Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seeking to define families as groups of people who share earning and caring activities, we contrast theoretical orientations that see advantages to a division of labour or complementary roles, in comparison to orientations that see less risk and greater companionship in a collaborative model based on sharing paid and unpaid work, or co-providing and co-parenting. It is important to look both inside and outside of families, or at the changing gendered links between earning and caring, to understand change both in families and in the work world. It is proposed that equal opportunity by gender has advanced further in the public sphere associated with education and work, than in the private family sphere associated with everyday life. Time-use data indicate that, on average, men carry their weight in terms of total productive time (paid plus unpaid work), but that women make much more of the accommodations between family and work. Fertility is likely to be lowest in societies that offer women equal opportunity in the public sphere but where families remain traditional in terms of the division of work. Policies are discussed that would reduce the dependency between spouses, and encourage a greater common ground between men and women in earning and caring.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".