MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3141193917 · doi:10.15273/allons-y.v5i0.10214

Beyond the Binary: Why Gender Matters in the Recruitment and Use of Children

2021· article· en· W3141193917 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Nidhi Kapur, Hannah R. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueAllons-y Journal of Children Peace and Security · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender identityPerspective (graphical)Psychological interventionSexual orientationPsychologyQualitative propertyGender analysisQualitative researchDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceGender studiesSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gender matters in conflict. Socio-cultural norms, attitudes and expectations related to gender dictate the causes, course and consequences of child soldiering. Despite international commitments, the recruitment and use of children in armed forces and groups persists. This paper summarizes existing quantitative data from the United Nations Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism, in light of complementary qualitative analysis from other sources, to highlight the ways in which gender norms can (a) drive recruitment, (b) determine roles and responsibilities, and (c) influence outcomes for children associated with armed forces or groups. The needs and experiences of girls and boys are explored, and where evidence allows, that of children of diverse sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics (SOGIESC). Recommendations are made on potential actions that can further nuance the gender perspective proposed in the Vancouver Principles. Suggestions are made on how to ensure prevention and response interventions are (1) supported by consistently disaggregated data, (2) cognisant of the gender drivers behind recruitment, and (3) tailored to the distinct needs of children of diverse SOGIESC.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllons-y Journal of Children Peace and SecuritySame topicGender, Security, and ConflictFrench-language works237,207