MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073099977 · doi:10.1177/1354068809342526

Gender and Political Party Leadership in Canada

2009· article· en· W2073099977 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueParty Politics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandatePolitical sciencePosition (finance)PoliticsIdeologyPeriod (music)Political economyPublic relationsPublic administrationLawSociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we compare the experiences of male and female party leaders at the provincial and federal levels in Canada between 1980 and 2005 and test several hypotheses regarding gender and party leadership. The Canadian case provides an excellent case study given the relatively large number of women (21 in total) who held the position of party leader during the time period in question. The case study reveals that major parties are less likely to elect women as their leaders, while parties on the ideological left are more likely than other parties to select women. The leadership races won by women are as competitive, if not more so, than those won by men, although the mandate secured by women leaders is less overwhelming. Not surprisingly, then, men are found to enjoy longer tenures as leaders than women, and, moreover, to enjoy greater electoral success.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.149 · 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