MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025733309 · doi:10.1300/j074v17n04_03

Remarriage in Later Life: Older Women's Negotiation of Power, Resources and Domestic Labor

2005· article· en· W2025733309 on OpenAlex
Laura Hurd Clarke

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Women & Aging · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemarriageNegotiationPower (physics)PsychologyMarital statusGender studiesSocial psychologySociologyDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using data from in-depth interviews with 24 community-dwelling women aged 52-90, this paper analyzes the remarriage experiences of older women in contrast to their first marital relationships. The women's accounts of their experiences in their first and later life marriages are examined in terms of the negotiation of power, resources, and domestic labor. While first marriages were frequently characterized by incompatibility, alcoholism, abuse, and infidelity, second marriages were viewed as the marriages the women wished they had had in the first place or as relationships that met their later life needs. The women's lived experiences are discussed in terms of the changing cultural norms pertaining to gender roles, marriage, and divorce.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.252 · 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