MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intimate Partner Violence

2016· other· en· W2784091766 on OpenAlexaff
Judith P. Andersen, Konstantinos Papazoglou

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Family Studies · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violenceSocioeconomic statusEthnic groupMasculinityCriminologyPsychologyFemininityPower (physics)LesbianGender studiesSocial psychologyPolitical scienceSociologyPoison controlSuicide preventionMedicineLawEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Intimate partner violence (IPV) refers to various types of abuse that may take place in heterosexual couples, LGBT couples, teen couples, and former intimates. Victims and perpetrators of IPV may come from all ages, ethnic groups, racial groups, religions, occupations, socioeconomic status levels, education levels, and geographical areas. Historically, women have been considered the property of or submissive to men. Moreover, traditional psychological theories focused on victims' or perpetrators' psychopathology. However, feminist theory has challenged the patriarchal norms of femininity and masculinity, which prescribe the power and control of men over women. Since the 1970s, numerous laws have been passed around the world defining IPV as a crime. In addition, policy and training programs, research projects, and advocacy organizations have been established to increase public awareness about IPV. In the United States, many states have developed police training programs incorporating practices for effective resolution of IPV cases and medical professional organizations have developed certain guidelines for IPV screening conducted by healthcare professionals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1070.016

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncyclopedia of Family StudiesSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207