MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384560461 · doi:10.56367/oag-039-10764

Sex-based labour market segregation and women's perceptions of entrepeneurship

2023· article· en· W4384560461 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access Government · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalaryEntrepreneurshipPerceptionWageArgument (complex analysis)Government (linguistics)Scale (ratio)Labour economicsDemographic economicsPolitical scienceGender studiesSociologyEconomicsPsychologyLawGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sex-based labour market segregation and women's perceptions of entrepeneurship Here Professors Tonoyan, Strohmeyer, and Jennings investigate sex-based labour market segregation and women's perceptions of entrepreneurship. As noted in a prior Open Access Government article, women tend to participate in entrepreneurial activity at lower rates than men within most countries included in the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Numerous plausible reasons for this gender gap exist. A large-scale study by Professors Vartuhi Tonoyan (California State University, Fresno), Robert Strohmeyer (University of Mannheim), and Jennifer E. Jennings (University of Alberta) put forth and examined the argument that women are likely to possess less favourable perceptions than men, on average, of how easy it would be to start a business. These scholars further argued that this disparity can be attributed to sex-segregated positions within traditional wage-and-salary employment, which present structural disadvantages for women’s entrepreneurship.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.258 · 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