MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604921770 · doi:10.7202/1039178ar

Briser le silence entourant la violence entre partenaires gais

2017· article· fr· W2604921770 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kévin Lavoie, Sylvie Thibault

Bibliographic record

VenueNouvelles pratiques sociales · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article présente les résultats d’une étude visant à documenter les représentations sociales de la violence entre partenaires homosexuels en Communauté française de Belgique auprès de deux groupes d’acteurs sociaux concernés par la problématique. Douze personnes ont été rencontrées, soit six hommes gais et six intervenants d’associations vouées à la diversité sexuelle. Le modèle théorique bidimensionnel de Moliner a été utilisé pour l’analyse des données, faisant ainsi émerger leurs réactions émotives, normatives et pragmatiques à l’égard du phénomène. Les résultats montrent que la violence entre partenaires masculins est une facette cachée des relations intimes et taboue au sein de la communauté gaie, ce qui amène les participants à réfléchir à leurs conceptions de la conjugalité et des rapports de pouvoir entre homosexuels. Certains facteurs qui favorisent ou inhibent la demande d’aide des hommes gais sont identifiés, de même que les prédispositions à l’intervention dans les organismes communautaires qui leur sont consacrés.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNouvelles pratiques socialesSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207