MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004552569 · doi:10.1037/a0032669

Reconstructing the experiences of first generation women in Canadian psychology.

2013· article· en· W2004552569 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Pelin Gül, Anastasia Korosteliov, L. M. Caplan, Laura C. Ball, Jennifer L. Bazar, Elissa N. Rodkey, Jacy L. Young, Kate Sheese, Alexandra Rutherford

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInvisibilityHistoriographyGender studiesPoliticsFeminismHistory of psychologyWomen's historyPsychologyPeriod (music)Critical psychologySociologySocial psychologySocial sciencePolitical sciencePsychoanalysisAestheticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date, the historiography on women in Canadian psychology has been relatively sparse. This is especially true in relation to the much more extensive literature that documents the history of first and second generation women in American psychology. The aim of this paper is to systematically identify and analyse the personal characteristics, educational experiences, and career trajectories of first generation women psychologists in Canada. We identify this cohort as women who received their PhDs during the period 1922 to 1960. We contextualize their experiences vis-a-vis unique trends in Canadian society, paying particular attention to the common struggles faced by these women within or in reaction to the broader social, cultural, political, and institutional structures they encountered. By locating and distinguishing Canadian women in psychology, we offer an important contribution to the development of a more comprehensive history of Canadian psychology and highlight its gendered dynamics.Keywords: Canadian psychology, history, women, feminism, genderBut if I am concerned about the lack of awareness of Canadian contributions to psychological knowledge, and a general lack of awareness of the history of our discipline, I am even more concerned about the relative invisibility of our herstory. (Stark, 2000, p. 3)Written just over a decade ago, this call for increased awareness of the history of Canadian psychology and the role women have played in it is now being heeded. In this paper, we address concerns about the invisibility of our herstory by presenting the results of our systematic search for women in early Canadian psychology. In doing so, we provide a counterweight to the extensive historiography on women in American psychology that began in the 1970s and has since expanded to encompass many important historical studies (e.g., Bernstein & Russo, 1974; Cameron & Hagen, 2005; Johnson & Johnston, 2010; Johnston & Johnson, 2008; O'Connell & Russo, 1980; Rutherford, VaughnBlount, & Ball, 2010; Scarborough & Furumoto, 1987).'Although much less is known about Canadian psychology's women's history-particularly the earliest generation of women psychologists-our work does build on a small number of valuable studies (e.g., de la Cour, 1987; Keates & Stam, 2009; M. J. Wright, 1992).2 Mary J. Wright (1992) explored the effects of World War II (WWII) and its aftermath on the careers of 10 women who obtained their PhDs between 1936 and 1949 from the University of Toronto. One of the themes she identified was that women did not move into more prestigious administrative and leadership positions as easily as their male counterparts, despite having significantly outperformed them in scholarly productivity and contributions to the discipline. De la Cour (1987) provided a brief overview of the history of women psychologists at the University of Toronto from 1920 to 1945. She argued that the presence of female psychologists in both academic and applied fields in this period was far from marginal. Finally, in their recent paper, Keates and Stam (2009) analysed patterns in the educational experiences of five prominent women who received their PhDs from Canadian institutions prior to 1950: Katharine BanhamBridges (1897-1995), Magda Arnold (1903-2002), Mary NorthPelin way (1909-1987), Mary S. Ainsworth (1913-1999), and Mary J. Wright (b. 1915). The authors compared the experiences of these women to those of the first generation of American women psychologists, noting however that this cohort of Canadian psychologists entered the field later than their American counterparts due to the later institutionalization of psychology in Canada.One of the trends that Keates and Stam (2009) identified was that because of this later entry, the Canadian women psychologists did not appear to encounter the same institutional and educational barriers as the earlier American cohort. They suggested that Canadian women's comparably uncontested entrance into psychology likely resulted from the already accomplished shift in the field's orientation from primarily experimental to largely applied. …

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0430.020
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienneSame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207