MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221129840 · doi:10.1080/1369183x.2022.2053078

Work, mobilities and the life course: choices and logistical entanglements in mobile life-careers

2022· article· en· W4221129840 on OpenAlexafffund
Vered Amit

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ethnic and Migration Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMobilitiesPaceLife course approachPrerogativeSociologyWork (physics)Public relationsPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologySocial scienceLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article employs the term ‘mobile life-careers’ in reference to work lives that have incorporated mobilities as ongoing constitutive features. The implications of oscillations between different forms of work mobilities over the course of careers are explored through a focus on the work histories of three development professionals. At issue are the ways in which the configuration of mobilities may change over time, as well as the extent to which workers are able to exercise choices (or not) in shaping these itineraries. What are the credentials that mobile workers must marshal to have a chance of balancing their personal and familial commitments with their professional mobilities? While an intense pace of mobilities has often been identified as the prerogative of the young and less encumbered, this article will consider why one of the critical resources affording participants in this sector, the capacity to sustain mobile life-careers was not their youthfulness, but the seniority and reputations they had accrued in the course of their work lives. Given the organisational variability of mobile work, for many personnel questions around work mobility may not be a matter of more or less, but of the form, pace and timing of mobility.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ethnic and Migration StudiesSame topicMigration, Aging, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207