MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210917126 · doi:10.1002/psp.2560

Ethnoracial disparities in intergenerational coresidence among Canadian millennial

2022· article· en· W4210917126 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maryam Dilmaghani, Ather H. Akbari

Bibliographic record

VenuePopulation Space and Place · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversitySt. Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupCensusDemographyRace (biology)Filial pietyDemographic economicsGeographyGender studiesSociologyPopulationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using the Canadian Census of 2016 and restricting the sample to the Canadian‐born millennials, this paper is concerned with ethnoracial disparities in adult children's coresidence with their parents. Substantial disparities are found in the prevalence of intergenerational coresidence by race and ethnic origin. Rather surprisingly, Canadian‐born millennials of Chinese, Japanese and Korean descent are found the least likely to coreside with their parents than their counterparts in other ethnoracial groups. There is little gender difference in this regard. Further exploration shows that millennials of Chinese, Japanese and Korean descent are much more likely than others to be geographically mobile across Canada, and this greater mobility drives the gaps. In other words, the lower intergenerational coresidence among Canadian millennials of Chinese, Japanese and Korean descent also implies a lower intergenerational proximity among these groups. Future implications of the findings for local labour and housing markets, as well as the healthcare system, are discussed in light of the Confucian concept of filial piety.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePopulation Space and PlaceSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207