Social and Cognitive Factors in Women's Marital Name Choice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
References Alia, Valeria. 1984. "Would a Rose By Any Other Name Smell At All?" Canadian Women's Studies 5:86–88. Alia, Valeria. 1985. "Women, Names and Power." Women and Language 8:34–36. Arichi, Masumi. 1999. "Is it Radical? Women's Right to Keep Their Own Surnames After Marriage." Women's Studies International Forum. 22:411–415. Blakemore, Judith Owen, Carol Lawton and Lesa Vartanian. 2005. "I Can't Wait to Get Married: Gender Differences in Drive to Marry." Sex Roles 53:327–335. Brightman, Joan. 1994. "Why Wives Use Their Husband's Names." American Demographics 16:9–10. Dralle, Penolope Wasson. 1987. "Women Physicians' Name Choice at Marriage." American Medical Women's Association 42:173–175. Etaugh, Claire, Judith Bridges, Myra Cummings-Hill and Joseph Cohen. 1992. "Names Can Never Hurt Me?" Psychology of Women Quarterly 23:819–823. Forbes, Gordon, Leah Adams-Curtis, Kay White and Nicole Hamm. 2002. "Perceptions of Married Women and Married Men with Hyphenated Surnames." Sex Roles 46:167–175. Foss, Karen and Belle Edson. 1989. "What's in a Name? Accounts of Married Women=s Name Choices." Western Journal of Speech Communication 53:356–373. Glendon, Mary Ann. 1989. The Transformation of Family Law: State, lawiarid Family in The United States and Western Europe. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Haskey, John. 1991. "Social and Family Characteristics of Marriage in England and Wales: Information Derived from Marriage Registration Records." Journal of Biosocial Science 23:179–200. Intons-Peterson, Margaret and Jill Crawford. 1985. "The Meaning of Marital Surnames." Sex Roles 12:1163–1171. Johnson, David and Laurie Scheuble. 1995. "Women's Marital Naming in Two Generations: a National Study." Journal of Marriage and Family 57:724–732. Kuo, Chen-Yu E. 1973. "Collectivism in Communist China: A Case Study of Mate-Selection." The Wisconsin Sociologist 1: 3–16. Kupper, Susan. 1990. Surnames for Women: A Decision-Making Guide. Jefferson NC: McFarland. Lindsey, Linda. 2004. Gender Roles: a Sociological Perspective. Prentice: Hall: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Scheuble, Laurie and David Johnson. 1993. "Marital Name Change: Plans and Attitudes of College Students." Journal of Marriage and Family 55:747–754. Scheuble, Laurie and David Johnson. 1998. "Attitudes Toward Nonconventional Marital Name Choice: An Adult Sample." Names 46:83–96. Scheuble, Laurie, Katherine Klingemann and David Johnson. 2000. "Trends in Women's Marital Name Choice: 1966–1996." Names 48:51–63. Sherif, Muzafer and Hadley Cantril. 1947. The Psychology of Ego Involvement. New York: Wiley. Stannard, Una. 1984. "Manners Make Laws: Married Women's Names in the United States." Names 32:114–127. Stodder, John. 1998. "Double-surnames and Gender Equality: a Proposition and the Spanish case." Journal of Comparative Family Studies 29:585–593. Suarez, Esther. 1997. "A Woman's Freedom to Choose Her Surname: Is It Really a Matter of Choice?" Women's Rights Law Reporter 18: 233–242. Trost, Jan. 1991. "What=s in a Surname?" Family Reports: 19:1–20. Valetas, Marie-France. 1993. "The Future of Woman's Own Name and the Transformation of Family Structures." Population: An English Selection 5:223–247. Valetas, Marie-France. 1993. "The Surname of Married Women in the European Union." Population & Societies 367:1–4. Walker, R. 1996. "Germany Bans Double Names for Families." The Christian Science Monitor Oct. 10:1,8. Weitzman, Lenore. 1981. The Marriage Contract: SpousesiLoversiand the Law. NY: Free Press. Yamanoue, Reiko. 1994. "One Marriage, Two Names." Japan Quarterly 41: 263–270.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
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 | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".