Duration Dependence in Employment: Evidence \nfrom the Last Half of the 20th Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper extends the investigation of Ignaczak [5] of the first employment spell of workers across five different birth cohorts using pooled data from the 15th and 20th cycles of the Canadian General Social Survey (GSS) to subsequent spells of employment with the purpose of testing for employment duration dependence. As the information on the GSS surveys spans well over the last half of the 20th century we are able to test not only the potential duration dependence but its stability over time. This paper contributes to the debate of employment stability by analyzing the differences between job and employment durations and showing that successive cohorts of workers have had increasingly shorter first employment durations. The analysis finds cohort effects which play a signiffcant role in explaining declining employment tenure. The cohort effects can be seen as a proxy for a number of socio-economic factors that affect the hazard of separation from employment. Separate analysis is completed for men and women by birth cohort. This pattern of declining tenure has occurred for both men and women, but the decline has been far more prominent for men. For men, macroeconomic factors affect the hazard more strongly in more recent cohorts, which is consistent with recessionary periods generating decreasing employment stability across cohorts. For women, cohort effects are consistent with the increasing generosity of maternity \nleave provisions through Unemployment Insurance.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".