Choosing to Retire? A Study of Women’s Patterns for Retiring or Continuing to Work
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Women of the baby-boom generation are the first generation of women to present an old age-retirement trajectory similar to the traditional male model. Using a narrative approach, we collected 20 life stories from older women, mostly retired, all born in Canada. We present five patterns that influenced respondents’ decisions to end their career or, inversely, postpone the moment of retirement: 1) “Choosing myself” to fully take advantage of the retirement years; 2) Rational retirement: the deliberate choice to stop paid employment and mourn one’s career; 3) The break: obligation to retire; 4) Retirement as an extension of the retirement of a spouse-breadwinner, and 5) Postponing retirement. Our analysis reveals that patterns vary, depending on socio-economic contexts and state of health, relationship to work, spouse’s retirement status, care work, and the desire for freedom. They also reflect life-long social roles associated with care work, remunerated work, housework, and civic commitments. The Aging-retirement trajectory depends on women’s collective and individual histories and the impact of gender on other intersecting social relations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".