Mothers’ Willingness to Sacrifice for Their Children: An Exploratory Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intensive mothering ideology emphasizes mothers’ sacrifice for their children. Despite the increase in women’s social and economic participation, mothers continue to experience conflicts between career and family obligations due to the conventional idea of “good mothers.” Do all mothers prioritize their children’s needs? This study focuses on whether mothers are willing to sacrifice their happiness and whether such beliefs change over time. We explore the factors contributing to mothers’ intention to sacrifice and its change from two theoretical perspectives, rational choice model and linked lives perspective. Using the first three waves of the Panel Study on Korean Children, the findings show that almost half of all mothers are not willing to sacrifice their own happiness for their children at each wave. Both rational choice and linked lives perspectives contribute to explaining mothers’ view of sacrifice in the baseline year. The change in mothers’ view on sacrifice over time is significantly influenced by a subset of variables including their spouse’s positions on sacrifice and social exchange experience with their children (the linked lives perspective), and the emotional values that mothers place on babies (the rational choice model).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".