Violent Partners or a Specific Class of Offenders? A Criminal Career Approach to Understanding Men Involved in Intimate Partner Sexual Violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study investigates the criminal career of individuals involved in intimate partner sexual violence (IPSV). Specifically, the goal is to determine whether men who engage in IPSV can be distinguished from those who engage in intimate partner non sexual violence (IPNSV) only and whether criminal trajectories in the resulting subgroup are heterogeneous. The sample comes from a Canadian database including a total of 12,458 individuals involved in IPSV and 32,474 individuals involved in IPNSV). Bivariate and multivariate analyses are performed to examine the differences in the two groups while latent profile analysis allows examining the heterogeneity of characteristics of men who engaged in IPSV. Findings indicate that the criminal career of men who engage in IPSV follows a pattern that is clearly distinct from that of men who engage in IPNSV only and is more specialized in terms of sexual offenses. Results also show that the criminal trajectories followed by the men who engage in IPSV are heterogeneous. Four profiles of different trajectories were identified. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".