Entering the Political Elite in Canada: The Case of Minority Women as Parliamentary Candidates and MPs*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette recherche analyse les femmes des minorités ethniques comme nouveau groupe social visant à accéder à l'élite politique. Elle est axée sur les conséquences liées à leur appartenance à une «double minorité». L'analyse examine deux modèles de cheminement de carrière qui offrent des caractérisations alternatives quant aux obstacles de recrutement auxquels se heurtent les nouveaux groupes sociaux et qui créent des attentes différentes quant aux ressources détenues par les femmes des minorités, comparativement à celles des groupes plus établis. Les résultats principaux, fondés sur un sondage canadien de 1993 sur les candidats parlementaires et completés par de l'information sur les députés, appuient davantage le modèle de «compensation» et, en général, semblent indiquer que l'inégalité continue de caractériser le processus d'accès à l'élite politique. This study examines minority women as a new social group seeking access to the political elite, emphasizing the consequences of their “double minority” status. The analysis considers two career path models that make alternative characterizations about the recruitment barriers faced by new social groups and that yield different expectations about the resources held by minority women compared with more established groups. The main results, based on a 1993 Canadian survey of parliamentary candidates, supplemented by information on MPs, indicate more support for the “compensation” model and, generally, suggest that inequity continues to characterize the process of political elite access.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".