Risk factors for intimate partner violence perpetration among college students: Impact of childhood adversities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Intimate partner violence (IPV) among college students is a significant problem that negatively affects their physical and emotional health. This study aimed at examining risk factors, especially childhood adversities at the individual, relationship, and community levels, of IPV perpetration among college students. Methods: The sample from seven universities in the U.S. and Canada (N = 3,725) completed an online survey. Major variables included IPV perpetration, five types of childhood adversities, alcohol and drug use, depression, and demographic information. Logistic regression was performed. Results: Peer violence victimization, witnessing parental IPV, experiencing child maltreatment, drug use, and depression were associated with a higher odd of perpetrating IPV. Conclusions: Research and practice must account for exposure to multiple risk factors when intervening with college students. An integrative approach that combines trauma-informed interventions with substance use and mental health treatment may be most successful at IPV perpetration prevention and intervention among college students.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".