Deconstructing Accounts of Intimate Partner Violence: Doing Interviews, Identities, and Neoliberalism
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
This article engages in a reflexive, critical, analysis, re-examining data from an earlier project that used qualitative interviewing to investigate the experiences of women who came into contact with police because of situations of ‘verbal abuse’. In the present article, we use discursive psychology to explore how the women navigated narratives of abuse during the interviews; the ideological influences at play; and constructions of identity. During the interviews, the women worked to construct favourable social identities, by drawing on institutional discourse, direct, and indirect speech. Their narratives revealed the influence of neoliberal ideologies and practices on their understandings of intimate partner violence and their victim identities. While they were committed to a neoliberal worldview that emphasized individualism, they simultaneously recognized the need for police intervention. These contradictory ideological investments were reflected in the women’s fluctuating identity constructions as disempowered/empowered victim, and victim/perpetrator. We argue that such competing investments, for these women and the broader public, create ideological dilemmas which inhibit collective action towards social change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it