MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155668268 · doi:10.1177/08862605211006360

Gender Differences in Sexual Coercion Perpetration: Investigating the Role of Alcohol-use and Cognitive Risk Factors

2021· article· en· W3155668268 on OpenAlex
Véronique Bonneville, Dominique Trottier

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-PinelUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual coercionCoercion (linguistics)PsychologyCognitionClinical psychologyAlcoholPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies have shown that alcohol is involved in 50 to 75% of all sexual coercion situations. Significant associations have been established between alcohol-use and sexual coercion perpetration and cognitive factors have been proposed to play an important role in this association. However, the current knowledge on the relationship between alcohol-use, cognitive factors, and sexual coercion perpetration is mostly based on male samples. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to investigate gender differences associated with the role of alcohol-use and cognitive factors in sexual coercion perpetration. To do so, 742 participants (562 women, 180 men) completed an online questionnaire assessing (1) alcohol-use, (2) perpetration of sexual coercion, and (3) cognitions related to sexuality or alcohol (misperception of sexual intent, alcohol-related expectancies, alcohol-related rape myth acceptance [RMA]). Results revealed that (1) for both men and women, alcohol-use as well as cognitive variables allowed to discriminate perpetrators from non-perpetrators, (2) perpetrators, whether male or female, did not differ significantly on any of the risk factors, except for alcohol-related RMA, (3) a prediction model that considered cognitive variables, as well as alcohol-use significantly contributed to the explanation of both male and female sexual coercion, and (4) the prediction model explained three times the amount of variance in sexual coercion perpetrated by men compared to women. On the one hand, these results highlight similarities in risk factors towards sexual coercion perpetration for both men and women. Perpetrators, regardless of their gender, seem to exhibit similar alcohol-use, alcohol-related expectancies, and tendencies to misinterpret sexual intent, making these risk factors potential prevention and intervention targets for both genders. On the other hand, these results emphasize the need to break away from male-based sexual coercion explanatory models and consider other variables towards a better understanding of female sexual coercion perpetration.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.256 · 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