Aggression in Children Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence: A Comparison of Maternal, Sibling, and Observer Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The negative effects of exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) on children have been well documented, including externalizing difficulties such as aggression. Although aggressive behavior is a common concern for these children, sibling aggression in children exposed to IPV has rarely been studied. Our purpose was to investigate similarities and differences in multiple informant reports of aggression by siblings exposed to IPV, and to examine how exposure to IPV was linked to these differing perspectives. Forty-seven sibling dyads and their mothers were recruited from the community. Aggression was assessed by observers, by mothers, and by the siblings themselves, whereas IPV was assessed by both maternal and child report. Informants had very differing views on aggression. Regression results indicated that children's reports of their own exposure to IPV accounted for significant variance in observed aggression between siblings, as well as in the maternal reports of aggression by both siblings. Aggression did not vary by sibling age, sex, or age spacing. Results were discussed within a risk and resilience framework.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".