Bad nights or bad bars? Multi‐level analysis of environmental predictors of aggression in late‐night large‐capacity bars and clubs
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
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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