MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408673635 · doi:10.1177/23780231251324988

“ <i>Dona de Si</i> ”: Women’s Empowerment as Affective Economies in Corporate-Sponsored Entrepreneurship Training

2025· article· en· W4408673635 on OpenAlexafffund
Carolina Gallo Garcia

Bibliographic record

VenueSocius Sociological Research for a Dynamic World · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipEmpowermentWomen entrepreneursPolitical scienceBusiness administrationSociologyBusinessEconomicsEconomic growthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author examines transnational narratives of women’s empowerment in Brazil, highlighting discourses promoting women’s ability to improve society and their incomes by mobilizing emotions and attributes linked to care responsibilities as savvy feminized skills to be used in micro entrepreneurship. On the basis of a case study through ethnographic research conducted between 2019 and 2022 within a national empowerment program for entrepreneurship training, the author argues that such initiatives are grounded in affective economies increasingly reliant on individualized forms of emotional labor as a central strategy to navigate the Brazilian labor market. By analyzing how emotions circulate within the social space of this corporate-sponsored training program, the author explores the role of affects in constituting power dynamics between those “already empowered” women promoting trainings and those yet to be shaped by the required affects to succeed. Drawing on theories of affective economies and governmentality, this study unravels some complexities of promoting empowerment and financial independence among women in the growing context of labor informality in Brazil. The author concludes by demonstrating how these narratives of empowerment create normative affective standards that rely on women’s emotional engagement with entrepreneurial values, often obscuring the precariousness underpinning their labor conditions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocius Sociological Research for a Dynamic WorldSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207