MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1743691009 · doi:10.1558/genl.v9i2.17318

Constructions of motherhood and fatherhood in newspaper articles on maternal and paternal postpartum depression

2015· article· en· W1743691009 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elizabeth Alexander, Linda M. McMullen

Bibliographic record

VenueGender and Language · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperNormativePostpartum depressionDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyDepression (economics)Gender studiesSociologyPregnancyPolitical scienceMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Postpartum depression (PPD) is typically constructed as a medical condition that is defined by prevalence rates, time of onset, duration, symptoms, causes and treatments. Presentations of PPD in popular texts have also revealed that it is a site for constructions of mothering/motherhood. While PPD has traditionally been assumed to be the domain of women, researchers have recently focused attention on PPD and men. Using articles on maternal and paternal PPD published in Canadian and American newspapers between 2008 and 2012, we analysed how constructions of mothering/motherhood and fathering/fatherhood were inscribed in this public forum. We show how mothering/motherhood was foregrounded via dominant evaluative discourses and highly imbued with expectations while fathering/fatherhood was kept in the background and characterised by the unavailability of clear expectations. We conclude that maternal PPD remains primary and normative while paternal PPD remains ‘othered’ despite the supposed attention to it in these public texts.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGender and LanguageSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207