MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Men’s business, women’s work: gender influences and fathers’ smoking

2010· article· en· W1565316869 on OpenAlexafffund
Joan L. Bottorff, John L. Oliffe, Mary T. Kelly, Lorraine Greaves, Joy L. Johnson, Pamela Ponic, Anna Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueSociology of Health & Illness · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's HealthOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitute of Gender and HealthMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsThematic analysisGender studiesPsychologyHegemonyPromotion (chess)Health promotionTobacco controlIntervention (counseling)Position (finance)Social psychologyMedicineSociologyPublic healthQualitative researchPolitical scienceNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To further understand men's continued smoking during their partner's pregnancy and the postpartum period, a study was undertaken to explore women's perspectives of men's smoking. Using a gender lens, a thematic analysis of transcribed interviews with 27 women was completed. Women's constructions of men's smoking and linkages to masculine and feminine ideals are described. The findings highlight the ways women position themselves both as defenders and regulators of men's smoking. Femininities that aligned women with hegemonic masculine principles underpinned their roles in relation to men's smoking and presented challenges in influencing their partner's tobacco reduction. By positioning the decision to quit smoking as a man's solitary pursuit, women reduced potential relationship conflict and managed to maintain their identity as a supportive partner. Insights from this study provide direction for developing gender-specific tobacco reduction initiatives targeting expectant and new fathers. Indeed, a lack of intervention aimed at encouraging men's tobacco reduction has the potential to increase relationship tensions, and inadvertently maintain pressure on women to regulate fathers' smoking. This study illustrates how gender-based analyses can provide new directions for men's health promotion programmes and policies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations35
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociology of Health & IllnessSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207