Factors Related to Rape Reporting Behavior in Brazil: Examining the Role of Spatio-Temporal Factors
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reporting of rape to police is an important component of this crime to have the criminal justice system involved and, potentially, punish offenders. However, for a number of reasons (fear of retribution, self-blame, etc.), most rapes are not reported to police. Most often, the research investigating this phenomenon considers incident and victim factors with little attention to the spatio-temporal factors of the rape. In this study, we consider incident, victim, and spatio-temporal factors relating to rape reporting in Campinas, Brazil. Our primary research question is whether or not the spatio-temporal factors play a significant role in the reporting of rape, over and above incident and victim factors. The subjects under study are women who were admitted to the Women's Integrated Healthcare Center at the State University of Campinas, Brazil, and surveyed by a psychologist or a social worker. Rape reporting to police was measured using a dichotomous variable. Logistic regression was used to predict the probability of rape reporting based on incident, victim, and spatio-temporal factors. Although we find that incident and victim factors matter for rape reporting, spatio-temporal factors (rape/home location and whether the rape was in a private or public place) play an important role in rape reporting, similar to the literature that considers these factors. This result has significant implications for sexual violence education. Only when we know why women decide not to report a rape may we begin to work on strategies to overcome these hurdles.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 it