MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3179194628 · doi:10.1177/08862605211030018

Young Women’s Experiences With Technology-Facilitated Sexual Violence From Male Strangers

2021· article· en· W3179194628 on OpenAlexaff
Alisha C. Salerno‐Ferraro, Caroline Erentzen, Regina A. Schuller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarassmentSocial mediaThematic analysisPsychologyAngerDisgustSocial psychologyQualitative researchSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stranger-perpetrated harassment was identified decades ago to describe the pervasive, unwanted sexual attention women experience in public spaces. This form of harassment, which has evolved in the modern era, targets women as they navigate online spaces, social media, texting, and online gaming. The present research explored university-aged women's experiences (n = 381) with online male-perpetrated sexual harassment, including the nature and frequency of the harassment, how women responded to the harassment, and how men reportedly reacted to women's strategies. Trends in harassment experiences are explored descriptively and with thematic analysis. Most women reported receiving sexually inappropriate messages (84%, n = 318), sexist remarks or comments (74%, n = 281), seductive behavior or come-ons (70%, n = 265), or unwanted sexual attention (64%, n = 245) in an online platform, social media account, email, or text message. This sexual attention from unknown males often began at a very young age (12-14 years). The harassment took many forms, including inappropriate sexual comments on social media posts, explicit photos of male genitalia, and solicitations for sex. Although most women reported strong negative emotional reactions to the harassment (disgust, fear, anger), they generally adopted non-confrontational strategies to deal with the harassment, electing to ignore/delete the content or blocking the offender. Women reported that some men nevertheless persisted with the harassment, following them across multiple sites online, escalating in intensity and severity, and leading some women to delete their own social media accounts. These results suggest the need for early intervention and education programs and industry response.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations69
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interpersonal ViolenceSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207