MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974311239 · doi:10.1080/14427591.2009.9686643

Reflections on the importance of place to the participation of women in new occupations

2009· article· en· W1974311239 on OpenAlexaff
Lynn Shaw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)FeelingPsychologyPublic relationsContext (archaeology)SociologySocial psychologyEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents personal reflections on experiences in constructing a cabin by the sea to explore enablers and constraints affecting women's participation in novel occupations, and to understand connections between place and occupation. Insights gained as a result of reflection suggest that catalysts for participation in new and unconventional occupations include elements such as being in a new place away from daily routines as well as feelings of freedom and safety. Resources in a place can support enactment of new skills and help to develop competence. The values espoused in a place can facilitate meaningful and ongoing participation. More research is needed in various settings to better understand how place and context can act as catalysts promoting the occupational participation of women in learning skills, meeting the demands of different occupations and gaining confidence when choosing to do something novel.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.026
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0060.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.311
GPT teacher head0.605
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational ScienceSame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207