MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066039788

Exploring the influence of socio-demographic factors on fertility decisions among women in Canada

2023· dissertation· en· W7066039788 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsFertilityCohort effectPopulationEstimationLogistic regressionLogitCohortTotal fertility rate
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global decline in fertility rates has drawn the attention of economists, researchers, and policymakers in recent decades. Given the economic and social implications of population changes, it is important to analyze what underlying factors have influenced fertility decisions over time, and what is behind the sharp change in the decision-making process regarding family size, and hence, population growth. The present paper analyzes the influence of different socio-demographic factors on two main fertility decisions: the number of children and the age of women at first child. The analysis is done employing data from the Canadian Social Survey for the years 2006, 2011, and 2017, proposing an estimation with an ordered logit model framework and accounting for possible cohort effects by incorporating birth-control variables. Main findings suggest that higher levels of education, urbanity, certain regions, and being religiously unaffiliated are associated with a higher likelihood of reporting fewer amount of children. These results also contribute to reporting a first child at an older age, except for the variable that captures religious attendance, which is associated with a higher likelihood of reporting a first child at an older age despite the fact that attending religious events is linked to a higher amount of 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207