The Changing Nature of Work in Canada and Other Developed Countries: What Do the Trends Over Time Tell Us?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter describes changes in various dimensions of work in Canada and around the world. It reviews the research examining changes in the self-reported psychosocial work characteristics of labor force participants across a number of countries. The chapter focuses on changes in psychosocial working conditions. It argues that new systems of work arrangements, such as lean production and flexible work arrangements have had certain unforeseen impacts on the psychosocial working conditions of labor market participants. The chapter presents changes in the nature of work using data from the Canadian Labor Force Survey, from the years 1976 through to 2003. It discusses all Canadian; there is no reason to believe that the Canadian labor market is significantly different from the US labor market or other labor markets in developed economies around the world. In addition to a lack of data collection, the measurement of changes in psychosocial working conditions is hampered by concurrent confounding changes in the labor market.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".