MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2341029006 · doi:10.14288/1.0054545

Intimate partner violence typologies : a cross-national comparison

2009· article· en· W2341029006 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura Templeton

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDomestic violenceSocial psychologyPoison controlCriminologyHuman factors and ergonomicsMedical emergencyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Family violence theory and feminist theory represent sociological explanations of violence against women. The former proposes that violence in intimate partner relationships is gender symmetric with minor violence routinely precipitating. Alternatively feminist theory suggests that women are subject to patriarchal control and severe violence by male partners. Johnson (1995) suggests that due to methodological differences, both explanatory models are possible, respectively supporting two intimate partner violence typologies: situational couple violence and intimate terrorism. Using Yllō's (1983) model, the current study proposes that regional status of women may be used to explain Johnson's (1995) intimate partner violence typologies. Y116 (1983) reports that as regions become more egalitarian a curvilinear pattern for male perpetration becomes evident, while female perpetration is best described as a direct relationship. Building on these results this study proposes that regions ranked as patriarchal will have higher rates of intimate terrorism, a gender asymmetric typology. Contrarily, egalitarian regions are hypothesized to have higher rates of the gender symmetric distinction situational couple violence. Combining International Dating Violence Study data with United Nations, Statistics Canada and Institute for Women's Policy Research data, study hypotheses were tested using a cross-national comparison. The Conflict Tactics Scales and Personal and Relationships Profile offered measures of interpersonal violence and control. Status of women measures developed in the current study focused on women's political, educational and economic representation compared to men as well as reproductive control. Twenty-nine regions were analyzed, representing over 9,000 individual responses. Data analysis involved OLS regression with per capita gross domestic product included as a control. Regional status of women successfully explains Johnson's (1995) typologies. The current study provides support for feminist theory, demonstrating that regions characterized as patriarchal are associated with men's use of control tactics and severe violence against women. Use of family violence theory to explain violence in egalitarian regions is also supported. Additionally, the current study sheds light upon the backlash hypothesis suggesting that future initiatives distinguish between patriarchal, transitioning and transitioned regions. It is suggested that future projects build upon the current results by studying the impact feminist and antifeminist movements have upon men's and women's use of violence in intimate 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicIntimate Partner and Family Violence→French-language works237,207→