MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2280933305

Who does what? : navigating gender roles in early parenthood

2014· article· en· W2280933305 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Annabel L. Lane

Bibliographic record

VenueSmith ScholarWorks (Smith College) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Education and Societal Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study explores gender role dynamics between couples in early years of parenthood. Forty-nine individuals in heterosexual couple relationships participated in phone interviews where they described their experiences making decisions and resolving conflict with their partners about the division of family labor. The families in this study had participated in the Supporting Father Involvement Project in Alberta, Canada. Findings of this study confirm existing research that gender roles become more traditional among heterosexual couples after parenthood, with mothers carrying out the majority of household tasks. Participants described a complex and challenging set of internal and external factors that were related to their decisions and feelings about gender roles, including logistical barriers, cultural narratives, and ideology from families of origin. Methods of resolving conflict about the division of labor corresponded with how satisfied participants felt with their relationships and roles. The responses highlighted a process by which parents became both more aware of and empathic towards their partners' perspectives. This process led to greater flexibility within gender roles, and parent descriptions of increased marital satisfaction, closeness, and family well-being overall.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmith ScholarWorks (Smith College)Same topicYouth Education and Societal DynamicsFrench-language works237,207