← Back to cohort
The gender gap in the care economy is larger in highly developed countries: Sociocultural explanations for paradoxical findings.
Katharina Block, Maria I. T. Olsson, Sanne Van Grootel, Carolin Schuster, Loes Meeussen, Colette van Laar, Sarah E. Martiny, Alyssa Croft, Molly Shuyi Sun, S. Wee, Mare Ainsaar, Lianne Aarntzen, Magdalena Adamus, Ciara Atkinson, Mohamad Avicenna, Przemysław Bąbel, Markus Barth, Tessa Benson‐Greenwald, Edona Maloku, Jacques Berent, Hilary B. Bergsieker, Monica Biernat, Andreea Georgiana Bîrneanu, Blerta Bodinaku, Janine Bosak, Jennifer K. Bosson, Marija Branković, Julius Burkauskas, Vladimíra Čavojová, Sapna Cheryan, Eunsoo Choi, Incheol Choi, Carlos C. Contreras‐Ibáñez, Andrew N. Coogan, Ivan Danyliuk, Ilan Dar‐Nimrod, Nilanjana Dasgupta, Soledad de Lemus, Thierry Devos, Marwan Diab, Amanda B. Diekman, Maria Efremova, Léïla Eisner, Anja Eller, Rasa Erentaitė, Denisa Fedáková, Renata Franc, Leire Gartzia, Alin Gavreliuc, Dana Gavreliuc, Julija Gečaitė-Stončienė, Adriana L. Germano, Ilaria Giovannelli, Renzo Gismondi Diaz, Lyudmila Gitikhmayeva, Abiy Menkir Gizaw, Biljana Gjoneska, Omar Martínez González, Roberto González, Isaac David Grijalva, Derya Güngör, Marie Gustafsson Sendén, William M. Hall, Charles Harb, Bushra Hassan, Tabea Häßler, Diala R. Hawi, Levke Henningsen, Annedore Hoppe, Keiko Ishii, Ivana Jakšić, Alba Jasini, Jurgita Jurkevičienė, Kaltrina Kelmendi, Teri A. Kirby, Yoko Kitakaji, Natasza Kosakowska‐Berezecka, Inna Kozytska, Clara Kulich, Eva Kundtová Klocová, Filiz Künüroğlu, Christina Lapytskaia Aidy, Albert Lee, Anna Eneroth, Wilson López‐López, Liany Luzvinda, Fridanna Maricchiolo, Delphine Martinot, Rita Anne McNamara, Alyson Meister, Tizita Lemma Melka, Narseta Mickuvienė, María Isabel Miranda‐Orrego, Thadeus Mkamwa, James Morandini, Thomas A. Morton, David Haruna Mrisho, Jana Nikitin, Sabine Otten, Maria Giuseppina Pacilli, Elizabeth Page‐Gould, Ana Perandrés‐Gómez, Jon Pizarro, Nada Pop‐Jordanova, Joanna Pyrkosz‐Pacyna, Samir Qouta, TamilSelvan Ramis, Nitya Rani, Sandrine Redersdorff, Isabelle Régner, Emma A. Renström, Adrian Rivera‐Rodriguez, Tania Esmeralda Rocha-Sánchez, Tatiana Ryabichenko, Rim Saab, Kiriko Sakata, Adil Samekin, Tracy Sánchez‐Pachecho, Carolin Scheifele, Marion K. Schulmeyer, Sabine Sczesny, David Sirlopú, Vanessa Smith‐Castro, Kadri Soo, Federica Spaccatini, Jennifer R. Steele, Melanie C. Steffens, Ines Sučić, Joseph A. Vandello, Laura Maria Velásquez‐Díaz, Melissa Vink, Eva Vives, Turuwark Zalalam Warkineh, Iris Žeželj, Xiaoxiao Zhang, Xian Zhao, Toni Schmader
Bibliographic record
VenueAmerican Psychologist · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsFanshawe CollegeUniversity of British ColumbiaYork UniversityUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of TorontoBrock UniversitySimon Fraser University
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónEuropean Regional Development FundEconomic and Social Research CouncilFondo de Financiamiento de Centros de Investigación en Áreas PrioritariasSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCentro de Estudios de Conflicto y Cohesión SocialUniversidad de DeustoJilin Office of Philosophy and Social ScienceMasarykova UniverzitaOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAVAgentúra na Podporu Výskumu a VývojaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloNational Research University Higher School of EconomicsCanada Research ChairsSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSociocultural evolutionGender gapVariation (astronomy)Representation (politics)Developing countryDeveloped countryGender roleSocioeconomic statusSurvey data collection
Abstract
. Furthermore, larger gender gaps in communal values (e.g., men's lower valuing of helping and caring for others) were a proximal predictor of larger gender gaps in care economy interest in highly economically developed countries. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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 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.
metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.827
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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.
Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.349 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
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 teacher head, not a consensus.
The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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