Exploring the link between sexual orientation, work-life balance satisfaction and work-life segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to, using several cycles of the Canadian General Social Survey (GSS) covering 2010–2015, examine the patterns of work-life balance (WLB) satisfaction and work-life segmentation by sexual orientation. Design/methodology/approach In this paper, multivariate regression analysis is used. Findings The analysis shows that men living with a male partner are more satisfied with their WLB than their heterosexual counterparts. No statistically significant difference is found between women who live with a female partner and their heterosexual counterparts, in WLB satisfaction. Work-life segmentation is operationalized by the odds of being at the top levels of the life satisfaction scale without being satisfied with the circumstances of one’s job. Controlling for a wide range of characteristics, working Canadians living with a same-sex partner, regardless of their genders, are found more likely to have segmented their work and life domains than their heterosexual counterparts. Originality/value The paper, for the first time, investigates how sexual orientation relates to WLB satisfaction and work-life segmentation. This study exploits a unique opportunity offered by the Canadian GSSs in which WLB satisfaction is directly surveyed, all the while partnered sexual minorities are identifiable.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".