Les comportements violents: comparaison des couples selon que l'homme est perçu ou non par sa conjointe comme un joueur problèmatique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marital problems, reported by a vast majority of problem gamblers, could worsen into violent behaviors. The purpose of this study consists of comparing couples in which the woman perceives her partner as a problem gambler with couples in which the partner is perceived as a non-problem gambler regarding dimensions and severity of violent behaviors inflicted and experienced by the women. Telephone interviews were conducted with 156 participants, 54 of which were in a relationship with a perceived problem gambler. Results indicated that more women with a perceived problem gambler partner report committing behaviors of physical violence and severe forms of psychological/verbal violence, compared with those whose partner is not perceived as a problem gambler. A greater number of these women were also victim of physical and psychological/verbal violence and of severe forms of these types of violence. In the long term, a better understanding of violence among these couples will provide guidelines to adapt interventions offered to gamblers and their relatives.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".