“If It’s Not a Slap or a Punch Then It’s Not Violence”: Portuguese University Student’s Representations and Practices About Intimacies and Dating Violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to analyze characteristics, representations, and practices of intimacies and violence in Portuguese university students. Data collection involved 10 focus groups with a total of 35 university students aged 18–23. The findings reveal that students conceptualize healthy relationships based on respect, trust, and individuality, reflecting egalitarian ideals. However, participants acknowledge persistent gendered expectations and asymmetries. Contributing factors to dating violence (DV) include gender stereotyping, social media, substance use, and specific social settings. While social media can foster connection, it also enables control and online abuse. Substance use, although not a direct cause, may exacerbate pre-existing tensions. DV predominantly occurs in private settings, though emotional abuse also surfaces in public spaces like social gatherings. Participants condemned DV but noted the societal normalization of less visible forms of violence. They highlighted the role of peers as primary support networks for victims but also pointed to passive attitudes when abuse involves acquaintances. These insights underscore the need for targeted interventions addressing social norms and enhancing informal support networks in university settings. This study enriches the limited qualitative research on DV among Portuguese youth and emphasizes the importance of aligning prevention strategies with the nuanced realities of young people’s relationships.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".