Behind Closed Doors: Attitudes, Dark Traits, and Perceptions of Intimate Partner Sexual Violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intimate partner sexual violence (IPSV) is a widespread concern and is characterized by sexual violence or coercion occurring within intimate partnerships; however, much of the literature has focused on heterosexual, male perpetrated sexual coercion.The aim of the current study was to understand how people's experiences with IPSV, attitudes, and dark personality traits relate to perceptions and perpetration of IPSV.Undergraduates (N = 680, 71.0% women, 68.7% heterosexual) were randomly assigned to read a fictitious IPSV vignette describing a scenario of either male-on-female, female-on-male, male-on-male, or female-on-female coercion and provide their perceptions of seriousness, perpetrator blame, and victim blame.Participants selfreported their previous history of IPSV perpetration and victimization, non-partner coercion victimization, rape myth acceptance, sexual entitlement, and Dark Tetrad traits.The results found that previous perpetration of IPSV, non-partner coercion, rape myth acceptance, sexual entitlement, psychopathy, narcissism, sadism, and gender were all significantly related to perceptions of seriousness, perpetrator blame, and/or victim blame; however, participants perceived the severity and blame similarly across heterosexual and homosexual conditions.Rape myth acceptance, sexual entitlement, and psychopathy were all significantly related to IPSV perpetration.The results demonstrate a consistent relationship between perpetrating IPSV and rape myth acceptance with perceptions of IPSV in heterosexual and homosexual relationships.The results provided tentative evidence for the nested ecological model framework of IPSV at the individual and societal levels; additionally, practical implications include more inclusive views of sexual minority groups and understanding the characteristics of IPSV perpetrators.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".