MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390652679 · doi:10.31235/osf.io/j9skr

Studying Individuals in Same-Sex Couples using Longitudinal Administrative Data from Canadian Tax Records: Opportunities and Challenges

2024· preprint· en· W4390652679 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Chih‐lan Winnie Yang, Nicole Denier, Xavier St‐Denis, Sean Waite

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversity of AlbertaMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSexual orientationEarningsSample (material)CensusLongitudinal studyData qualitySurvey data collectionIdentification (biology)Demographic economicsPsychologyDemographyBusinessSocial psychologyEconomicsAccountingPopulationMedicineStatisticsSociologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Quantitative research on the social, demographic, and economic outcomes of sexual minorities has long been hampered by data shortfalls, with most surveys and censuses limited by sample sizes and/or a lack of direct questions on sexual identity. The growing availability of administrative data presents an opportunity to fill some of these gaps.Objective: This article highlights the challenges and opportunities involved with using a novel administrative dataset – the Longitudinal Administrative Databank, which includes 20% of Canadian tax filers – to study sexual minority populations in Canada. We identify three sources of bias, propose strategies to adjust for this bias, and introduce a measure of “inferred sexual minority status” to improve the identification of sexual minorities in tax data.Results: Administrative tax data offers significant advantages, including a large sample size, high-quality income data for individuals and linked family members, a longitudinal design, and the ability to trace individuals’ same-/different-sex partnership histories. Our adjustment strategies mitigate some biases in identifying same-sex couples, including underreporting, misclassification, and measurement errors. The estimated proportion of individuals in same-sex marriages closely aligns with Canadian census estimates from 2006–2021, while the proportion in same-sex common-law partnerships is underestimated. Finally, our earnings gaps analyses highlight the utility of the inferred sexual minority status measure.Contribution: This article contributes to research on sexual minority data landscapes, offering new insights into the identification and measures of sexual minority populations using longitudinal administrative tax data. Our approach points to new opportunities for studying the long-term longitudinal income and family dynamics of sexual minority populations on the national level.

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)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.149
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.149
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.020
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.491
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.096 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207