My Parents, My Grandparents Went Through Residential School, and All this Abuse has Come From it: Examining Intimate Partner Violence Against Canadian Indigenous Women in the Context of Colonialism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the global rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) for Indigenous women have been acknowledged as substantial, few studies have incorporated an analysis of the impacts of colonization in the context of IPV. This secondary mixed-methods analysis explored the experiences of 40 Indigenous women from the Canadian prairie provinces who were abused by their intimate partners. The women discussed the impact of colonization, including the use of residential schools, to break down family life, spiritual beliefs, and languages, at times linking this to IPV. Of the 40 women, 38 described male partners as the abusers and two identified female abusive partners. Consistent with the literature, many of the male partners physically assaulted the respondents so severely that the women were injured and were at risk of death. Almost half of the men (47.4%) used sexually coercive strategies and/or sexually assaulted the women. Implications include the importance of professionals considering the broader historical experiences and possible trauma of Indigenous women who seek assistance for IPV from abusive partners.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".