Gender typing in stepmothers: a phenomenological analysis
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
Purpose Difficulties in defining stepfamily roles remain an important issue for its members. A potentially important factor in defining roles in the family is the identification with a particular gender type and how it relates to one's expectations about one's place in the family system. The purpose of this paper is to explore how gender typing processes inform our understanding of the stepmother role construction process, and its link with stepfamily adjustment. Design/methodology/approach Semi‐structured interview data from six androgynous and six feminine stepmothers were selected based on gender type identification. Findings Results from this analysis were analyzed using a phenomenological approach, and are presented with the intent to explore how gender typing processes inform our understanding of the stepmother role construction process, and its link with stepfamily adjustment. Originality/value Gender typing has not been studied in the context of stepmother families, even though research on stepmothers’ adjustment has highlighted the ambiguous nature of their role in the stepfamily. Additionally, while qualitative inquiry continues to represent the favoured paradigm in the emerging area of stepmother research, studies of this type remain limited in scope.
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 | 0.036 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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