MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131971499

Teen Dating Violence: Measurement And Outcomes

2014· dissertation· en· W2131971499 on OpenAlex
Deinera Exner

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueeCommons (Cornell University) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDating violencePsychologyStatisticsMedicineMedical emergencyMathematicsHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlDomestic violence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Violence experienced in early and mid-adolescent romantic relationships (known as teen dating violence) is an important public health issue, and the three papers in this volume each address a different research question on this topic. Emerging research demonstrates that individuals who experience victimization in adolescence are more likely to be re-victimized in future relationships; however, past work on this topic is limited by potential confounding, and lack of assessment of potential mediators of this relationship. Thus, the first paper (Chapter Two) used data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health to explore pathways to revictimization, adjusting for confounding using a high-dimension propensity score. Results indicated that dating violence experienced during adolescence was indirectly associated with intimate partner violence experienced 12 years later, through the experience of intimate partner violence at 5.5 year follow-up. These findings, as well as all empirical findings in the field, rest on the quality of measurement, and so the selection of a measure for a given research study is an important task. Currently, however, no comprehensive compendium exists that presents teen dating violence measures with evidence of reliability and validity and discusses strengths and limitations of these evidencebased measures. Thus, the second paper (Chapters Three and Four) presents a two-part comprehensive review of teen dating violence measures that have been the focus of psychometric testing. This review also summarizes empirical literature that uses identified measures. Due to the complex and nuanced nature of interpersonal interactions, psychological aggression is a particularly difficult construct to measure. Empirical data show that psychological aggression is common in teen dating relationships, but to more precisely answer questions about the impact of this aggression on healthy development, measures must be designed that capture psychological aggression that is purposeful, serious and perceived as harmful. The third and final paper in this volume (Chapter Five) reports on the initial adaptation of a measure of severe psychological aggression (the Measure of Psychologically Abusive Behaviors; Follingstad, 2011, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(6)) for teen dating relationships. Together, these three papers advance understanding of teen dating violence and support its developmental and public health importance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.220 · 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