Something’s Gotta Give: The Relationship Between Time in Eldercare, Time in Childcare, and Employee Wellbeing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While existing research indicates that "sandwiched" employees (those with both childcare and eldercare demands) have lower wellbeing than employees with only eldercare demands, there is little understanding how childcare and eldercare demands interact to create those differences. Drawing on two studies, we hypothesize childcare demands amplify the negative impact of eldercare demands on wellbeing. Study 1 operationalizes childcare as a dichotomous variable (i.e., has childcare or not), and examines the relationship between hours per week in eldercare and wellbeing for two groups of employees: those with eldercare and those in the sandwich generation. Study 2, which operationalizes childcare as a continuous variable (i.e., hours in childcare per week), explores how time in childcare moderates the relationship between time in eldercare and wellbeing. Findings show time in eldercare is negatively associated with wellbeing, and the impact of childcare on the relationship between time in eldercare and wellbeing is dependent on how one operationalizes wellbeing and childcare constructs.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".