MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bad nights or bad bars? Multi‐level analysis of environmental predictors of aggression in late‐night large‐capacity bars and clubs

2006· article· en· W2006714038 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kathryn Graham, Sharon Bernards, D. Wayne Osgood, Samantha Wells

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthWestern University
FundersNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
KeywordsAggressionPsychologyInjury preventionPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To clarify environmental predictors of bar-room aggression by differentiating relationships due to nightly variations versus across bar variations, frequency versus severity of aggression and patron versus staff aggression. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Male-female pairs of researcher-observers conducted 1334 observations in 118 large capacity (> 300) bars and clubs in Toronto, Canada. MEASUREMENTS: Observers independently rated aspects of the environment (e.g. crowding) at every visit and wrote detailed narratives of each incident of aggression that occurred. Measures of severity of aggression for the visit were calculated by aggregating ratings for each person in aggressive incidents. FINDINGS: Although bivariate analyses confirmed the significance of most environmental predictors of aggression identified in previous research, multivariate analyses identified the following key visit-level predictors (controlling for bar-level relationships): rowdiness/permissive environment and people hanging around after closing predicted both frequency and severity of aggression; sexual activity, contact and competition and people with two or more drinks at closing predicted frequency but not severity of aggression; lack of staff monitoring predicted more severe patron aggression, while having more and better coordinated staff predicted more severe staff aggression. Intoxication of patrons was significantly associated with more frequent and severe patron aggression at the bar level (but not at the visit level) in the multivariate analyses and negatively associated with severity of staff aggression at the visit level. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate clearly the importance of the immediate environment (not just the type of bar or characteristics of usual patrons) and the importance of specific environmental factors, including staff behaviour, in predicting both frequency and 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations231
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesFrench-language works237,207