MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Preserving Domesticity: Reading Tupperware in Women's Changing Domestic, Social and Economic Roles*

2003· article· fr· W2111069401 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Vincent

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesFemininitySociologyPolitical scienceGender studiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'image représentée par Tupperware est essentiellement féminine. Cet article analyse la littérature entourant Tupperware pour y retrouver cette image de la fémininité de classe moyenne, euronord‐américaine et domestique. L'analyse de cette littérature se fait en tenant compte des changements et continuités, au cours des 50 dernières années, des rôles domestiques, économiques et sociaux des femmes nord‐américaines. Ces rôles domestiques et économiques se sont entrelacés, ce qui a permis à L'entreprise de mieux les exploiter. La réussite de Tupperware en s'associant à cette image très précise peut servir comme baromètre pour révéler comment les femmes négocient les pressions combinées de la maison et du travail. Tupperware projects a quintessentially gendered image. This article explores writings by and about Tupperware to discover its representation of middle‐class white domestic femininity. This image is read against changes and continuities in North American women's domestic, economic and social roles over the past fifty years. There has been an ongoing intertwining of women's domestic and paid work roles that Tupperware has been able to exploit. The enduring success of Tupperware as a company associated with a specific image is thus a useful barometer indicating how women are contending with the combined pressures of home and work.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations46
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207