MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393244988 · doi:10.1257/app.20210816

The Impact of Cash Transfers to Poor Mothers on Family Structure and Maternal Well-Being

2024· article· en· W4393244988 on OpenAlex
Anna Aizer, Sung‐Woo Cho, Shari Eli, Adriana Lleras‐Muney

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Economic Journal Applied Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityCalifornia Center for Population Research, University of California, Los AngelesUniversity of MinnesotaPrinceton UniversityCarnegie Mellon UniversityNational Institutes of HealthYale University
KeywordsCash transfersDemographic economicsPovertyEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use newly collected data for 16,000 women who applied for Mothers' Pensions, America's first welfare program, to investigate the effect of means-tested cash transfers on lifetime family structure and maternal well-being. In the short term, cash transfers delayed marriage and lowered geographic mobility. In the long run, transfers had no impact on the probability of remarriage, spouse quality, or fertility. Cash transfers did not affect women's well-being, measured by longevity and family income in 1940. Given the lack of significant negative behavioral impacts, the benefits of transfers appear to exceed costs if they have-even modest-positive impacts on children.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.243 · 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