MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897810849 · doi:10.1177/0886260518805773

Warmth, Competence, and Blame: Examining Mothers of Sexually Abused Children Within the Stereotype Content Model

2018· article· en· W2897810849 on OpenAlexafffund
Kelsi Toews, Jorden A. Cummings, Linzi Williamson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaSaskatchewan Health Research Foundation
KeywordsVignetteBlamePsychologyCompetence (human resources)Social psychologyLegal psychologyAdmirationDevelopmental psychologyPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research shows that nonoffending mothers are frequently held at fault for child sexual abuse (CSA), by both society and professionals, with contradictory explanations for the fault. For example, the same maternal characteristic can be used to assign blame or alleviate blame (i.e., single mothers have been held more at fault for their child's CSA and less at fault). The purpose of this study was to assess a theoretically based model that could account for these different reasons. We tested the stereotype content model (SCM), which examines the content of stereotypes toward target groups, by focusing on perceptions of that group's levels of warmth and competence. We sampled 136 undergraduate participants who read a vignette describing CSA, and completed the SCM with the mother of the victim as the target, and measures of mother fault. Our results showed that participants fell into three SCM groups of mother fault: (a) Moderate Contemptuous Prejudice (i.e., low competence, low warmth); (b) Admiration (i.e., moderate competence, high warmth); and (c) Very Contemptuous Prejudice (i.e., very low competence, very low warmth). Each cluster also held unique emotions toward the mother, as predicted by the SCM. Results further showed that assigned levels of fault were significant, but that fault did not vary by SCM group, lending support to the ideas that the SCM can be applied to this group and that different participants assign fault for different reasons.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interpersonal ViolenceSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207