Establishing stability: exploring the meaning of ‘home’ for women who have experienced intimate partner violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is evidence that involuntary housing instability may undermine health and well-being. For women who have experienced intimate partner violence (IPV), achieving stability is likely as important for other groups, but can be challenging. Through our analysis of 41 interviews with women who have experienced low income and IPV, we argue that definitions of housing stability are multifaceted and for many centred on a shared understanding of the importance of creating an environment of "home". We found that obtaining housing that satisfied material needs was important to women. However, in asking women to define what housing stability meant to them, we found that other factors related to ontological security and the home, such as safety, community, and comfort, contributed to women's experiences of stability. Through our discussion of the importance these women placed on establishing stable homes, we argue that future research on women's experiences with housing stability and IPV should include definitions of stability that capture both material security and women's experiences with building emotionally stable homes.
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 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 | 0.003 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".