What Children Learn from Sexual Abuse Prevention Programs: Difficult Concepts and Developmental Issues
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Social workers have long been concerned about whether child-directed school-based programs are effective in preventing sexual abuse. Knowing children's prior knowledge of abuse prevention concepts and what changes after intervention would be invaluable to program personnel. Method This secondary analysis involved 231 elementary school children who were randomly assigned (matched by age) to participate in the “Who Do You Tell” sexual abuse prevention program (n = 117) or in a wait-list control condition (n = 114). Chi-square analyses compared changes on each item of the Children's Knowledge of Abuse Questionnaire-Revised based on treatment versus control condition and developmental level (ages 5 to 7 compared to ages 8 to 13). Results Three items significantly improved for children in the program as compared to those in the control condition across ages. Conclusions The results suggest several changes in teaching prevention concepts.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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 it