Conceptualizing acts and behaviours that comprise intimate partner violence: a concept map
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aims to explore the conceptualization of intimate partner violence (IPV) among men and women from diverse subpopulations in Toronto, ON, Canada. Relatively few research efforts have been made to examine differences in conceptualizations of IPV across populations of different race and ethnic backgrounds. METHODS: Using concept mapping methodology, we sampled 67 women and men identified concepts and groups of concepts (domains) that reflected their understandings of the behaviours and attitudes that comprised IPV. We also determined the relative importance of each concept and domain as a contributor to IPV. RESULTS: 'External and Cultural Influences', 'Victim Response to Abuse' and 'Social and Emotional Manipulation' were a few domains that participants rated as moderately or highly important contributors to IPV. These conceptual domains are often left out of commonly used IPV measures. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings have important implications for the conceptualization of IPV and for future IPV measurement and measurement tool development.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".