Genre et Communication : quels enjeux pour les pratiques professionnelles en communication ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Communication : quels enjeux pour les pratiques professionnelles... Le genre apparat comme une dimension non ngligeable dans l'apprhension des mtiers et des parcours professionnels de la communication dans toutes ses dclinaisons (relations publiques, presse, publicit, journalisme d'entreprise, communication externe, interne, etc.). On trouve en sociologie du travail des recherches s'intressant au thme de la fminisation des mtiers et des professions, qui, par exemple, interrogent une possible dvalorisation induite par l'arrive des femmes, se penchent sur une division du travail o se rvlent les principes de diffrenciation et de hirarchisation entre les tches masculines et fminines (Malochet, 2007, 6), ou encore posent la question des discriminations en organisations. Ces travaux amnent considrer la transversalit des rapports de genre, puisque les trajectoires professionnelles doivent tre articules aux modalits de travail et aux activits proprement dites. D 'ailleurs, pour Miller (cit par Caron, 2004), le genre occupe une position centrale dans la vie organisationnelle.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.039 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".