MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974534806 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.343-032019

“A Normal Amount of Masculine Hardness”: Representations of Male Nurses in 1960s West Germany

2019· article· en· W2974534806 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christoph Schwamm

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean history and politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHegemonic masculinityMasculinityHegemonyGender studiesNarrativeSociologyInequalityGender inequalityPolitical sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nursing studies narrative of the role of masculinity can be summarized as follows: hegemonic masculinity prevents men from doing care work. An analysis of public relations efforts to recruit male nurses in West Germany during the 1960s does not provide evidence for such a link. Representing nursing as compatible with hegemonic masculinity was also able to legitimize the existence of male nurses, while the idea of promoting gender equality in nursing was advocated by exactly those institutions that enabled the eventual gender inequality within the profession. Finally, the thesis of hegemonic masculinity as some kind of anti-caregiving agent comes into question because of the success of the civilian service in West Germany, despite the gender shaming used to deter men from enlisting in it.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicEuropean history and politicsFrench-language works237,207