MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145983270 · doi:10.3917/tgs.008.0149

Les paroxysmes de la conciliation. Violence au travail et violence du conjoint

2002· article· fr· W2145983270 on OpenAlexaff
Élizabeth Brown, Dominique Fougeyrollas-Schwebel, Maryse Jaspard

Bibliographic record

VenueTravail genre et sociétés · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceConciliationSociologyPhilosophyArbitration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé L’enquête nationale sur les violences envers les femmes en France (enquête Enveff) apporte sur la conciliation entre travail et famille un éclairage supplémentaire, différent de ce que révèle d’ordinaire le seul angle des contraintes spatio-temporelles. Alors que les inégalités entre les sexes ont souvent été analysées au travers des contraintes qui s’imposent aux femmes dans le travail et la famille, les hommes bénéficiant d’une liberté tangible, l’enquête Enveff permet de mettre directement en relation les situations de violence repérées au cours des douze derniers mois dans la vie de travail avec les situations de vie en couple. Le caractère multiforme de la violence est analysé en prenant en compte les divers types de violences interpersonnelles, verbales, psychologiques, physiques et sexuelles, perpétrées dans le cadre du travail et par le conjoint. Dans la majorité des cas, activité professionnelle et vie maritale n’apparaissent pas incompatibles, à condition d’accomplir la conciliation des deux vies dans l’harmonie, car la moindre difficulté ouvre la voie à des effets cumulatifs de violences dans les deux sphères.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.255
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTravail genre et sociétésSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207