MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251389342 · doi:10.24124/2006/bpgub1325

The culture of the female victim in high school bullying

2006· dissertation· en· W4251389342 on OpenAlexaff
Anita Dobie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggressionPsychologyVerbal aggressionInterviewNewspaperPerspective (graphical)Poison controlSocial psychologySuicide preventionDevelopmental psychologyMedicineMedical emergencyPolitical scienceSociologyMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

North Americans have become more aware of bullying as the result of the many accounts reported in newspapers, and on television and written in books involving the deaths, beatings and shootings of students.This study investigates bullying from the perspective of the victimized female high school student.A qualitative study was conducted by interviewing three female students in Grades 8-12 who self-identified as victims.The findings provide insight into the types of bullying, and reactions to and ramifications of bullying.Verbal and non-verbal aggression was the most prominent.Physical aggression was always preceded or accompanied by verbal aggression.Cyber bullying was particularly insidious because of the anonymity it allowed.The participants described the devastating effects bullying had on their self-esteem and their relationships.This study showed that the emotional pain resulting from bullying incidents had negative repercussions in both the short and long-term.Based on the results of this study, recommendations are provided to schools on how to work with victims.

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)0.004
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.015
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207