Le rapport à l’argent chez les adultes du Québec : enquête sur ses origines et variations dans le temps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce projet de recherche analyse la relation que les gens entretiennent avec l’argent ainsi que son évolution au cours des parcours de vie. La relation ainsi mise en lumière est nommée « rapport à l’argent » et est conceptualisée comme étant une forme d’habitus. Neuf répondants qui ont entre 45 et 59 ans et qui habitent le Québec auront été passés en entretiens qualitatifs pour ce faire. L’analyse produite est divisée en deux parties principales : la première se penche sur les caractéristiques du rapport à l’argent, la seconde sur la manière avec laquelle il peut ou non évoluer au cours des étapes de vie. Les conclusions tirées stipulent tout d’abord que le rapport à l’argent peut se décrire à l’aide de versions modifiées et étendues des figures de Simmel, ensuite que l’enfance joue un rôle primordial dans la formation initiale de ce rapport et que celui-ci est relativement durable et perdure généralement à travers le temps tant qu’il n’est pas remis en question. Cette remise en question se fait habituellement avec l’aide d’un partenaire romantique. This research project analyzes the relationship people have with money and its evolution during their life course. This relationship is then called “relationship to money” and is conceptualized as a form of habitus. Nine respondents ranging from 45 to 59 years old who are currently living in the province of Québec have been interviewed to produce the data. The analysis thus produced is divided into two parts: the first one treats of the characteristics of the relationship to money, the second one treats of the ways in which this relationship may or may not evolve during different life stages. The conclusions state firstly that relationship to money can be described with the help of Simmel’s archetypes, given those have been reworked and expanded, and secondly that relationship to money built during childhood is relatively durable and usually persists through the life stages until it is called into question. This process usually requires the help of a close romantic partner.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".