MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

German Adolescents’ Time Use from 1991 to 2001: Is Gender Symmetry in Sight?

2005· article· en· W2085642112 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLoisir et Société / Society and Leisure · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSociology and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTime-use surveyGermanLeisure timeWork (physics)PsychologySightDemographySurvey data collectionGeographyMedicineSociologyStatisticsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1991/1992, Germany carried for the first time a national time use survey. More than ten thousand respondents aged 12 years and older described their daily activities by filling in a self-administered diary on two days. The second national time use survey was conducted in 2001/2002. It collected time diary data from more than twelve thousand respondents using a comparable survey design to the 1991/1992 survey. The 2001/2002 survey followed Eurostat guidelines for European harmonised time use surveys and provided an opportunity to observe possible time use changes during the period separating the two surveys as well as make international comparisons with the time use of adult and adolescent populations in other countries. This article focuses on changing patterns of adolescent time in Germany and examines the question whether “typical” gender specific time use patterns with regard to school, paid work, domestic work, leisure and mass media can be already observed in the younger generation.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.320 · 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