Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to analyze the extent and determinants of ambivalent — that is, seemingly inconsistent and contradictory — attitudes with regard to gender roles and female participation in the labor force from a comparative point of view. Drawing upon the work of Robert Merton and Elinor Barber, it is argued that attitudinal ambivalence may arise as a consequence of a disjunction between people’s aspirations and the structural possibility of realizing them. One such disjunction with possible importance for ambivalence with regard to gender role attitudes is between, on the one hand, the massive increase in women’s participation in higher education, which has increased women’s opportunities as well as aspirations to pursue career and labor market goals similar to those of men, and on the other hand, the emergence of institutions that allow women to take advantage of these opportunities by providing the means to reconcile work at home with paid work. The empirical analyses, using data from the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) for 26 countries, presents strong evidence in favor of this argument: the greater the difference between rates of change in female educational attainment and institutions that might reconcile paid work with motherhood, the greater is attitudinal ambivalence with regard to gender roles.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".