MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030803218 · doi:10.1521/jaap.31.3.563.22137

The Rape of Boys and the Impact of Sexually Predatory Environments: Review and Case Reports

2003· article· en· W2030803218 on OpenAlexaff
Sharon Sageman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAutonomyDevelopmental psychologyAnxietyBetrayalSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the effect of rape and the impact of sexually predatory environments on young boys and the resulting sequelae in adulthood. It presents the literature and the case histories of Jeff and Todd to illustrate the psychic devastation that occurs, and the ensuing attempts at reestablishing boundaries and regaining a sense of autonomy and male identity. Issues including facing powerlessness, betrayal by trusted adults, and the effect of emasculation on developing sexual identity are explored. A study of almost 4,000 siblings by Nelson et al. (2002) showed that a twin who was not sexually abused himself but who grew up in the same milieu as his sexually abused twin, suffered similar psychopathologic symptoms, such as suicide attempts, alcohol dependence, and social anxiety. Todd spent his formative years in a Catholic boarding school where boys were physically and sexually abused by priests. His history illustrates the severe psychological damage this causes and is consistent with the findings of Nelson's study.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic PsychiatrySame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207