“It’s a lot of work, and I’m still doing it”: Indigenous perceptions of help after sexual abuse and sexual violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project used a sequential exploratory design to learn about what Canadian Indigenous people found helpful for dealing with the impacts of sexual abuse and sexual violence, as well as facilitators and barriers to service use. Participants resided in Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada and identified primarily as Ojibway, Oji-Cree, Cree, and Métis. Talking Circles and individual interviews were integrated with quantitative survey data. The Medicine Wheel was used to organize and describe findings. Spiritual practices included meeting with Elders, attending ceremonies, being outside, teachings, Healing Circles, and using Traditional Healers and Traditional Medicines. Emotional practices included connection, listening and being listened to, validation, cultural connections, self-reflection, belonging, and help with grieving. Physical practices included fasting, having a safe place to go, and sobriety, while mental practices included learning and understanding, non-judgement, learning coping skills, and being persistent. Findings reinforce that supports for sexual abuse/violence must be conceptualized beyond formal supports and be inclusive of the spiritual, emotional, mental, and physical practices used by Indigenous peoples.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".