MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519223683 · doi:10.1093/sp/jxw006

From the Defamilialization to the “Demotherization” of Care Work

2016· article· en· W2519223683 on OpenAlexaff
Sophie Mathieu

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Politics International Studies in Gender State & Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamWork (physics)SociologyCare workWelfare stateDivision of labourPaid workState (computer science)Focus (optics)Social workGender studiesPsychologyPolitical sciencePoliticsComputer scienceLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article adds to the debate on how to “genderize” comparative analysis of welfare states by building from mainstream and feminist research. It introduces a new conceptual tool—the “demotherization” of care work—to convey the extent to which mothers can transfer part of their caregiving responsibilities to the state, grand-parents, their partner, or paid caregivers. The concept of demotherization allows shifting the focus of the analysis from the role of “families” to the role of “mothers” in social reproductive work. The combination of motherization/demotherization and familialization/defamilialization yields four types of maternalism: “implicit,” “traditional,” “state-funded dematernalism,” and “familialized dematernalism.” Although the demotherization of care work leads to increased gender equality, it does not systematically challenge the gendered division of care work.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.066
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations51
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Politics International Studies in Gender State & SocietySame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207