MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1596784654

Gender, household labour, and psychological distress

2008· article· en· W1596784654 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wenting Tao

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistressPsychologyPsychological distressSocial psychologyLabour economicsEconomicsClinical psychologyAnxietyPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although considerable progress has been made in documenting the nature and gendered allocation of unpaid family work in Canada over the last several decades, relatively few epidemiological studies have addressed the potential consequences of household labour for women’s mental health. Even fewer have focused on the consequences for men. The limited research which has examined the relationship between household work and well-being has produced conflicting findings. Conflicting findings may be due, in part, to the almost sole focus of researchers on time spent in family work as the key determinant of mental health outcomes, ignoring other conditions and characteristics of family work. The objective of the present study was to examine more nuanced relationships between the perceived division of household labour and psychological distress, taking into consideration other aspects of family work, including the nature of the household task and the perceived fairness of the division of family work. Of particular interest in the study was whether the nature of these relationships differs for men and women. The study involved secondary data analysis of a recently conducted telephone survey of employed, partnered parents with children. Data analyses involved a multi-stage process consisting of univariate, bivariate, and multivariable analyses. To address the key objectives of the study, a series of multiple linear regression models were estimated with psychological distress as the outcome, adjusting for key confounders. The results indicated that the perceived division of family work was important for women’s psychological well-being and the perceived fairness of the division of family work for men’s. That is, for women, perceiving spending more time than their partners in housework and child rearing was associated with greater psychological distress. For men, perceived unfairness to themselves in the division of housework and perceived unfairness to their partners in the division of child rearing were both associated with greater psychological distress. The results of this study, combined with previous research, suggest that the gendered nature of household work has implications for the psychological well-being of both women and men and that both paid and unpaid work needs to be considered when examining the social determinants of parents’ psychological well-being.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207