MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387227135 · doi:10.21428/58a8fd3e.34772e30

Revenge Porn: A Disturbing Trend in Sexual Violence That Must Be Exposed

2023· article· en· W4387227135 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandre Gauthier

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual violenceCriminologyPsychologyMedical emergencyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Revenge porn, also known as "pornodisclosure" is a form of online sexual violence that involves sharing sexually explicit images or videos of a person without their consent.This form of sexual violence has become increasingly prevalent in recent years due to the ease with which images can be shared on social networks and messaging applications.In this popularization article, we will begin by exploring the scope of revenge porn.Next, we will analyze the reasons that motivate perpetrators of this form of sexual violence and the psychological, social, economic, and occupational effects it has on victims.Finally, we will discuss the legal and ethical aspects of revenge porn and suggest preventive measures. A B S T R A C TLa vengeance pornographique, également connue sous le nom de « pornodivulgation » ou de « revenge porn », est une forme de violence sexuelle en ligne qui consiste à partager des images ou des vidéos sexuellement explicites d'une personne sans son consentement.Cette forme de violence sexuelle est devenue de plus en plus répandue ces dernières années en raison de la facilité avec laquelle les images peuvent être partagées sur les réseaux sociaux et les applications de messagerie.Dans le présent article de vulgarisation, nous débuterons en explorant la portée de la vengeance pornographique.Ensuite, nous analyserons les raisons qui motivent les auteurs de cette forme de violence sexuelle ainsi que les effets psychologiques, sociaux, économiques et professionnels qu'elle engendre chez les victimes.Enfin, nous aborderons les aspects légaux et éthiques liés à la vengeance pornographique et suggérerons des mesures préventives.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207