The Gender Gap in Market Work Hours Among Canadians: Examining Essential(ist) Linkages to Parenting Time and Household Labour Hours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using 2015 Canadian time diary data, we analyse how the gender gap in market work hours is linked to gender inequality in parenting time and household labour hours (N = 2,296). Among Canadians who are 15–34 years of age, we examine three family groupings, single without children, married without children and married with children. For the married with children group, we focus on respondents with at least one child aged 0–4 years. We find that the gender gap in market work is not significant for those single and married without children. For the married without children group, a gender gap exists for household labour. This suggests that a gender gap in household labour exists prior to the onset of children. As expected, a large gender gap in market work presents itself for married/common law respondents with young children. Half of the gender gap in market work is explained by household labour hours and parenting time. Our study demonstrates that time allocations contribute substantively to gender inequality in market work. Yet, the large unexplained part of the gap suggests that this issue is larger and more complex than mere bargaining decisions about domestic and market time. JEL: I24, J13, J16, C10
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".