MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2748541810 · doi:10.1177/1048291117724800

A Feminist Intervention That Hurt Women: Biological Differences, Ergonomics, and Occupational Health: Une intervention féministe qui a nui aux femmes: différences biologiques, égalité, ergonomie et santé au travail

2017· article· en· W2748541810 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karen Messing

Bibliographic record

VenueNEW SOLUTIONS A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesHarassmentSociologyArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The University of Québec in Montréal has agreements with trade unions providing access to university resources. Researchers involved in this program worked in partnership with union women's and health and safety committees for more than twenty years. Not all studies succeeded in improving women's working conditions. One joint project involved observational studies of tasks done by health-care workers, complemented by interviews and questionnaires. We found that task assignments, movements, postures, and work-related musculoskeletal disorders varied by gender/sex and made recommendations for change. However, issues of pay equity, spending on health care, and contracting-out of "ancillary work" were salient. Researchers learned that in the absence of changes in power relationships in the workplace, women may be disadvantaged by denial as well as by exaggeration of female-male differences. Men may also be at risk when their gender is invisible. We suggest some feminist approaches to workplace solutions and some pathways for research. Résumé L'Université du Québec à Montréal a signé avec des centrales syndicales des ententes leur donnant un accès à des ressources universitaires. Des chercheures ont travaillé en partenariat avec des comités syndicaux de condition des femmes et de santé-sécurité au travail pendant plus de 25 ans, mais ce ne sont pas toutes les études qui ont abouti à des améliorations. Un projet concernait des observations du travail d'employé.e.s du secteur de la santé, dont les tâches, mouvements, et postures variaient selon le genre/sexe. Nous avons recommandé des transformations, mais des enjeux d'équité salariale, de coûts et de sous-traitance y ont fait obstacle. Les chercheures ont appris qu'en l'absence de transformation des rapports de pouvoir au travail, le déni des différences hommes-femmes, autant que leur exagération, peut désavantager les travailleuses (et les travailleurs). Nous suggérons des approches féministes aux solutions pour le milieu de travail, ainsi que des pistes de recherche.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNEW SOLUTIONS A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health PolicySame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207