General Social Survey, Cycle 17, 2003 [Canada]: Social Engagement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cycle 17 of the GSS is the first cycle to collect detailed information on social engagement in Canada. Topics include social contact with friends and relatives, unpaid help given and received, volunteering and charitable giving, civic engagement, political engagement, religious participation, trust and reciprocity. The survey gathers information on social networks in the everyday lives of Canadians. Respondents are asked about their frequency of contact with relatives and friends, the quality of this contact (i.e., face-to- face, by phone, or by e-mail/Internet) and the size of their social networks. The distinction made between the number of close relatives, close friends, and other friends is considered important for the analysis of outcomes associated with close/weak ties, and kin/non-kin ties. The module ‘Social Contact – General’ includes questions designed to support the analysis of “bridging” and “bonding.” “Bridging” refers to social ties that exist among different groups of people. “Bonding” refers to social ties that exist within a group, among people who are similar. This section also includes measures of social support and reciprocity. Respondents are asked about unpaid help they have received from relatives, friends, neighbours, and other persons, as well as unpaid help they have given.
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.014 |
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".