MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405575673 · doi:10.1111/ntwe.12329

Immigrant IT Workers' Experiences With Remote Work: Temporal, Spatial, and Ideological Dimensions of Paid/Unpaid Work and Care

2024· article· en· W4405575673 on OpenAlexafffund
Kim de Laat

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Technology Work and Employment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsImmigrationUnpaid workBridge (graph theory)Work (physics)Information and Communications TechnologyIdeologyCare workBridging (networking)SociologyVariety (cybernetics)Political scienceEngineeringMedicineComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This article examines immigrant IT workers' experiences with remote work. Through interviews with 21 immigrant IT employees, I find that remote work is used to bridge care/work obligations. Bridging occurs spatially , for example, when working from home enables family members to return to countries of origin for extended periods of time. And bridging occurs ideologically , by enabling remote workers to enact gendered self‐concepts that may be otherwise challenging to achieve. For women, this means they can maintain focus on paid work, while for men, it means engaging in involved fatherhood by taking on more childcare duties. These findings enhance the social shaping of technology perspective by delineating immigrants' gendered relationships with ICT‐mediated remote work, and the intricacies of time use. While ICT‐mediated remote work is conferred on individual employees, it is used to allocate a variety of (unpaid) care relations, both intra‐ and inter‐household. Remote work is not merely an individual‐level experience, and preferences for and against it may be incidental, in the case of immigrants. Rather it is necessary for many to bridge care/work gaps shaped by immigrants' experiences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Technology Work and EmploymentSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207