Time, Gender, and the Negotiation of Family Schedules
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
I examine the interactive processes by which women and men negotiate family time schedules. Based on fifty interviews with seventeen dual‐earner couples, I focus on the ways men and women define time in gendered ways, exert different controls over the way time is used, and align their time strategies in the course of managing everyday family life. The results indicate that there are both continuities and discontinuities with the past: women continue to exert more control over the organization of time in families, but time negotiation itself has become a more complex and demanding activity. The way that couples carry out these negotiations reflects a variety of adaptive strategies, with some couples being very reactive in contending with present demands and others being highly structured and seeking to anticipate and control the future. Although some couples worked to negotiate balance in their time responsibilities, it was wives who maintained control over time and, ultimately, the orchestration of family activity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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