Social and Cognitive Factors in Women's Marital Name Choice
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
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.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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