MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403141510 · doi:10.1007/s12144-024-06731-w

Intimate partner violence and domestic violence linked to animal abuse: a review of the literature

2024· review· en· W4403141510 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carlos Barbosa‐Torres, M.a Mar Bueno-Galán, Natalia Bueso‐Izquierdo, Pilar Cantillo Cordero, Juan Manuel Moreno Manso

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Psychology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de Extremadura
KeywordsDomestic violencePsychologyCriminologySocial psychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsClinical psychologyPoison controlMedical emergencyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Animal abuse is an instrumental form of violence used in intimate partner violence and domestic violence. These two realities coexist in today’s society, leaving the victims with psychological scars. The main objective was to analyse the presence of animal abuse in cases of intimate partner and domestic violence, and to analyse the extent to which the affective relationship the victims have with their pets can influence the decision to leave their homes, fleeing from the aggressor. The work carried out using the Prisma Methodology consisted of a systematic review of scientific articles extracted from the Web Of Science, Science Direct, Scopus, Pubmed and Google Scholar databases from the last ten years, measuring their quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The results obtained were grouped into two tables with references, on the one hand, to the principal data concerning the reviewed articles and, on the other, to the characteristics and consequences of the abuse. These results provide relevant information concerning the presence of animal abuse in situations of violence, as a strategy of indirect harm towards the victim.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.410 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent PsychologySame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207