The Association of Drinking Pattern with Aggression Involving Alcohol and with Verbal versus Physical Aggression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a general population survey of 1,019 Ontario adults, the present study examined the relationships of (a) drinking pattern (i.e., drinking frequency, heavy episodic drinking (HED), and hazardous drinking with alcohol involvement in aggression (i.e., no aggression, aggression without alcohol, and aggression involving alcohol); (b) drinking pattern with level of aggression (i.e., no aggression, verbal, and physical aggression); and (c) alcohol involvement with level of aggression (i.e., physical versus verbal). All three drinking-pattern measures were associated with aggression involving alcohol but not with aggression not involving alcohol. HED and hazardous drinking were associated with physical aggression (compared with no aggression). Alcohol involvement in aggression was associated with physical aggression (vs. verbal). The findings suggest that, while a pattern of heavy or hazardous drinking is associated with increased risk of aggression, this increased risk only applies to alcohol-related aggression and drinking at the time may contribute to severity of aggression.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".