Les préférences des Québécois envers la redistribution : l'exception canadienne?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Est-ce que le modèle québécois de politiques sociales reflète une opinion publique plus favorable aux services publics et à la redistribution de la richesse? Pour répondre à cette question, les auteurs utilisent trois séries de sondages portant sur deux questions centrales dans l’étude comparée des préférences des citoyens à l’État-providence : l'appui à la redistribution du revenu (1986 à 2021) et les préférences quant à la taille des services publics (2019 à 2023). Dans ces trois séries de sondages, ils observent un appui significativement plus élevé envers la redistribution et les services publics chez les répondants québécois que chez les répondants des autres provinces, bien que les répondants des provinces de l'Atlantique affichent aussi un appui élevé. Les électeurs conservateurs et les citoyens plus aisés sont significativement moins en faveur des services publics et de la redistribution hors du Québec.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".