Entre l’effet tempo et l’effet quantum : une analyse de l’effet des politiques familiales sur la fécondité dans les pays avancés
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article s’inscrit dans la lignée des revues de littérature qui se penchent sur l’effet des politiques familiales sur la fécondité. L’article rappelle que les politiques peuvent 1) affecter lequantumdes naissances, 2) affecter letempodes naissances, 3) ne pas avoir d’effet sur la fécondité. Tout en démontrant l’effet hétérogène des politiques familiales sur la fécondité, l’auteure argue que les transferts monétaires (sous forme d’allocations et de crédits d’impôt) et les services de garde sont associés à un effetquantumsur les naissances, alors que les primes à la naissance semblent davantage provoquer un effettempo.L’effet des congés parentaux demeure incertain. L’article conclut en démontrant qu’au-delà de la conciliation travail-famille, c’est la marge de liberté que détiennent lesmèresface à l’obligation de prodiguer des soins, une idée conceptualisée sous le terme de « dématernalisation », qui influe le plus sur la fécondité.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".