MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139883445 · doi:10.1177/10778010022181688

Teen Dating Relationships and Aggression

2000· article· en· W2139883445 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

VenueViolence Against Women · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggressionPornographyPsychologyPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionDating violenceInjury preventionExploratory researchSocial psychologyOccupational safety and healthSexual abuseDevelopmental psychologyCriminologyMedical emergencyDomestic violenceMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative exploratory study uses discussion groups with 24 Canadian teens aged 14 to 19 to cast new light on aggression in teen dating relationships. Data collected confirm that violence is present in numerous ways and that the teens' explanatory models still attribute part of the responsibility to victims. The teens suggested individual, couple, and social factors, such as the influence of peers and pornography. Findings indicate that future research should study forms of abuse specific to teens and that prevention programs should address nonconsensual violence as well as the consensual use of violence in sexual relationships.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.818

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.274 · 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