GENDERED AND INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONALITIES IN FUTURE ORIENTATIONS: GUATEMALAN SCHOOLCHILDREN’S REPORTS OF GENDER ROLES IN PRESENT AND FUTURE HOUSEHOLDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines children and youth’s future orientation in rural Guatemala by examining their reports of activities of adults and children in present and future households. A total of 690 students in a small town in highland Guatemala completed a household task attribution form that listed 29 tasks in seven domains (domestic chores, care for children, household decisions, responsibilities, household purchases, work for money, development) with four gendered household figures (man, woman, boy, girl). Using cultural consensus analysis, we analyze patterns of agreement and variation in responses to determine the existence of shared cultural models and gendered submodels in both time periods. Taking a gendered and intergenerational relationality perspective, we focus on the ways that future orientations reflect, (re)produce, and contest contemporary gender norms. Reports of task distributions in the present reflect “traditional” gender norms divided along “productive” and “reproductive” lines. While male participants’ conceptions of the future largely reproduced these structures, female participants appeared willing to increase their own domestic work to foster greater gender equality among their children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".