Employment and Social Integration in Midlife
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
Policy makers aim to raise the retirement age for economic reasons. For individuals, longer employment maintains income and social contacts. However, retirement allows more time for socially integrating activities with family and friends. There is therefore tension for midlife individuals between the perceived advantages of employment and retirement. Welfare states vary in policies toward older workers, in terms of incentives for working longer or “early exit,” which may influence individuals’ preferences concerning retirement timing. Data from 20 European countries were used to examine middle-aged women’s and men’s attitudes toward employment and other time uses. The analysis incorporated age, gender, socioeconomic circumstances, and type of welfare regime. Work-life conflict was evident, expressed as preferring more time for family, friends, and leisure, especially where employment rates were highest and more for women than men. Many full-timers preferred shorter hours. Differences between desired and actual employment status were greatest among working-class, female, and older individuals. Unmet demand for jobs was most common in transitional and Mediterranean welfare states. The likelihood of employment was related to the type of welfare regime.
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 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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 | 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