MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1868316683

Just Nostalgic Family Men? Off-the-Job Family Time, Providing, and Oral Histories of Fatherhood in Postwar Canada, 1945-1975

2009· article· en· W1868316683 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert Rutherdale

Bibliographic record

VenueOral History Forum d'histoire orale · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsAlgoma University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupBaby boomIdeologyPeriod (music)Gender studiesBoomIdeal (ethics)Face (sociological concept)Working classPsychologySociologyHistorySocial psychologyDemographyPolitical sciencePoliticsSocial scienceAestheticsArtLawEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the life stories of three men who fathered children during Canada’s 1949-1961 baby boom. Drawn from a sample of thirty-five interviews, these particular cases offer rich comparisons, across ethnic and class lines, of what these men valued most about their fathering years. At the conclusion of his interviews, Rutherdale asked his participants to reflect on the socially and historically significant role of fatherhood and how they thought it had changed since the baby-boom period. To this end, he considers the ways that these men, especially when recalling their leisure time at home, engaged in nostalgic reminiscences. This was, as Rutherdale notes, markedly different from how they recalled their roles as providers; the intensification of the male breadwinner ideology, during this period of economic growth, impacted remembering. Taken together, Rutherdale offers intriguing examples of how memory navigates the boundaries between fact and fiction, and between fathers as “providers” with real regrets about the past and fathers as “nostalgic” family men who longed for what they imagined as an ideal past.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOral History Forum d'histoire oraleSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207