MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7073977921

Changing Chinese family and elder care : the practice of filial piety among ethnic immigrant families in Vancouver

2018· other· en· W7073977921 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReciprocity (cultural anthropology)Context (archaeology)ImmigrationKinshipExtended familyEntitlement (fair division)TransnationalismValue (mathematics)NegotiationEthnography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on ethnographic research conducted in 2017 with Mandarin-Speaking Chinese senior migrants in Vancouver's downtown Chinatown, this thesis examines how the notion of filial piety and forms of intergenerational reciprocity are reconfigured and understood in the context of the shift of social support for the elderly shifting from the family to the state. Specifically, through income assistance and subsidized housing provided by the government, and assisted by a broad network built through friends, neighbours, and churches, the paper describes how welfare resources and social support provide a means for Chinese seniors to act strategically to deal with changes and family tensions for the sake of their families as well as for their own. My study of Chinese seniors however, suggests that it is possible for a sense of family value to coexist with a sense of individualistic values such as personal independence and lifelong productivity that are appreciated in a modern society. The forms of different values that emerged are not a reflection of dualism between the East and the West; rather, I argue these different forms of values are intertwined in overlapping process of modernism and traditionalism in immigrants to Canada. This thesis examines how intergenerational family relationships are affected by the availability of government-sponsored senior support programs, which are a resource that enables families to resolve tensions through the negotiation of coexisting values.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies→French-language works237,207→