MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097316381 · doi:10.1177/1097184x03253138

Girlfriend Abuse as a Form of Masculinity Construction among Violent, Marginal Male Youth

2003· article· en· W2097316381 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Totten

Bibliographic record

VenueMen and Masculinities · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsYouth Services Bureau of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityPatriarchySeriousnessHegemonic masculinityGender studiesVariation (astronomy)AuthoritarianismSociologyIdeologySocial psychologyPsychologyPolitical sciencePoliticsDemocracy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on the development and effect of familial and gender ideologies on the masculine identities of thirty marginal male youth aged thirteen to seventeen years, all of whom were gang members or belonged to violent male peer groups. Qualitative, indepth interviews uncovered protest and negative masculine identities. Their abusive behavior, directed at girlfriends, gays, and racial minorities, is suggested to be a response to blocked access to traditional institutional benefits of patriarchy. Violence compensated for perceived threats to their masculine identities. The construction of masculinity was an ongoing process for these boys, negotiated and developed on a daily basis using available resources in their social space location. Significant differences within the sample explain the variation in the degree to which they embraced patriarchal-authoritarian models of family and gender, and variation in the forms and seriousness of their physical and sexual violence.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations81
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMen and MasculinitiesSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207