MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596987114 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.37.4.563

The Ways of Adaptation and Allocation Work Time from Russian Households in the Period of Crisis

2006· article· en· W2596987114 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Galina Gvozdeva, Elena Gvozdeva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnpaid workWork (physics)Time allocationRussian federationDemographic economicsPaid workEconomicsAdaptation (eye)Duration (music)Economic growthDevelopment economicsLabour economicsEconomic policyWorking hoursPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers gender analysis of time allocation for paid and unpaid work in five different types of Russian households, as well as the ways of adaptation in household features since 1991 (when the Soviet Union was disorganized). Emphasis was given on analysing consequences of the financial crisis in 1998, when many people lost their jobs and most Russian families lost their life savings. The ways of adaptation varied depending on the types of families. Families with low income and with children perform more unpaid work. and this work. mostly performed by the females, widens the opportunities of sustaining normal life for those who suffer hardships due to economic transformations in the country. The study was based on a Russian State Statistical Bureau (Goskomstat) data. The data if paid and unpaid work duration was obtained from the Monitoring of Economic Conditions in the Russian Federation: Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (1996, 1998, 2003).$$Gender analysis, time allocation, paid and unpaid work, Russian family.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207