Replication Files for Pensions and household structure: Pennsylvania Railroad retirees in 1900, 1910, and 1920
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The proportion of elderly people living apart from children increased dramatically during the twentieth century (Gratton & Gutmann, 2010; Smith, 1982). Most observers attribute this change to increasing incomes, but Ruggles argues that attitudes became less favorable to coresidence with children (Ruggles, 1994, 1996, 2003, 2009, 2015). We use the introduction of the Pennsylvania Railroad Pension to examine the role of income in residential decisions of the elderly. In 1900 the Pennsylvania Railroad announced that all employees over the age of 70 would be retired from service with pensions. Pensions were substantial, about 40 percent of pre-retirement wages, and workers in poor health could retire starting at age 65. We linked retirees from pension records to censuses to examine the relationship between incomes and household patterns in 1900, 1910, and 1920. Although men living with their wives were not affected, we find direct relationships between pension incomes and early retirement and household structure among widowers. Widowers with higher incomes were more likely to head their own households and less likely to live with a married child. Men who retired early because of poor health were less likely to remain heads of household and more likely to live with a married child. These patterns are consistent with Laslett’s (1988) “nuclear hardship” hypothesis, and they support the view that higher incomes later in the century would have reduced coresidence with children, especially married 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".