Athlete victims of sexual violence: links to conformity to the sport ethic
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
In research, various reasons have been proposed to be able to understand the occurrence of sexual violence in sport. This article examines the relationships between conformity to the sport ethic norms and sexual violence among young athletes, according to sex and type of sport (individual and team). Athletes (n = 1140) from Quebec, Canada aged 13–18 years responded to an online questionnaire, which included two validated tools: a measure of conformity to the sport ethic norms (i.e. striving for distinction, self-sacrifice and refusing to accept limits) and a measure of experiences of sexual violence (i.e. by team-mates and coaches). Relationships between variables were examined using logistic regression analysis. The results show that increasing conformity to the striving for distinction norm contributes to an increase in the probability of being a victim of sexual violence from team-mates. Conformity to this norm is also associated with sexual violence by the coach, depending on the type of sport. Finally, increasing conformity to the norm of self-sacrifice increases the likelihood of experiencing sexual violence from the coach in an individual sport. These results may lead to the establishment of collective actions to influence conformity to the sport ethic norms and may pave the way for other studies to examine the factors influencing sexual violence since the phenomenon is multifactorial and little of the variance is explained by sport ethic.
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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