Greek students’ attitudes toward rape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literature on sexual harassment and violence against women describes a variety of myths and stereotypes regarding partial or total responsibility of rape victims and their “enjoyment” of sexual violence. Rape stigma and rape myths are aspects of generalized attitudes toward victims of rape and rapists, while it seems that sexual violence remains a taboo in today’s western societies. This study explores Greek university students’ attitudes towards rape. A questionnaire created for the purpose of this study was administered to 950 Greek students at the University of Athens and at the University of Ioannina, divided into three groups: a group of students from the Faculty of Law, a group from Departments orientated to Humanistic and Social Sciences and a group of students from other Faculties and Departments of Applied Sciences. Factor analysis revealed four factors: “Rape victim’s responsibility”, “Defining the concept of rape”, “Rape motivation” and “Rapist’s characteristics”. In line with previous research findings, the results indicated that women were less accepting of conservative attitudestowards rape than men; they also seemed to reject attitudes of “blaming the victim” more, and to hold negative views of rapists. Additionally, the results showed that students of rural origin retain more conservative attitudes with respect to the victim’s responsibility and the rapist’s characteristics than students of urban origin. Finally, students in Law Departments seemed to have accepted more moderate attitudes than the other two groups of students; they mostly disagree with conservative attitudes regarding victim’s responsibilities along with the Social Science students, but they agree more with Applied Sciences students in defining rape.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".