MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200224771 · doi:10.3138/jmvfh-2021-0077

Making military and Veteran women (in)visible: The continuity of gendered experiences in military-to-civilian transition

2021· article· en· W4200224771 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Maya Eichler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Military Veteran and Family Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilitary serviceSpouseMilitary psychologyMilitary personnelNormativeMilitary sociologyNorm (philosophy)Service memberPsychologyCadetGender studiesMedicinePolitical scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LAY SUMMARY This study explores how gender and sex shape the military-to-civilian transition (MCT) for women. Thirty-three Canadian women Veterans were interviewed about their military service and post-military life. MCT research often emphasizes discontinuities between military and civilian life, but women Veterans’ accounts highlight continuities in gendered experiences. Military women are expected to fit the male norm and masculine ideal of the military member during service, but they are rarely recognized as Veterans after service. Women experience invisibility as military members and Veterans and simultaneously hypervisibility as (ex)military women who do not fit military or civilian gender norms. Gendered expectations of women as spouses and mothers exert an undue burden on them as serving members and as Veterans undergoing MCT. Women encounter care and support systems set up on the normative assumption of the military and Veteran man supported by a female spouse. The study findings point to a needed redesign of military and Veteran systems to remove sex and gender biases and better respond to the sex- and gender-specific MCT needs of women.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Military Veteran and Family HealthSame topicGender, Security, and ConflictFrench-language works237,207