Is family structure a cue for stereotyping? A systematic review of stereotypes and parenthood
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Is family structure a cue for stereotyping? Past reviews on the topic of stereotypes and parenthood are divided. To update the current understanding on this important question, this systematic review summarizes and integrates the body of literature published between 2003 and 2013 on stereotypes associated with married, divorced, single, step, same-sex and adoptive parents. Seventeen articles met all of the inclusion criteria. An analysis of the final sample of studies helps main trends pertaining to these six parental types to be identified. Findings revealed that motherhood and fatherhood continue to be conceptualized differently, with stereotypes associated with different types of fathers appearing more positive than those associated with different types of mothers. Married parents also appear to remain the parental type that is the most positively stereotyped and against which other types are compared. These results are compared to past meta-analytic reviews and implications for future research are presented.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it