Development of a Tool to Measure Women’s Agency in India
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ensuring and expanding women’s agency is an essential component of efforts to promote the rights and well-being of women. However, inadequate measurement hampers monitoring and research into achieving this goal. In this study, we developed a theory-based measurement tool of women’s agency. We developed a conceptual model of agency through a review of the literature, and then used this model to identify potential indicators of agency. These indicators were asked as part of a population-based household survey that was completed between July and November 2016 by 3042 women in rural Rajasthan, India. We tested the construct validity of the hypothesized measurement model using confirmatory factor analysis. We identified a conceptual model of agency, composed of 23 indicators, which measured the domains Household Decision-Making, Freedom of Movement, Participation in the Community, and Attitudes and Perceptions. This conceptual model fit the study data well (CFI = 0.974, TLI = 0.970, RMSEA = 0.031). Our results have implications for measurement efforts in a number of settings, and our tool can be used to measure women’s agency in rural India.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it