MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Women and Men in Conflicting Social Roles: Implications from Social Psychological Research

2011· article· en· W1920051856 on OpenAlexaff
Kimberley A. Clow, Rosemary Ricciardelli

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Issues and Policy Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbivalenceWorkforceRealmStereotype (UML)InequalitySocial psychologySocial inequalityPsychologyLegislationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite legislation for gender equality in many nations, gender discrimination continues to be a problem. Psychological research from social role theory, the stereotype content model, and ambivalent sexism provide insights into the motivations behind gender inequality. This article reviews key research findings from these theoretical perspectives in the realm of gendered occupational inequalities and segregation. The emphasis of the article is on individuals fulfilling social roles that are perceived as conflicting and the consequences of those perceptions. Parents in the workforce, female leaders, and male nurses are used as specific examples of social role conflict. The policy implications from this research—and the issues facing parents in the workforce, female leaders, and male nurses in particular—are discussed.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0070.026
Scholarly communication0.0080.013
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.313
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Issues and Policy ReviewSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207