MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Understanding Men's Aggression in Bars: Development of the Beliefs and Attitudes toward Male Alcohol‐Related Aggression (<scp>BAMARA</scp>) Inventory

2012· article· en· W1980503815 on OpenAlex
Samantha Wells, Paul F. Tremblay, Kathryn Graham

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAlcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychologyAggressionClinical psychologyDiscriminant validityConfirmatory factor analysisSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyInternal consistencyPsychometricsStructural equation modelingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While several qualitative studies suggest that beliefs and attitudes are important in explaining men's alcohol-related aggression, no quantitative instrument measuring men's beliefs and attitudes about male alcohol-related aggression has been developed. The purpose of this study was to develop and test a theoretically based multidimensional inventory measuring Beliefs and Attitudes toward Male Alcohol-Related Aggression (BAMARA) consisting of 9 dimensions: (i) expected negative consequences; (ii) expected positive consequences; (iii) personal approval; (iv) perceived male peer approval; (v) perceived female peer approval; (vi) perceived normality; (vii) relaxed norms when drinking; (viii) alcohol as an excuse; and (ix) male honor/protection of masculinity. METHODS: A random sample of 1,343 young adult male college and university students participated in an online survey. Item analyses using confirmatory factor analytic (CFA) and item-response theory (IRT) procedures were conducted to select a refined pool of items promoting high internal consistency and discriminant validity of the 9 scales. We evaluated the criterion validity of the 9 scales, the BAMARA total score (BAMARA-Total), and a short form of the inventory (BAMARA-SF) in terms of their association with experiences of barroom aggression and other theoretically linked constructs. RESULTS: CFA and IRT analyses resulted in a 53-item inventory consisting of the 9 scales with adequate model fit and good internal consistency indices. Criterion validity was demonstrated, with the BAMARA scales correlating well with reports of actual experiences of aggression in bars. BAMARA-Total and BAMARA-SF were found to be significantly associated with barroom aggression controlling for a number of important control variables. CONCLUSIONS: This new instrument is expected to have many important applications in the male aggression literature, with the full BAMARA being employed for the assessment of specific beliefs and attitudes and the BAMARA-SF used as a general attitudinal measure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.462
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.054 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it