MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163519263 · doi:10.2190/8yqm-b04h-pg4d-bllh

Cyber-Harassment: A Study of a New Method for an Old Behavior

2005· article· en· W2163519263 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

VenueJournal of Educational Computing Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarassmentAngerCyber bullyingSadnessPsychologyQuarter (Canadian coin)Variety (cybernetics)Social psychologyThe InternetComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A total of 432 students from grades 7–9 in Canadian schools reported their experiences of cyber-harassment, which is a form of harassment that occurs through the use of electronic communications such as e-mail and cell phones. More than two-thirds of students (69%) have heard of incidents of cyber-harassment, about one quarter (21%) have been harassed several times, and a few students (3%) admitted engaging in this form of harassment. In addition, victims of cyber-harassment reported a variety of negative consequences, especially anger and sadness, and had experienced other forms of harassment. These results suggest several avenues of research needed to explain how and why adolescents use technological advances to harass their peers.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.560
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.377 · 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