MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128246573 · doi:10.1177/1077801208320368

The Elevated Risk for Violence Against Cohabiting Women

2008· article· en· W2128246573 on OpenAlexaffabout
Douglas A. Brownridge

Bibliographic record

VenueViolence Against Women · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohabitationDemographyMarital statusOddsPoison controlInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsSelection biasSuicide preventionOccupational safety and healthDomestic violencePsychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthPopulationSociologyPolitical scienceLogistic regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined cohabiting women's elevated risk for male partner violence. It was predicted that an increased rate of cohabitation would be accompanied by a reduction in the bias toward selection into cohabitation and that this would result in greater similarity between characteristics of cohabiting and marital relationships as well as in their respective rates of violence. The results were generally consistent with this prediction. Cohabitation increased in Canada between 1993 and 2004, which appeared to have been reflected in some reduction in differences in selection and relationship variables as well as in lower rates of violence for cohabiting relative to married women. Nevertheless, persons who cohabited remained a select group and several relationship differences persisted. These selection and relationship differences accounted for the persistence of cohabiting women's elevated odds of violence in each survey. Results suggested that rates of violence in cohabiting and marital unions should eventually converge.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations45
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueViolence Against WomenSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207