Attitudes Towards Gender Roles and Gender Role Behaviour Among Urban, Rural, and Farm Populations in Slovenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to contribute to still existing discussion about the origins of the unequal gender roles in society. Albeit significant changes in redefinition of the gender roles under the impact of economic and cultural globalisation the unequal position of women in private and public spheres still persists even in societies with the most developed economies and welfare systems. The basic argument followed in the study is that working arrangements women choose are not simply in accordance with their preferences and attitudes, but a result of complex interplay of attitudes and practical constrains embodied in contextual factors. The result of the study based on the Second European Comparative Survey on the Acceptance of Population-related Policies (PPA2) for Slovenia support that argument by showing that certain contexts (type of place of residence and the way of making a living - like farming) still significantly delineate women lives. In spite of common national specifics (long tradition of high women’s employment, favourable gender equality legislation and availability of institutions and services for working mothers) and relatively similar attitudes towards gender roles among the population, farm women in Slovenia considerably diverge in their daily life patterns (e.g. taking care of children) and preferences to combine family and working life from urban and even rural women and in general from men as well. Based on such results, reflected by ample gender rural studies’ evidences, it can be argued, that not simply natural predispositions affect farm women’s occupational choices, but
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".