MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1491113523 · doi:10.1111/jftr.12051

Fathering, Feminism(s), Gender, and Sexualities: Connections, Tensions, and New Pathways

2014· article· en· W1491113523 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Doucet, Robyn Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Theory & Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeminismGender studiesHuman sexualitySociologyDisadvantagedFeminist theoryFeminist philosophyNarrativeVariety (cybernetics)Diversity (politics)Race (biology)Political scienceAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article provides a critical overview of selected intersections of feminist theories and gender theories within fathering research and looks at a variety of theoretical and methodological approaches to a diversity of fathering experiences, including differences of class, ethnicity, race, sexuality, and family forms. Although there are many overlaps between feminist theories and gender theories, and most scholars who write about gender are feminist or profeminist scholars, there is one important distinction. Gender theories attend to multiple dimensions of gendered narratives, lives, practices, identities, and institutions. Feminism and feminist theories share all of these concerns; however, feminism and feminist theories are also directly connected to the promotion of social change for diverse groups of women, especially disadvantaged women. This point is important because it can lead to potential conflicts between feminist concerns and fathering.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.021
Scholarly communication0.0060.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations57
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family Theory & ReviewSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207