MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973653083 · doi:10.5539/res.v11n4p1

Leaving and Losing a Job After Childbearing in Italy: A Comparison Between 2005 and 2012

2019· article· en· W2973653083 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marina Zannella, Antonella Guarneri, Cinzia Castagnaro

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrodata (statistics)PsychologyAffect (linguistics)Demographic economicsWork (physics)Social psychologyDemographyEconomicsSociologyPopulationCensus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article builds on microdata from the Birth Sample Survey (BSS) carried out by Istat in 2005 and 2012 in order to analyse changes in the occupational status of mothers of young children. We aim in particular to broaden the understanding of the individual and contextual characteristics that can affect the probability of women who were employed during pregnancy of not returning to work in the two years following the child’s birth. The study contributes to existing literature on mothers’ employment in two main ways. First, we take into consideration the different nature - voluntary or involuntary – of the motivations for not returning to work. Second, we attempt to evaluate whether the likelihood of Italian mothers to leave or lose their jobs and the factors affecting these probabilities changed between 2005 and 2012. Our results confirm human capital investments and job characteristics to be among the main determinants of women’s employment continuity after childbearing. The probability of losing a job increased significantly for mothers in 2012 compared to 2005, probably as a result of the deterioration of labour market conditions during the recession years. Conversely, the probability of leaving a job was not statistically significantly related to the year; family characteristics - the presence of a couple and features of the partner’s job - were key factors in women’s deciding not to return to work after childbearing.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.341 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207