Men and Boys Violence Prevention Project: Informing a Government of Alberta Action Plan to Engage Men and Boys to Stop Violence Against Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shift believes that working with men and boys can have a positive, transformative impact, not only on the lives of women and girls, but also on the lives of men and boys. As a result, we have been working over the past five years to advance this area of research, and in 2014 partnered with the Family and Community Safety Branch within the Ministry of Human Services-Government of Alberta (GOA) to build the first comprehensive government plan to engage men and boys in violence prevention. (This was undertaken as part of the GOA’s Family Violence Prevention Framework). Our research team (Lana Wells, Elizabeth Dozois, Deinera Exner-Cortens, Merrill Cooper, Sophia Boutillier, Elena Esina, and Ken Froese) conducted a literature review, consulted with leaders throughout Alberta and completed a provincial e-scan to understand both the evidence and current efforts in Alberta to advance a primary prevention approach with men and boys. From this, we identified specific recommendations to inform the Government of Alberta on an Action Plan to engage men and boys in violence prevention to advance gender equality and stop violence against women. These recommendations were compiled in the following report that was submitted to the Family and Community Safety Branch within Human Services in December 2015. The report is currently being reviewed by cross-ministry partners to explore opportunities to advance the findings. Follow the download link below to access a full report.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".