MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022760859 · doi:10.1177/09500172004042770

Caring for Nothing

2004· article· en· W2022760859 on OpenAlexaffabout
Donna Baines

Bibliographic record

VenueWork Employment and Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforcePublic relationsWork (physics)NothingSocial workAltruism (biology)Coercion (linguistics)BusinessSociologySocial psychologyPolitical sciencePsychologyLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unwaged work is a widespread practice in the pro-market, non-market public and non-profit social services in Canada. Under performance-based models of public management new forms of work organization have standardized social services work and expanded the use of volunteers, including the volunteer labour of paid employees. Increasingly routinized work makes it easier for unwaged volunteers to assume work, and for managers to supervise it. New developments include heightened expectations from management and a willingness of workers to perform volunteer work in their own or other agencies. The article suggests that the unwaged social services workforce operates along a continuum with ‘compulsion’ at one end and ‘coercion’ on the other. As workers’ identities and knowledge base are tied to notions of altruism and caring, and there are often implicit threats to their continued employment, most workers are not refusing unwaged work. Rather they see this and other forms of unpaid work as resistance against an increasingly alienating society, as well as a way to meet the needs of clients, relatives and friends.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0120.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.005

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations242
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWork Employment and SocietySame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207