MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990544943

Early lessons from the International Study of Work-Family Experiences

2018· other· en· W6990544943 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUbaya Repository (University of Surabaya) · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)HyporeflexiaCircumstantial evidenceTSG101Work (physics)Liquation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Study of Work-Family Experiences (ISWAF) is a large-scale comparative cross-national study that was recently set up and is being launched in 35 countries across the globe. ISWAF aims at analyzing the impact of national context and in particular cultural values on individuals’ work-family conflict, enrichment, and balance, as well as on the management of boundaries between work and family roles. The panel aims at sharing the on-going experiences of scholars contributing to ISWAF, for the benefit of all those interested in cross-national work-family research and in the challenges of designing and coordinating large-scale comparative surveys. First, Barbara Beham will share early lessons learned from the setting up of ISWAF (survey design and collaborators’ network). Second, Ameeta Jaga and Artiawati Mawardi will analyze their experiences collecting data in South Africa and Indonesia, respectively. Third, Ariane Ollier-Malaterre will discuss how ISWAF is attempting to capture sub-cultures and within-country heterogeneity, in the Canadian context and beyond. Fourth, Suzan Lewis will explore how ISWAF could be used in tandem with qualitative approaches, or serve as a first step for emic in-depth studies. Last, Andreas Baierl will put forth ideas regarding data analysis strategies most likely to be relevant for the multi-level data being collected.
\nDiscussants:
\n•\tTammy Allen, University of South Florida
\n•\tAriane Ollier-Malaterre, Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) - École des Sciences de la Gestion (ESG)
\nPresenters:
\n•\tBarbara Beham, Berlin School of Economics and Law;
\n•\tAmeeta Jaga, University of Cape Town;
\n•\tArtiawati, University of Surabaya;
\n•\tSuzan Lewis, Middlesex University;
\n•\tAndreas Baierl, University of Vienna;
\n
\n

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 imitation

Not 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.203 · 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