MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043727289 · doi:10.1177/1524838002238943

When Two Fields Collide

2003· article· en· W2043727289 on OpenAlex
Paula C. Barata, Charlene Y. Senn

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

VenueTrauma Violence & Abuse · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violenceContext (archaeology)Meaning (existential)Poison controlSociologyCriminologyHuman factors and ergonomicsEconomic JusticeCriminal justiceWork (physics)Suicide preventionLawPolitical sciencePsychologyMedicineEngineeringMedical emergencyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feminist theorists in law and the social sciences have questioned the appropriateness of using the methods of their disciplines as tools for bettering the lives of women who have experienced domestic violence. The authors begin with a brief review of the major feminist critiques within these two domains. They explore the assumptions on which both are based and provide examples of how well-meaning attempts to use these disciplines in the area of domestic violence have fallen short of their goals. They then show how the problematic assumptions of both disciplines may be worsened when research on domestic violence is done within the context of the criminal justice system using the example of the mandatory arrest experiments. They conclude that research and the law should come together only under conditions where feminist critiques are taken seriously and the perspectives of women who are the victims of these offenses are placed at the center of the work.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.296 · 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