MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911271775 · doi:10.7202/1055719ar

Papa 2.0 au Québec. La légitimité du père dans l’utilisation des semaines parentales

2019· article· fr· W2911271775 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Valérie Harvey

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de recherche sociologique · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Si la prise du congé de paternité de trois à cinq semaines est bien rentrée dans les moeurs québécoises, la durée du congé parental est une question délicate dans le couple. Les cinq semaines de congé semblent être devenues une nouvelle norme au Québec, mais le père qui désire partager le congé parental « enlève » des semaines à la mère, toujours perçue comme la prestataire légitime. L’arrivée d’un enfant est un moment de cristallisation qui fixe les responsabilités dans la nouvelle famille. À travers les résultats d’une enquête qualitative réalisée auprès de pères québécois travaillant dans le domaine des technologies de l’information, un congé prolongé pour le père augmente sa confiance quant aux soins du bébé et son implication par la suite. Mais le fait que les pères sont beaucoup moins nombreux à prolonger leur congé parental peut expliquer le partage inégal des tâches ménagères qui persiste.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.007

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers de recherche sociologiqueSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207