Quand la réadaptation blesse ? Éducateurs victimes de violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to understand violence directed against behaviour technicians in juvenile rehabilitation centres. The findings are based on a survey conducted among 586 educators working in one of ten youth centres across Quebec. In this article we will first assess the occurrence of violent acts. Then, we will examine individual and contextual factors that predict physical aggression. More than half (53.9 %) of the educators surveyed reported to have been physically assaulted at least once in the past year. Regarding individual factors, being affected by the exposure to aggressive behaviours and the frequency of psychological aggression increase the risk of victimization. With respect to situational factors, the age of the clientele and the legal basis for placement (i.e. civil or criminal) influence the occurrence of violent acts towards staff members. Our analyses also show that physical violence not only affects staff members but also the institution. The identification of predictors of violence can guide prevention programs in youth centres. Moreover, they can help target behaviour technicians who are at risk of being assaulted in order to prevent their victimization.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".