The Role of Gender-Related Constructs in the Tolerance of Dating Violence: A Multivariate Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a purposive sampling technique, this study employed an online questionnaire to assess the relationship between attitudes towards gender-related constructs (e.g. rape myth acceptance, shared power in relationships, the acceptability of dating violence and perceived seriousness of dating violence) and the tolerance of dating violence among undergraduate students in the Faculty of Social Science at the University of Ottawa. Linear regression models were conducted to identify the most salient predictors of the tolerance of dating violence. A general/combined model was examined as well as three subtype-specific models (e.g. psychological, physical and sexual dating violence). A total of seven predictor variables were entered into each model in three blocks: sociodemographic variables were entered first, followed by sex and then gender-related constructs (e.g. rape myth acceptance, power in relationships, the acceptability and seriousness of dating violence). The results identify a number of variables that are associated with the tolerance of dating violence scales and some that led to a decrease in scores on these scales. Findings suggest that the link between gender-related constructs and the tolerance of dating violence is complex and multidimensional and warrants further research to explain the variation observed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".