MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2249002018

Frequency and correlates in young adult Quebec francophones' experiences of sexual harassment

2006· article· en· W2249002018 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Marc Senécal, Madeline J. Hebert, Francine Lavoie, Rikki Tremblay, Frank Vitaro

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de psychoéducation · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarassmentPsycINFOPsychologySexual abuseRomancePoison controlInjury preventionClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicinePolitical scienceMEDLINEMedical emergency
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the frequency of sexual harassment experiences of young Quebec Francophones and examines the link between sexual harassment and other experiences of victimization. The sample consists of 1186 young adults (577 men and 609 women) aged between 20 and 22 years. In an in-home interview, participants completed computerized questionnaires relating to sexual harassment and other forms of victimization experienced. Results show that 78% of women compared to 61% of men report experiencing at least one episode of sexual harassment from a member of the school or work setting. Sexual harassment in the school setting involves for the majority of cases a fellow student. In the work environment, harassment involves for most cases a colleague. Differences in factors linked to sexual harassment experiences by gender are noted. For men, psychological violence in romantic relationships, witnessing interparental violence and having been victim of child sexual abuse contribute to the prediction of sexual harassment. Only a history of child sexual abuse contributes to the prediction of sexual harassment experiences for women. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) (journal abstract)

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 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)0.000
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.917

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de psychoéducationSame topicSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesFrench-language works237,207