MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220809586 · doi:10.3390/sexes3010017

Immigrants’ Length of Residence and Stalking Victimization in Canada: A Gendered Analysis

2022· article· en· W4220809586 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joseph Asumah Braimah, Emmanuel Kyeremeh, Eugena Kwon, Roger Antabe, Yujiro Sano, Bradley P. Stoner

Bibliographic record

VenueSexes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
Canadian institutionsNipissing UniversityThe Scarborough HospitalSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStalkingImmigrationResidenceContext (archaeology)DemographyPsychologyCriminologyGeographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although previous studies have explored the role of gender on stalking victimization, we know very little about how female and male immigrants are exposed to stalking victimization over time after their arrival to their host society. To address this void in the literature, we use the 2014 Canada General Social Survey to compare stalking victimization among native-born individuals, recent immigrants (those who have been in Canada for fewer than 10 years), and established immigrants (those who have been in Canada for 10 years or more) separately for women and men. Applying gender-specific complementary log-log models, we find that female (OR = 0.63, p < 0.05) and male (OR = 0.46, p < 0.01) recent immigrants are less likely to experience stalking victimization than their native-born counterparts. We also find that female established immigrants (OR = 0.65, p < 0.05) are less likely to experience stalking victimization than their native-born counterparts although there is no significance difference for male established immigrants (OR = 1.01, p > 0.05). Overall, this study points to the importance of understanding the intersection between immigrants’ length of residence and gender in the context of stalking victimization in Canada. Based on these findings, we discuss several implications for policymakers and directions for future research.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexesSame topicStalking, Cyberstalking, and HarassmentFrench-language works237,207