Dyadic Dynamics in Young Couples Reporting Dating Violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study uses a combination of observational methods and dyadic data analysis to understand how boyfriends' and girlfriends' perpetration of dating violence (DV) may shape their own and their partners' problem-solving communication behaviors. A sample of 39 young heterosexual couples aged between 15 and 20 years (mean age = 17.8 years) completed a set of questionnaires and were observed during a 45-min dyadic interaction, which was coded using the Interactional Dimension Coding System (IDCS). Results suggest that neither boyfriends' nor girlfriends' own perpetration of DV was related to their display of positive and negative communication behaviors. However, estimates revealed significant partner effects, suggesting that negative communication behaviors displayed by girls and boys and positive communication behavior displayed by girls were associated to their partner's DV but not to their own. Such results confirm the need to shift our focus from an individual perspective to examining dyadic influences and processes involved in the couple system and the bidirectionality of violent relationships.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".