MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381716508 · doi:10.1111/cars.12444

Is everyone really middle class? Social class position and identification in Alberta

2023· article· en· W4381716508 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michelle Maroto, Delphine Brown, Guillaume Durou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Cultural Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiddle classSocial classClass (philosophy)SociologyIdentity (music)HumanitiesSocial psychologyPsychologyGender studiesPolitical scienceLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In defining social class, researchers often rely on measures of objective class position, even though subjective perceptions of social class identity can better account for the creation of social class boundaries. We explore the relationship between measures of objective class position and subjective class identity using data from an online survey of 1155 residents in Alberta, Canada, a conservative province dependent on a fluctuating energy sector. We find that although most Albertans identified as middle class, the strength of class identity and views regarding linked social class fates varied across categories with poverty class and uppermiddleclass respondents standing out. In reporting class identity, respondents considered measures related to objective class position, especially their income and economic security levels, but gaps still remained. We then use the results of this exploratory study to advocate for more comprehensive measures of social class.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieSame topicSocial and Cultural DynamicsFrench-language works237,207