MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390802210 · doi:10.1515/bis-2022-0032

Basic Income and Violence Against Women: A Review of Cash Transfer Experiments

2024· review· en· W4390802210 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBasic Income Studies · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violencePovertyCash transfersSexual violenceCashCriminologyPsychologyPoison controlSuicide preventionMedicineBusinessEconomicsEnvironmental healthEconomic growthFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Violence against women is understood as a public health issue that has long-term health consequences for women. Economic inequality and women’s economic dependence on men make women vulnerable to violence. One approach to addressing poverty is through basic income, a cash transfer for all individuals which is not dependent on their employment status. This paper examines the relationship between basic income and violence against women by surveying different forms of cash transfer programs and their association with intimate partner violence, sexual exploitation, and systemic violence. Previous reviews report that cash transfers can be associated with decreased intimate partner violence. This review goes beyond existing systematic reviews by including intimate partner violence, sexual exploitation, and systemic violence for a broader understanding of how cash transfers relate to violence against women. Search databases include EBSCOhost search with Medline, Social Science Abstracts, APA PsychINFO, Social Work Abstracts. Search terms were “basic income” or “cash transfer” and “women” and “violence” or “homicide” or “sexual risk.” Other terms searched were “indigenous” or “colonial” or “systemic”. This search included articles reporting on cash transfers as the exposure and an indicator of violence against women as the outcome. Articles were excluded if it did not fit these criteria and were not written in English. This search yielded 28 articles that described intimate partner violence (emotional, physical, or sexual), 15 articles that described sexual exploitation, and no articles describing systemic violence against women. We used other supplemental articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria to pinpoint gaps in literature on systemic violence. These papers were analyzed through a feminist lens, an intersectional approach in addition to other theories. This search resulted in 43 articles. Consistent with other reviews on this subject matter, many recipients of cash transfers reported feeling empowered by it. A large proportion of articles found that cash transfers have a decreased association with physical forms of IPV overall, however some articles report decreased, increased, or unchanged outcomes for emotional IPV, such as aggression, controlling behaviours, or threats. Cash transfers may also be associated with reduced sexual exploitation as nine out of 11 studies reported that participants reduced their number of sex trade interactions due to having their financial needs met and studies also reported their perceived increased autonomy in sexual decision-making. This article outlines the gaps in literature, including the examination of cash transfers and systemic violence that can guide future research to best understand how cash transfer impact violence against women.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.344 · 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