MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613176646 · doi:10.25336/p6s305

Gender inequality in the family setting

2017· article· en· W2613176646 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Roderic Beaujot, Jianye Liu, Zenaida R. Ravanera

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Studies in Population · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman capitalContext (archaeology)Gender inequalityDemographyPaid workInequalitySociologyDivision of labourPsychologyHumanitiesDemographic economicsGender studiesPolitical scienceGeographyWorking hoursEconomicsLabour economicsArtEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Now that human capital increases the propensity to be in union for both men and women, the gender differences in the patterns of entry and exit from relationships have decreased. However, there are still strong gender differences in living with children, with women at younger ages and women not in couples being more likely than men to be living with children. Women are more likely to be lone parents while men are more likely to be living as part of a couple. While the employment rate of women in unions is no longer suppressed if they are living with children, their average work hours remain lower, while men have the highest employment rate and highest average work hours if they are living with children. For both men and women, parents do more unpaid work than persons without children though parenthood increases women’s more than men’s unpaid work. In the context of diverse and less stable families, a more equal division of both earning and caring activities would benefit gender equality.Maintenant que le capital humain augmente la propension à être en union pour les hommes et les femmes, les différences entre les sexes dans les modèles d’entrée et de sortie de relations ont diminué. Cependant, il y a encore de fortes différences entre les sexes dans la propension à vivre avec les enfants : les plus jeunes femmes et les femmes qui ne sont pas en couple sont plus susceptibles que les hommes de vivre avec les enfants. Les femmes sont plus susceptibles d’être des parents seuls alors que les hommes sont plus susceptibles de vivre dans le cadre d’un couple. Alors que le taux d’emploi des femmes en union n’est plus réduit si elles vivent avec des enfants, leurs heures moyennes de travail restent inférieure, tandis que les hommes ont le taux d’emploi et les heures moyennes de travail les plus élevés si ils vivent avec des enfants. Pour les hommes et les femmes, les parents font plus de travail non-payé que les personnes sans enfants, mais la parentalité augmente plus le travail non-payé des femmes que des hommes. Dans le contexte des familles diverses et moins stables, une répartition plus égale dans la division des activités d’emploi et de soins serait bénéfique pour l’égalité des sexes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Studies in PopulationSame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207