MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395450114 · doi:10.54097/j7a9nx66

Age Discrimination in Chinese Internet Workplace

2024· article· en· W4395450114 on OpenAlexaff
Bo Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education Humanities and Social Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsFanshawe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetAge discriminationInternet privacyPsychologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide WebLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to economic reforms, cultural biases, and rapid technological progress, age discrimination has become widespread in China's online business environment. China is making the transition from central planning to market economy, and measures such as "xiagang" have enabled state-owned companies in China to lay off elderly permanent staff and reduce permanent employee numbers. As the internet industry expands, younger workers who are dynamic are being favored over those perceived to be less adaptable such as older individuals. The "age 35 phenomenon" illustrates how prejudice has been deepened by cultural expectations around gender, family responsibilities, and age. This study investigates all of the elements that contribute to age discrimination and termination trends among Chinese internet businesses. This article covers topics like pertinent policies, shifting labor relations, gender roles and age discrimination - among many others. Research findings indicated that eliminating sociocultural prejudices was just as essential to meeting economic and regulatory challenges, both of which are equally essential. Countermeasures on a national, organizational, and individual level include antidiscrimination legislation, corporate social responsibility programs, retraining programmes, networking events, and skill development activities. Policies and practices that promote inclusiveness have the power to mitigate instability and inequality. This study sheds light on the multiple obstacles elder Chinese internet workers encounter while offering solutions.

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 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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.249
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education Humanities and Social SciencesSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207