Bibliographic record
Abstract
While World War I presented opportunities for women to break out of traditional roles, it also reinforced enduring gender norms. The war represents a complex period of both progress and regression for women’s rights and roles. This essay explores the impact of World War I on Canadian women, highlighting the tensions between the temporary expansion of their roles and the reinforcement of traditional gender dynamics. Prior to the war, women’s roles were largely confined to the domestic sphere, with limited participation in public or economic activities. However, as men left to fight, women took on jobs traditionally reserved for men, especially in clerical and industrial work, demonstrating their capabilities in new areas. Despite this, women’s contributions were often framed within the confines of traditional femininity, particularly in nursing, which reinforced the image of women as nurturers and caregivers. Propaganda during the war emphasized women’s caregiving roles, portraying them as saintly figures whose work in nursing aligned with societal ideals of female virtue and sacrifice. This reinforced the maternalistic view of women, even as they gained greater visibility in the workforce.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.053 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.004 |
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".