MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307052076 · doi:10.1080/02185385.2022.2134194

Working precariously within the social welfare system in Japan during the COVID-19 pandemic: Resilience without resistance among non-regular frontline workers

2022· article· en· W4307052076 on OpenAlexafffund
Viveka Ichikawa, Izumi Niki, Izumi Sakamoto

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia Pacific Journal of Social Work and Development · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersRoyal Bank of Canada
KeywordsThematic analysisGovernment (linguistics)PandemicWelfareBurnoutSocial isolationNeoliberalism (international relations)Psychological resilienceSocial WelfareInequalitySocial workPolitical scienceEconomic growthBusinessCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Public relationsQualitative researchPsychologyMedicineSociologySocial psychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global COVID-19 pandemic exposed structural inequality perpetuated by neoliberalism. essential workers, including helping professionals, have experienced a high-stress level. This pilot study examined the challenges faced by social welfare workers in Japan during the pandemic. Japanese social welfare departments in municipal governments, which are primary providers of public assistance and social services, are staffed by government officers (GOs, permanent government employees) and non-regular frontline workers (NRs, hired on annual contracts, predominantly female, covering direct casework). Informed by narrative inquiries, five individual interviews of GOs and NRs were conducted. The thematic analysis highlighted the increased employment instability, individualisation, and powerlessness among NRs. NRs expressed intensified stress from the safety risk, long working hours, and insufficient organisational support. Stratified by different types of contracts, resultant tasks, and genders, NRs experienced intensified isolation, leading to burnout. The implications of working precariously in the pandemic under the neoliberal social welfare systems are discussed.

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)0.002
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia Pacific Journal of Social Work and DevelopmentSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207