A Conflict between Professional vs. Domestic Life? Understanding the Use of ICT in Teleworking for Balance in Work and Family Units
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
The advancement of information and communication technologies such as personal computers, the Internet and mobile phones has enabled people to work any time and anywhere. Teleworking, the practice of setting up home offices for employees with appropriate resources for computing and communication, is one example of this new flexibility. Teleworking brings new challenges as well as benefits, and a variety of studies have examined the impact of teleworking in terms of costs and benefits. A major attraction for teleworkers is the control it allows them over the way they structure their work and lives. However, the intrusion of work into the home blurs the boundaries between work and home life and may result in conflict between work and family. This work-family conflict is a direct result of the mutual incompatibility between the demands of work and family roles (Akdere, 2006). The aim of this research is to study the work-family balance of Malaysian teleworkers by exploring the nature of interactions between work and family activities, in order to get a better understanding of the experience of teleworkers in balancing their work and family life. This study will use the work-family border theory (Clark, 2000) to describe the phenomenon, and to explain how individuals manage and negotiate the work and family spheres and the borders between them in order to attain balance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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