MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144042233 · doi:10.22215/etd/2020-14246

iPredator: Image-Based Sexual Abuse Risk Factors and Motivators

2020· dissertation· en· W3144042233 on OpenAlexaff
Vasileia Karasavva

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntitlement (fair division)PsychologySexual orientationPsychopathySexual abuseNarcissismSocial psychologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPersonalityPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image-based sexual abuse (IBSA) can be defined as the non-consensual sharing or threatening to share of nude or sexual images of another person. This is one of the first studies examining how demographic characteristics (gender, sexual orientation), personality traits (Dark Tetrad), and attitudes (aggrieved entitlement, sexual entitlement, sexual image abuse myth acceptance) predict the likelihood of engaging in IBSA perpetration and victimization. In a sample of 816 undergraduate students (72.7% female and 23.3% male), approximately 15% of them had at some point in their life, distributed and/or threatened to distribute nude or sexual pictures of someone else without their consent and 1 in 3 had experienced IBSA victimization. Higher psychopathy or narcissism scores were associated with an increased likelihood of having engaged in IBSA perpetration. Additionally, those with no history of victimization were 70% less likely to have engaged in IBSA perpetration compared to those who had experienced someone disseminating their intimate image without consent themselves. These results suggest that a cyclic relationship between IBSA victimization exists, where victims of IBSA may turn to perpetration, and IBSA perpetrators may leave themselves vulnerable to future victimization.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207