MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339962513 · doi:10.2307/25149402

Le Mouvement familial au Québec, 1960-1990

2003· article· fr· W2339962513 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jocelyne Murray, Denise Lemieux, Michelle Comeau

Bibliographic record

VenueLabour / Le Travail · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceEthnologySociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans le contexte d'expansion economique et de croissance de l'Etat qui caracterise les annees 1960, la reorganisation des systemes d'education, de bien-etre et de sante entraine un reamenagement des activites et suscite des interets concernant les familles. Des associations familiales nees de l'Action catholique, des associations creees autour de la reforme scolaire, de nouvelles associations de parents en quete de reformes, des associations feminines qui glissent vers le feminisme constituent le terreau d'un mouvement social cree dans la seconde partie des annees 1960. Inspire des mouvements europeens, favorise au depart par des leaders politiques, sociaux et religieux, le Mouvement familial poursuit ses objectifs au cours des annees 1970, tandis que l'on assiste a la montee du mouvement des femmes.L'ouvrage retrace, a partir des documents et memoires issus de 17 federations d'organismes familiaux ou a interet familial, comment la participation de ces groupements (et de plusieurs autres) a diverses activites et revendications, ainsi que leurs interactions avec l'Etat et avec le mouvement des femmes contribuent a la mise en place d'une politique familiale. Outre les domaines de la famille et des associations familiales au centre de l'analyse, cette etude ajoute des donnees inedites a l'historiographie du Quebec moderne en traitant du changement social, de l'emergence des politiques et des institutions sous l'angle de l'apport des mouvements sociaux a ces transformations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLabour / Le TravailSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207