Povezanost rodne ravnopravnosti u kućnim poslovima, stabilnosti i kvaliteta bračnog odnosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Da bismo odgovorili na pitanje koliko je rodna ravnopravnost u raspodeli kućnih poslova značajna za bračni kvalitet i stabilnost, u okviru šireg istraživačkog projekta, tokom 2015. i 2016. godine ispitano je 498 parova sa prebivalištem u Republici Srbiji, koji su živeli zajedno od 6 meseci do 57 godina i 6 meseci (AS= 14,02; SD= 11,85). Od oba partnera prikupljeni su podaci o opterećenosti kućnim poslovima, zadovoljstvu raspodelom kućnih poslova, različitim dimenzijama kvaliteta braka i stepenu bračne nestabilnosti. Razlike u opterećenju kućnim poslovima između žena i muškaraca ispitane su serijom t-testova za zavisne uzorke, a struktura razlika u stepenu zadovoljstva raspodelom poslova, proceni kvaliteta i stabilnosti braka među parovima koji kućne poslove obavljaju ravnopravno i onih kod kojih većinu kućnih poslova uglavnom obavlja jedan od supružnika ispitana je diskriminativnom analizom. Rezultati ukazuju da je u našoj sredini još uvek aktuelna tradicionalna podela kućnih poslova i da su žene u većoj meri angažovane na kućnim poslovima vezanim za hranjenje i higijenu dok su muževi više angažovani oko poslova vezanih za popravke. Briga o okućnici, deci i kućnim ljubimcima predstavljaju kućne poslove oko kojih se oba supružnika angažuju podjednako. Takođe, rezultati ukazuju da je ravnopravna raspodela kućnih poslova važna za zadovoljstvo raspodelom poslova žena, stepen dijadne kohezije i dijadnog zadovoljstva oba supružnika.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.002 |
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".