MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211062228 · doi:10.3138/jmvfh-2021-0089

Desire to serve: Insights from Canadian defence studies on the factors that influence women to pursue a military career

2022· article· en· W4211062228 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Barbara T. Waruszynski, Kate Hill MacEachern, Suzanne Raby, Michelle Straver, Éric Ouellet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Military Veteran and Family Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaCanadian Armed ForcesDepartment of National Defence
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)Diversity (politics)Inclusion (mineral)Military personnelPublic relationsPerceptionPolitical scienceMilitary sociologyMilitary psychologyMilitary theoryPsychologyMilitary scienceSocial psychologyLawPoliticsMilitary operations other than war

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LAY SUMMARY The Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) continues to highlight the need to promote greater diversity and inclusion in its ranks. An increased representation of women in the Canadian military would enable greater capacity and capabilities to serve people, both domestically and abroad, and would contribute to a more diverse and inclusive military. To better understand how the CAF could increase the representation of women in the Canadian military, this article provides the key findings of three internal research studies on women’s perceptions of joining the military and women’s experiences as CAF members. These research studies examined the factors that influence women to join the military, the possible challenges impacting women’s decisions to join the military, and the improvements required for enabling a more effective military culture, including recruitment strategies that may help to increase the representation of women. The findings highlight specific factors and recommendations military leaders may consider to help promote greater capacity and capabilities through a more diverse and inclusive military.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0200.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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