Urban and Kibbutz Dwellers in Israel: Parenting Approaches Through the Lens of Bourdieu’s Capital Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern society is structured as a social hierarchy, with individuals of higher status enjoying various privileges. Many theorists have attempted to quantify this hierarchy, and one contemporary theorist, Pierre Bourdieu, proposed viewing hierarchy through an individual’s possession of three intertwined forms of capital: economic capital (material resources), cultural capital (educational level), and social capital (social networks). Research has also shown that different social classes vary in their parenting views. This study examined whether differences exist between two population groups in Israel—kibbutz residents and urban dwellers—in their parenting approaches, as viewed through the lens of Bourdieu’s three forms of capital. To investigate this phenomenon, we conducted a qualitative study involving in-depth interviews with 30 participants: 15 individuals residing on kibbutzim and 15 living in urban areas. The findings reveal significant differences in the parenting approaches of each group, which may contribute to widening social inequalities and reinforcing existing gaps within Israeli society, particularly between these two community types.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".