Catholicism and cohabitation in Canada : a multi-religious assessment of Cornwall’s determinants of religious behavior model.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the relationship between belief and behavior as seen in the association between Catholicism and cohabitation in Canada. It analyzes whether belief in the Catholic Church's teachings about sexuality and family life influences parishioners propensity not to cohabit to a greater extent than Protestant and secular (no religion) beliefs. Employing Cornwall's Determinants of Religious Behavior Model and data from the 2010 Canadian General Social Survey (Cycle 24: Time-Stress and Well-Being), it was expected that the results would indicate that belief in the Catholic Church's teachings about sexuality and family life influences parishioners propensity not to cohabit to a greater extent than beliefs in Protestant and secular (no religion) doctrines in Canada. That is, belief in the Catholic Church's teachings about sexuality and family life was expected to decrease the likelihood of cohabitation when compared with less resolute Protestant sects and secular (no religion) beliefs. The findings largely support Cornwall’s model, however no support was found for the expectation that Catholics would exhibit lower rates of cohabitation compared to Protestants and those who do not affiliate with a religion.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".