Stalking Behaviors by Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders in Employment Settings: Understanding Stalking Behavior and Developing Appropriate Supports
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
Stalking behavior in the workplace by individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) can be problematic and complicated for employers to address. Often employers have limited knowledge of the disorder and the unique social characteristics associated with ASD that place these individuals at risk for stalking. It is important that employers, employees with ASD, employment support providers, and employees without ASD understand the legal implications of stalking behavior as well as appropriate interventions. Interventions can include elements of positive behavior support such as a functional behavioral assessment along with an intervention plan. We discuss specific interventions that can be used in the work setting to improve social interaction and cover legal implications. Interventions include self-management tools, video feedback, participation in employee social skill groups, employer provided counseling benefit, and other possible support strategies. Becoming informed about legal protections in relation to stalking behavior can be addressed through understanding specific provisions of the American Disability Act and Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it