MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412733987 · doi:10.1002/psp.70078

Geographic Proximity Between Adult Children and Their Parents in Canada: The Role of Childhood Parental Income

2025· article· en· W4412733987 on OpenAlexaffabout
Samuel MacIsaac, Yuri Ostrovsky, Grant Schellenberg

Bibliographic record

VenuePopulation Space and Place · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusGeographical distanceYoung adultHousehold incomeFamily incomeDemographyPsychologyGeographyDevelopmental psychologySociologyEconomic growthPopulationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Adult children's geographic distance from their ageing parents has important implications for understanding intergenerational family spatiality, caregiving, and labour mobility. Though many studies delve into the determinants of intergenerational residential proximity, few analyse household characteristics from childhood – including parental income during childhood. Using administrative tax data from the Canadian Intergenerational Income Database, this study tracks a cohort of individuals initially observed as teenagers co‐residing with their parents in the mid‐1980s and the geographic distance between children and parents from 1997 to 2019 when adult children moved through middle age and their parents through old age. Findings show that the geographic distance between adult children and their parents remains positively and significantly associated with the household parental income of adult children when they were teens, and accounting for other socioeconomic characteristics and adult children's own family income in adulthood. These results underscore the effects of characteristics dating back to childhood and their potential implications for intergenerational informal care provision and family ties. Lesser geographic distance between adult children and ageing parents is also correlated with parents' ages and the presence of grandchildren, which align with expectations regarding care needs.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePopulation Space and PlaceSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207