The Influence of Stereotypical Beliefs, Participant Gender, and Survivor Weight on Sexual Assault Response
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
The present study explored the influence of survivor weight and participant gender, rape myth acceptance, and antifat attitudes on perceptions of sexual assault. Using an online survey tool, a community sample of 413 adult Canadian residents reviewed a hypothetical sexual assault scenario and completed a series of evaluations and attitudinal questionnaires. Generalized linear model analyses revealed that participants were more likely to hold the survivor responsible, excuse the perpetrator's actions, and respond more negatively toward the survivor and more positively toward the perpetrator when the survivor was depicted as thin versus overweight. Interactions were found between rape myth acceptance and survivor weight, gender and survivor weight, and gender and antifat attitudes, for certain dependent variables. In addition, men and those with higher levels of rape myth acceptance and antifat attitudes were found to make more negative evaluations of the survivor and more positive evaluations of the perpetrator. Recommendations for future research and interventions are discussed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it