Human Agency Revisited: The Paradoxical Experiences of Victims of Crime
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Victims of violent crime often complain of feeling powerless. In some respects this represents a psychological aftereffect of the crime — an experience in which something was done to them against their will that they were powerless either to prevent or to stop. However, focusing attention on the psychological aftereffects of such experiences often overshadows other important considerations. For example, there is the possibility that an accumulation of subsequent social and institutional interactions may serve to minimize their ability actively to cope with their experiences. This paper seeks to address these issues head on by reframing victimization in terms of the interplay between victims' social and institutional interactions, on the one hand, and their agency to cope on the other. 1 Following a brief review of the critical literature on victims' problematic institutional positions and a discussion of agency, data will be presented from a qualitative study of individuals who have suffered the murder of a loved one. 2 As will be seen, the differing experiences of these individuals in a variety of social contexts have much to teach us about institutional influences, therapeutic ideologies, and human agency.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".