MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521183567 · doi:10.59876/a-jzvs-hs20

Gender Equality Policy as Horizontal Policy: A Comparative Study of the Netherlands and the United Kingdom

2002· article· en· W2521183567 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Annie Hondeghem, Sofie Cromboom, Sarah Nelen

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement international · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterdependenceOrdinationRepresentation (politics)PoliticsGender equalityKingdomHorizontal and verticalPolitical sciencePublic administrationSociologyPublic economicsGender studiesEconomicsLawGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines two countries (the Netherlands and the UK) that are attempting to implement a horizontal gender equality strategy. The analysis identifies several external and internal factors that influence the relative success of this new strategy. These factors include the following: a good representation of women in politics, a structural dialogue with the women's movement combined with strong political will and high profile administrative co-ordination structures, as well as clear policy objectives and instruments that are monitored and evaluated. None of these factors constitute in themselves sufficient conditions, but a complex interdependent combination seems to be a good stimulating environment. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement internationalSame topicGender Politics and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207