MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6906365128 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/x57zu

Gender Role Attitudes and Beliefs and Maternal Gatekeeping: A Meta-Analytic Review

2022· other· en· W6906365128 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGatekeepingCoparentingClosing (real estate)Gender roleQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As an essential subdimension of coparenting, gatekeeping involves behaviors encouraging or discouraging the coparent from engagement in parenting. Maternal gatekeeping is defined as the “preferences and struggles of mothers” to control the role of fathers in terms of involvement with housework and childcare activities (Allen & Hawkins, 1999; Schoppe-Sullivan et al., 2015). Hence, mothers may block or promote fathers’ involvement in parenting through gate closing or gate opening behaviors (Schoppe-Sullivan et al., 2008). Several studies revealed that greater maternal gate closing is associated with lower quality and quantity of father involvement in parenting (Fagan & Barnett, 2003; Stevenson et al., 2014), whereas greater gate opening is related to higher levels of father involvement in childcare (Schoppe-Sullivan et al., 2008; Zvara et al., 2013). Considering the indisputable role of engaged fathering in promoting children’s positive cognitive, language, and social-emotional development (Cabrera et al., 2007; Hastings et al., 2008; Kochanska et al., 2008), understanding maternal gatekeeping is essential to understanding fathering behavior, and therefore, children’s development. Gender roles are defined by individuals’, groups’, and societies’ expectations, values, and beliefs associated with a particular sex (Blackstone, 2003). Research has revealed that attitudes in favor of traditional gender roles and beliefs in biological essentialism are associated with higher maternal gate closing (Deutsch & Gaunt, 2020). The authors will conduct a meta-analytic review of the gatekeeping research literature since the first time the term was used (Beitel, 1989) to assess the associations of gender role attitudes and beliefs with maternal gate closing and maternal gate opening. Most typically, mothers report on their own gatekeeping behavior and fathers’ report on mothers’ gatekeeping behavior. Using gender as a moderator will contribute to the analysis to see how results might vary by mothers’ and fathers’ reports.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.013
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Science FrameworkFrench-language works237,207