MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100283544 · doi:10.1177/0192513x11424261

Making Ends Meet

2011· article· en· W2100283544 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Penny Edgell, Samantha K. Ammons, Eric Dahlin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Issues · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Job securityPerceptionInequalityFamily lifeQuarter (Canadian coin)Family economyJob insecurityEconomic securityPsychologySocial psychologySociologyEconomicsEconomic growthGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The “New Economy” features 24/7 employment, varied work schedules, job insecurity, and lower benefits and wages, which lead to disparities in experiences of security and sufficiency. This study investigates sufficiency concerns in the New Economy; who is having trouble making ends meet? Sufficiency concerns are subjective perceptions that work is insufficient to meet basic needs and that family and work cannot be coordinated in a stable way. This study uses the 2006 National Survey of Religion and Family Life ( N = 1,621) to analyze Americans’ experiences in the New Economy and how these experiences are related to work–family conflict. Sufficiency concerns were experienced by a quarter to a third of our respondents and were shaped by gender and structural inequality, especially race and education. Moreover, sufficiency concerns strongly predict work–family conflict, even when other controls are included. This research furthers our understanding of work–family conflict and the winners and losers in the New Economy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.012
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.007

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family IssuesSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207