Structural Advocacy Organizations and Intersectional Outcomes: Effects of Women's Police Stations on Female Homicides
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
Abstract By introducing the concept of “structural advocacy organizations,” this study theorizes and tests the boundary conditions within which organizations designed to protect the rights of disenfranchised groups promote structural changes at the intersection of gender and race. We test these claims on Brazil's “women's police stations,” a type of structural advocacy organization with greater female representation on staff and with specialized procedures and an institutional mandate to address violence against women. The analysis indicates that homicides are lower among the population of women in municipalities which have women's police stations. However, within this group, homicides committed against women who self‐identify as “black” and “brown” are lower only in municipalities that are characterized by high levels of female education and in metropolitan areas with infrastructure development. The results suggest that improving intersectional outcomes for women who are disenfranchised on race requires complementary policies and institutional mandates to address racialized violence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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