MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000962982 · doi:10.1177/0886260507307648

The Role of the New “Date Rape Drugs” in Attributions About Date Rape

2007· article· en· W2000962982 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlameSexual assaultAttributionVoluntarinessPsychologyClinical psychologyInjury preventionPoison controlPsychiatryMedicineSocial psychologyMedical emergencyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the effect of voluntary and involuntary drug use on attributions about sexual assault. The sample was composed of 280 randomly selected male and female undergraduate students. The type of drug used (GHB, alcohol, or none) and the voluntariness of the administration were varied in an unambiguous date rape scenario. Participants viewed sexual assault facilitated by alcohol or drugs similarly to sexual assault without drug or alcohol involvement, assigning the highest levels of responsibility and blame to the perpetrator and the lowest levels of both to the victim in these situations. In contrast, women's voluntary consumption of drugs prior to a sexual assault reduced perpetrator responsibility and blame and increased blame to the victim compared to other situations (except in some cases, voluntary drunkenness). These findings extend the limited research on date rape drugs and previous work on the influence of alcohol on date rape attributions.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.308 · 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