Gender’s Role in Exposure to Interparental Violence, Acceptance of Violence, Self-Efficacy, and Physical Teen Dating Violence Among Quebec Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite efforts to prevent physical teen dating violence, it remains a major public health issue with multiple negative consequences. This study aims to investigate gender differences in the relationships between exposure to interparental violence (mother-to-father violence, father-to-mother violence), acceptance of dating violence (perpetrated by boys, perpetrated by girls), and self-efficacy to disclose teen dating violence. Data were drawn from Waves 1 and 2 of the Quebec Youth Romantic Relationships Project, conducted with a representative sample of Quebec high school students. Analyses were conducted on a subsample of 2,564 teenagers who had been in a dating relationship in the past 6 months (63.8% girls, mean age of 15.3 years). Path analyses were conducted to investigate the links among exposure to interparental violence, acceptance of violence, self-efficacy to disclose teen dating violence (measured at Wave 1), and physical teen dating violence (measured at Wave 2). General exposure to interparental violence was linked, through acceptance of girl-perpetrated violence, to victimization among both genders and to girls' perpetration of physical teen dating violence. No significant difference was identified in the impact of the gender of the perpetrating parent when considering exposure to interparental violence. Self-efficacy to disclose personal experiences of violence was not linked to exposure to interparental violence or to experiences of physical teen dating violence. The findings support the intergenerational transmission of violence. Moreover, the findings underline the importance of targeting acceptance of violence, especially girl-perpetrated violence, in prevention programs and of intervening with children and adolescents who have witnessed interparental violence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".