Louise Carbert. Rural Women's Leadership in Atlantic Canada: First-Hand Perspectives on Local Public Life and Participation in Electoral Politics.\n
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book is essential reading for anyone interested in Canadian women's participation in formal political life.Beginning with the insight that fewer women find their way into electoral office in rural than in urban constituencies -at all levels, for all parties, and in every region of the country -political scientist Louise Carbert then focuses her attention on Atlantic Canada, the nation's least urbanized region and the one currently least likely to elect women to office, to explore this deficit of female political leadership.Her arguments draw on 14 focus group discussions conducted in 2000 with 126 women who were the mainstays of their rural communities.While their voices offer valuable evidence, it is Carbert's finely-tuned analysis, rooted in an impressive command of the larger academic literature on electoral politics, that makes this book so effective in exploding the old stereotypes that are often invoked in studies of the political behaviour of both women and Atlantic Canadians.Women, she argues, are diverted from the political arena less by domestic obligations, lack of funding, a deeply-rooted Atlantic Canadian conservatism, or even by gender bias, than by the structural contours of political life in their hard-pressed rural communities. 32.2,
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".