MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116365864 · doi:10.1177/0261018308098397

(Re)Constructing women's resistance to woman abuse: Resources, strategy choice and implications of and for public policy in Canada

2009· article· en· W2116365864 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Social Policy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResistance (ecology)Public policyDomestic violenceRace (biology)Social policyPolitical sciencePsychologySociologyPoison controlSuicide preventionEconomicsEconomic growthMedicineGender studiesEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While there has been considerable attention paid to Canada's anti-woman abuse policy framework, much of this attention has neglected its implications for women's resistance to abuse. This paper attempts to address this gap by using the lens of women's resistance to analyse the anti-woman abuse policy in Canada. I begin by exploring the ways in which the policy framework constructs the `problem' and considering its implications for women's choice in resistance strategy. Using the Canadian General Social Survey on Victimization (1999), I apply independent samples tests to explore women's (non)usage of various strategies, as it varies by class, race, and ability. I conclude with suggestions for policy reform.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.339 · 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