Adolescent Sexual Harassment, Shame, and Depression: Do Experiences of Witnessing Harassment Matter?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This preliminary study explored a person-group dissimilarity hypothesis in the context of adolescent sexual harassment. Theory suggests that victimized youth are expected to experience worse outcomes if they perceive victimization to be a rare experience among their peers. This study comprised 435 middle school students who reported on their experiences of sexual harassment (victimization and witnessing), shame, and depressive symptoms. We tested a cross-sectional conditional indirect-effects model, with shame mediating the relationship between victimization and depressive symptoms (the indirect effect) and with witnessing as a moderator of the indirect effect. For all students, shame mediated the relationship between victimization and depressive symptoms. For female students, there was a buffering effect of witnessing, whereby the indirect effect was weaker at high levels of witnessing. These findings have potential implications for theory and intervention, suggesting the importance of examining young people’s social contexts to better understand their responses to sexual harassment.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it