Brazilian and Immigrant Families in São Paulo City: Education and Work
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two studies, worked out in different moments in the same period (1900-1950), have pointed to some significant differences in the way families living in Sao Paulo (city ?) brought up their children and consequently in the way men and women have acted towards work and family life. The first study was focused on families originated from Brazilian middle and lower social and economic classes living in the capital city of Sao Paulo - nevertheless coming from inland -. The second one was focused on families from Portuguese origin resident in the interior of Sao Paulo state. In both researches, a French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’s theory was applied, as their conceptual basis - especially habitus concept strategies and economic, social and cultural capital, oral reports from two generations’ members were used as data source. Independent from their social and economic classes, we have noticed that there was a distinction between the upbringing transmitted by Brazilian parents to their sons and to their daughters: whenever possible, teenage girls are not allowed to work outside the home; it was just when necessary that they should be admitted to work outside the family sphere. Among cultivated values by Brazilian families, school education must be a relevant point, as it was considered a way of social ascension. Portuguese origin families, on the other hand, evaluated work so much that teenage girls were expected to participate in family work as hard as young men and only when taking care of a baby, a woman could be moved away from work activity.$$Portuguese and Brazilian families, education, work, habitus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".