Shared immigration process, different perspectives: The impact of immigration-related gaps on couple relationships
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Improving couples’ immigration experience requires characterizing aspects of the immigration process that affect couple relationships. Past research has set forth that post-immigration gaps between partners (discrepancies in their respective cultural adaptation) represent a key aspect. Accordingly, the present research investigated what kind of post-immigration gaps impact migrants’ couple relationship following immigration and how they do so. We used a qualitative dyadic research design, including in-depth open-ended interviews with each partner separately. This design allowed us to understand the experience of migrant couples at the dyadic level. The most notable challenges for couples were related to gaps in employment, finances, legal status, and satisfaction. Gaps led to conflicts in four situations: when one partner felt a lack of support from, or quality time with the other partner; when one partner experienced economic pressure because of his–her gender role values; when one partner had sole responsibility for his–her family stability and legal status in the host country; and when partners did not manage to make joint decisions when facing disagreement.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it