MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104442673 · doi:10.1177/0886260511423243

Social Support as a Moderator for Alcohol-Related Partner Aggression During the Transition to Parenthood

2012· article· en· W2104442673 on OpenAlexafffund
Valerie Caldeira, Erica M. Woodin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsAggressionModerationPsychologySocial supportPoison controlInjury preventionSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsAlcoholClinical psychologyAssociation (psychology)Developmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alcohol-related partner aggression is a pervasive social problem throughout various life stages, including the transition to parenthood. Previous research shows that alcohol use is associated with partner aggression perpetration for both men and women; however, not all individuals who consume alcohol act aggressively. In this study, the moderating effects of general social support and partner-specific support on the association between prepregnancy alcohol use and recent partner physical aggression are investigated using a community sample of 98 pregnant couples. For men, high levels of general appraisal social support (i.e., someone to talk to about one's problems) increases the strength of the association between alcohol use and aggression perpetration, whereas partner-specific emotional support serves as a buffer. For women, general social support is not a significant moderator, but high levels of partner-specific instrumental support strengthens the association between alcohol use and aggression. These results can be applied to prevention and treatment programs for alcohol-related partner aggression.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interpersonal ViolenceSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207