Cohabitation, marriage, and murder: Woman‐killing by male romantic partners
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
Abstract Using a national‐level US homicide database that includes more than 400,000 homicides committed from 1976‐1994, I calculated rates of uxoricide (the murder of a woman by her romantic partner) by type of relationship (cohabiting or marital), ages of the partners, and age difference between partners. Women in cohabiting relationships are about nine times more likely to be killed by their partner than are women in marital relationships. Within marital relationships, the risk of uxoricide decreases with a woman’s age. Within cohabiting relationships, in contrast, middle‐aged women are at greatest risk of uxoricide. Paralleling the uxoricide victimization rates, uxoricide perpetration rates are highest for young married men and for middle‐aged cohabiting men. Uxoricide risk generally increases with greater age difference between partners. These findings provide the first national‐level replication of uxoricide risk patterns reported for a national‐level Canadian sample. Discussion highlights future research directions, including identifying why women in cohabiting relationships incur greater risk of uxoricide than do women in marital relationships. Aggr. Behav. 27:284–291, 2001. © 2001 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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