MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2255615839

Not Just Women's Work: Relocating Gender in Studies of Labour Regulation

2012· article· en· W2255615839 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ruth Buchanan

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFordismCompromisePolityWageLabour economicsEconomicsConsumption (sociology)Political sciencePolitical economyMarket economySociologyLawSocial sciencePolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past several decades, shifts in the structure and organization of the international economy and polity have taken place in conjunction with changes in the ways we explain and understand these arrangements. The working lives of men and women in Canada, as elsewhere, have been transformed as a consequence of these developments. Many scholars describe these changes in terms of a shift from Fordism to post-Fordism. Fordism encapsulates the relationship between a certain way of organizing production and a type of economic regulation. In developed countries like the United States and Canada, mass production and mass consumption balanced each other off as long as the Fordist compromise held. The “wage/gender bargain” of Fordism required that men worked full time for a “family wage”, while women worked at home for no pay, and were considered peripheral workers in the paid labour market. Feminist scholars never fully extended the security of benefits of the Fordist compromise to women. These days, however, the desirability of the Fordist compromise appears a somewhat moot question. The wage/gender bargain of Fordism clearly seems to have broken down in most sectors of advanced economies, while the issue of what will replace it is still unclear.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0130.059
Scholarly communication0.0110.011
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicLabor Movements and Unions→French-language works237,207→