Bettering and balancing : experiences of maternal self-employment in urban and rural Nova Scotia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advancing the “push-pull debate” (Hughes, 2003), this research draws on Budig’s (2006) \ndisadvantaged worker and class-mobility hypotheses to identify the push and pull-factors that \ninform mothers’ decisions to self-employ in Nova Scotia. A review of literature examining \nmaternal self-employment revealed three key limitations: (1) a frequent reliance on quantitative, \nnational survey data, (2) a focus on macro-level geographic context, and (3) a lack of \ncomparative analysis of two or more geographic contexts. To address these gaps, this research \nemployed a qualitative approach to examining the influence of meso-level geographic context. \nThe following questions were addressed: (1) What push and pull-factors do mothers identify in \ntheir experiences with self-employment? (2) How does urban versus rural residence shape \nmothers’ experiences of self-employment in Nova Scotia? Qualitative data was collected through \nsix semi-structured interviews with urban and rural self-employed mothers and analyzed using \nthematic content analysis. While unique rural constraints and resources were discussed, the \nprimary push-and pull-factors into self-employment were identified by urban and rural \nparticipants, alike. Participants more strongly emphasized pull-factors toward self-employment, \nincluding the ability to reduce work-family conflict and increase control. Within self employment, identified constraints included a loss of income and increase in workload and \nresponsibilities, while resources included community support and social networks. Participants \nsuggested that mothers’ experiences in both wage-employment and self-employment could be \nimproved through the expansion of government programs and increased advocacy for scheduling \nflexibility and work-family balance in the workplace. Findings reveal that mothers navigate and \nweigh multiple push and pull-factors when deciding to self-employ, indicating that further \nqualitative research is needed to fully capture mothers’ unique experiences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".