Attitudes Toward Gender Parity Initiatives—A Comparative Study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The struggle for gender parity (sustainable development goal 5) sustains a controversial debate among authors, leaders, and organizations. Studies connecting social dominance orientation, status threat, and attitudes towards gender parity initiatives are scant. This article investigates these relationships and their mediators, focusing on gender parity initiatives in three independent studies—Brazil, Canada, and Portugal—comparing data collected from professors and employees in public and private HEIs. Both social dominance orientation (SDO) and status threat influence employees' attitudes towards gender parity initiatives, with SDO being the most important and significant determinant. Canadian employees are more supportive of gender affirmative actions and share a preference for group‐based inequality. Employees in all three countries perceive their societies as egalitarian, with a gender parity agenda in place, and no longer requiring efforts for gender equity regardless of the respondents' gender. Intriguing insights on the perceptions and attitudes of those self‐identifying as “woman” and “man” were found.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it