Bibliographic record
Abstract
A traditional saying in China is that “Men dominate the outside; women dominate the inside.” The first part of this saying has clearly changed, as Chinese women of working age show near universal participation in paid labor. To what extent is the second part of this saying still reflected in modern China? We examine this question using data from the China Health and Nutrition Study. We selected a subsample of 2,580 wives aged 20-55 and their husbands in order to analyze husbands’ participation in three traditionally female household tasks and child care. We examine absolute and relative measures of husbands’ participation for urban and rural residents separately, and we identify determinants of husbands’ greater participation. We find that urban husbands contribute more than rural husbands, but regardless of residency, wives do the vast majority of household labor and child care. Findings for the urban sample are most consistent with those of U.S. studies and show at least partial support for three major explanations of the division of household labor: time availability, gender-role ideologies, and relative power. We suggest possible ways to alleviate the “double day” experienced by Chinese wives.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".