MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005748372

The Role of WWII Propaganda in Shaping Women's Roles

2025· article· en· W7005748372 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholars Crossing (Liberty University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentHistoriographyPoliticsEthnic groupGovernment (linguistics)NarrativeOral historyWorld War IIWhite (mutation)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study offers a comparative qualitative analysis of World War II propaganda and how it influenced women’s labor in the United States and Canada. It investigates how each country’s cultural identity and political climate shaped propaganda messaging aimed at women and how that messaging affected public attitudes toward their roles. Using a wide range of primary sources—including propaganda posters, government studies, pamphlets, films, radio broadcasts, speeches, and oral narratives—this research highlights the stark differences in how the U.S. and Canada mobilized women during the war. In the United States, propaganda promoted female empowerment through iconic campaigns like Rosie the Riveter, encouraging women to join the workforce in a wide range of capacities. Meanwhile, Canadian messaging emphasized traditional family values, portraying women as temporary contributors to the labor force and moral defenders of the home. This project carefully analyzes how these different narratives shaped women’s experiences during the war and in the postwar period. The U.S. government's message of empowerment began to challenge existing gender norms and played a role in the rise of postwar feminist movements. In contrast, the gains made by Canadian women proved more temporary, with a return to prewar gender roles after the conflict ended. This dissertation contributes to the broader historiography of gender and wartime propaganda by filling in critical gaps in histiographical studies between these two nations. It engages with existing academic research while also considering how race, class, and ethnicity and how they relate with gender in shaping women’s experiences. Ultimately, this study argues that while both countries used propaganda to mobilize women for the war effort, their differing national ideologies and cultural values led to distinctly different portrayals—and those portrayals had lasting effects on how women’s roles were understood in each country.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0250.024
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholars Crossing (Liberty University)Same topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207