MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379797183 · doi:10.1111/imig.13154

Challenging transitions? Assessing the occupational mobility patterns of US immigrants by gender

2023· article· en· W4379797183 on OpenAlexaff
Annie S. Lee, William M. Rodgers, Sébastien Breau

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Migration · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationOccupational mobilityDemographic economicsOccupational prestigeDemographyPositive selectionGerontologyGeographyMedicineSociologyEconomicsSocioeconomic statusPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article uses the New Immigrant Survey to assess the occupational mobility of US immigrants. Estimates from OLS and Heckman selection models show the occupational mobility of immigrants follows a U‐shaped pattern: immigrants arriving in the United States see their occupational status decline before it gradually improves. However, even 9 years after coming to the United States, the occupational status of immigrants remains lower than prior to their arrival in the country. Our findings also suggest that immigrant women with higher occupational status tend to move more often to the United States than immigrant men. Conversely, immigrant women are more likely than men to experience career interruptions after migration. Finally, occupational employment growth rates (defined as the growth rate in the number of jobs for an occupation) have a positive impact on both men and women immigrants' ability to recover their occupational status, though the impact appears to be greater for immigrant women.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational MigrationSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207