MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160076045 · doi:10.46692/9781447348283.002

Changing Ideologies, Demographics and Attitudes

2019· other· en· W3160076045 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Cultural Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographicsIdeologyGeographyPsychologyPolitical scienceSociologyDemographyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter provides the context in which public policy on poverty, the family and parenting has evolved over the last 20 years. It examines changes in ideology in relation to the family, key socio-economic trends and shifts in public attitudes over the period, and why they are significant for family policy. The socio-economic trends we focus on include changes in economic growth, family type, the employment patterns of parents, housing tenure and costs, and the diversity of the population of Britain. These areas were chosen because they represent major changes, particularly in the lives of low-income families. They also provide the context for understanding the rationale for policy action. Finally, the chapter explores how this context has influenced parents’ roles and the emergence of parenting as a concept in its own right. Changing ideologies Family policy has evolved over centuries, responding to as well as attempting to influence the behaviours of mothers and fathers. The state has concerned itself with matters such as marriage, divorce, the birth rate and parental responsibility. However, historically, the state has been reluctant to intervene directly in behaviours within the family, except where there was significant danger to children. The year 1997 marks the beginning of a significant change in the role of public policy in family life. The Beveridge post-war welfare state was concerned with both the economics of the family and the birth rate. It created a social insurance system, underpinned by a National Health Service (NHS), tax-funded allowances for children and a commitment to full employment. It was also designed to prevent destitution and ensure a safety net for families. Beveridge's vision enshrined a traditional view of women's role, assuming that after the very active part women played during the Second World War, married women would and should return to the home as housewives. Alongside this was a concern about a falling birth rate; in Beveridge's words, mothers had ‘vital work to do in ensuring the adequate continuance of the British race’ (Cmd 6404, 1942). He proposed incentives for marriage and childbirth, and while his proposed marriage grant was not implemented, a maternity grant and benefit were introduced alongside widows’ benefits and family allowance, becoming foundations for our current welfare state (Timmins, 1996).

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial and Cultural DynamicsFrench-language works237,207