MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2309552135 · doi:10.1177/0192513x16631016

I Just Can’t Fit It in! Implications of the Fit Between Work and Family on Health-Promoting Behaviors

2016· article· en· W2309552135 on OpenAlexaff
Colleen E. Pagnan, Amber J. Seidel, Shelley MacDermid Wadsworth

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Issues · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph-Humber
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationPsychologyWorkforcePerspective (graphical)Sample (material)Life course approachWork engagementMultilevel modelWork (physics)Family healthDevelopmental psychologyFamily lifeSocial psychologySociologyMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individuals working long hours and/or experiencing work-related stress, including work–family conflict, are less likely to engage in health-promoting behaviors. Grounded in a life course perspective and guided by the conceptualization of life course fit, this study examined appraisals of fit between work and family roles and engagement in health-promoting behaviors, specifically physical activity and family meals, using a sample of parents ( n = 811). The sample was drawn from the 2008 National Study of the Changing Workforce, a nationally representative sample of workers in the United States. Results suggest that multiple dimensions of fit were associated with greater frequency of exercise and family meals. Furthermore, parenting demands and eldercare moderated these associations. A better understanding of the proximal processes related to engagement in health-promoting behaviors would be valuable in understanding how to secure the health and well-being of families for the future.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family IssuesSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207