MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2252191568 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.45.2.293

“Breadwinners” or “Involved Fathers?” Men, Fathers and Work in Italy

2014· article· en· W2252191568 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria Letizia Bosoni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrivingIdentity (music)Family lifeSociologyGender studiesWork (physics)Social science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The identity transformation affecting both men and women and structural changes in the family and in the labour market in the last few decades have led to a reflection on the role of the so-called "involved/new fathers" and of fatherhood-related practices. Several empirical studies, in fact, highlight a change in the father role, both in and outside Italy, towards a more family involved style of male parenthood. Nevertheless, the strong relationship between fathers and work remains a pivotal trait in a man’s identity: the breadwinner model is, in fact, still thriving in many European countries, including Italy. One of the most relevant issues in this scenario is the complex relationship between family and work. This paper is aimed at exploring men’s and fathers’ ideas and opinions on their involvement in work, family life and care, in order to identify their features in contemporary society. This topic will be analysed in depth with the help of data from the European Values Study, whose fourth wave was conducted in47 European countries including Italy, in 2008-2009.This survey helps detect some structural aspects and values concerning fundamental aspects of life, such as marriage and the family, work, leisure time, religion and inter-generational relationships.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207