An Evaluation of Men’s Batterer Treatment Groups
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
Objective: Fifteen treatment groups for men who abused intimate partners were evaluated. Method: 104 men took part, with a completion rate of 68.3%. Scores on social desirability were utilized to adjust totals on other self-report scales. Results: Group completers (n = 71) were no different from dropouts (n = 33) on the adjusted standardized measures or demographics. Group completion was associated with significant improvements on the adjusted variables of appraisal social support, self-esteem, perceived stress, attitudes toward marriage and the family, locus of control, and the marital relationship functions of roles, affective expression, and communication. Importantly, adjusted scores on both the Physical and Non-Physical Abuse subscales of the Index of Spouse Abuse were significantly reduced, the latter to below the clinical cutoff. No differences were found between court-mandated and non-court-mandated group completers. Conclusions: The utility of using social desirability to adjust scores is highlighted. The implications for group treatment are discussed.
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 | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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