MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404283551 · doi:10.1177/00207152241293463

Multidimensional gender ideologies: How do they relate to work-family arrangements of mothers with dependent children in Poland and western Germany?

2024· article· en· W4404283551 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jasmin Joecks, Anna Kurowská, Kerstin Pull, Pia S. Schober

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNarodowe Centrum NaukiDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsIdeologyWork (physics)Demographic economicsSociologyPsychologyGender roleGender studiesPolitical scienceSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyEconomicsPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study uses a multidimensional approach to identify gender ideologies and investigate their association with work-family arrangements among mothers of dependent children in Poland and western Germany. Based on data from the Generations and Gender Survey, we apply ordinal latent class analysis and identify five gender ideology classes: (1) traditional, (2) intensive parenting, (3) ambivalent, (4) moderately egalitarian, and (5) strongly egalitarian. In both countries, we find that the intensive parenting class resembles the traditional class in terms of lower maternal employment, a more gendered division of housework and childcare, and a smaller probability of using formal childcare, whereas the ambivalent respondents mostly practice work-care arrangements that are similar to the moderately egalitarian class. With respect to informal care, mothers who identify with strong egalitarianism significantly differ from the traditional class in western Germany, but they do not in Poland—thus highlighting the role of the cultural and institutional context in explaining the complex links between mothers’ gender ideologies and work-family arrangements.

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 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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207