Participation of Women in the Workforce: A Comparative Study between Central and Western Plains of West Bengal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The population of women contributes nearly half of the total count but it counts for only a quarter of total workforce participation in India. The participation of women in different workforces is not only limited to the financial need of the family but is also related to the social system, the education level of the women, and the availability of work opportunities for them. The present study aims to compare the sector-specific women's work participation level and associated social factors of the women workforce. Two regions out of five regions in West Bengal specified by NSSO were considered to be study regions. Incorporating the necessary variables, a structured interview schedule was prepared and data were collected from randomly selected 160 working women from two districts from two regions under study. The collected data has been finalized for analysis after a validity check. Necessary frequency analysis and non-parametric tests have been performed to get the results.
 Most of the respondents of central regions were service holders. Education has a signification effect on income level in both the regions under study. Service holders were at significantly higher income levels than other occupational groups. The respondents from the central regions were more educated and empowered than the women of the western region. A large scale of variety in occupational involvement has been found in both regions in the present study. The income level is directly related to occupation and education. The educated women of both regions preferred service as their occupation and earn more than other categories. Specific policies or programs that enhance institutional involvement of all occupational categories may cater to our developmental goal.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".