Women and occupations in the census of England and Wales : 1851-1901
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
The accuracy of the occupational enumeration of women in the Victorian censuses, and the potential for problems created by the under or mis-enumeration of women's work, has been a source of much debate and discussion over the last 25 years. The principle aim of this thesis has been to ascertain the extent of the under and mis-enumeration, and to question whether the census is as poorly enumerated as has been suggested. The accuracy of the argument that the Victorian Domestic Ideology negatively influenced the recording of women's work is also examined. This has been achieved through the examination of the Census Enumerator's Books in rural, provincial and urban communities, comparing the data contained within these with that held in other primary sources. These include such diverse documents as wage books, workhouse and county asylum admission and discharge registers, newspaper articles, court reports, local histories and contemporary surveys. Geographical coherence has been maintained by focusing on women living in East Anglia and London. Through the careful analysis of the documents available, and the innovative use of varying methodologies, it has been possible to compare and contrast the occupational enumeration of married women living in many different locales and working in diverse occupations across 60 years of history. Through this it has been possible to observe the ways in which the census, far from ignoring the work of married women, mirrors closely the working patterns described in other primary sources and histories. The thesis argues that, whilst it cannot be suggested that all work carried out by women will be found in the census, a far greater percentage is recorded than was previously suggested. Furthermore, the census offers an insight into women's working patterns and experiences, adding to our knowledge of women's work and the ebb and flow of working life.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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