Une jeunesse en quête de sens? Le rapport au travail des jeunes français à travers le prisme des effets de génération et d’âge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the evolving relationship to work among French youth, in the context of relatively unstable employment and deteriorating conditions for entry-level employees. It explores the objective dimensions of work (such as job quality), and more subjective considerations related to career paths, work situations, and professional or social priorities. The study draws on two complementary sources. The generational surveys conducted by the Centre d’études et de recherches sur les qualifications (Céreq) have allowed us to examine how representations of work shifted across an 18-year span. Meanwhile, data related to a single cohort of young people over seven years of their working life have allowed us to assess the effect of age. We explore the latter in terms of individual life and work experiences, the stages involved in the transition to adulthood, social background, and gender. Ultimately, the article identifies four categories of youth, each of which corresponds to a distinct and subjective relationship to work. These categories reflect various degrees of satisfaction and resignation in relation to work situations, setbacks, and opportunities for advancement. However, most young people remain optimistic about the future.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".