MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Unpaid work, capital and coercion

2012· article· en· W2751529027 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWork Organisation Labour & Globalisation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Economy and Work Transformation
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnpaid workContext (archaeology)EconomicsCoercion (linguistics)Work (physics)WarrantPower (physics)Capital (architecture)Labour economicsPaid workSociologyInequality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past several decades, household work has generated a dramatic outflow of research and theory on unpaid work. Here, the authors (who shared equally in the writing of this paper) examine multiple forms of unpaid work and propose that in the contemporary capitalist economy the key dimensions of unpaid work are: first, that it is not compensated in terms of direct payments by capital; second, that elsewhere in the economy the same activities are paid; and, lastly, that participation in unpaid work is directly related to socially constructed power relations. Within this framework, they point out the complex and dynamic interplay between unpaid work and patterns of social inequality. In conclusion, it is proposed that approaching unpaid work, and in particular domestic labour, in this broader context and in terms of more nuanced treatments of power provides a fuller understanding of the issues and suggests that unpaid work may be in the midst of dramatic expansion. The implications of this growth for individuals and societies around the globe warrant researchers' attention.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.230 · 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