MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391358919 · doi:10.29173/spectrum222

Bridging the Gender Gap: A Canadian Study Examining Gender Inequality in Engineering Workplaces

2024· article· en· W4391358919 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)InequalityGender inequalityGender gapGender equalitySociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyGender studiesDemographic economicsComputer scienceMathematicsEconomicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite considerable work to encourage women to enter the profession, engineering continues to be heavily male dominated. Research shows that women in engineering experience unequal treatment starting from their entry into the occupation. My research will discuss the experiences of gender inequality for women working in engineering fields by looking at the empirical literature examining the hiring process, chilly climates, hostile work environments, pay and promotion inequalities, and the challenges women engineers face due to competing identities and motherhood. I will show that the oppression and inequality of women reflects and perpetuates a culture that favors male-dominance and exclusionary practices within the engineering profession.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.203 · 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