MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408461294 · doi:10.1177/15248380251320992

The Predictors, Motivations and Characteristics of Image-Based Sexual Abuse: A Scoping Review

2025· review· en· W4408461294 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Loren E. Parton, Michaela Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueTrauma Violence & Abuse · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyContext (archaeology)Inclusion (mineral)Sexual abuseLegislationChild sexual abusePoison controlPsychologyPublic relationsHuman factors and ergonomicsCriminologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologyGeographyMedicineEnvironmental healthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image-based sexual abuse (IBSA) is a form of sexual violence and abuse that is facilitated by the use of technology. The array of different technologies, ever-changing behaviors, and varied terminology have created challenges in terms of appropriate response, legislation, and the protection of victims as well as difficulties in establishing the extent and harms of this behavior on a wider scale and context. This scoping review examines and synthesizes the current literature which focuses on predictors, the motivation of perpetrators, and the characteristics of both victims and perpetrators in relation to IBSA. The databases Web of Science , ASSIA , ProQuest , and StarPlus were searched in December 2023. A supplementary search was conducted in Google Scholar and hand-searching of two key journals within the topic area. The search focused on five geographical locations that share some cultural background (United Kingdom/Ireland, United States, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia). A total of 60 studies and reviews were included which meet the inclusion criteria. The main findings were: (a) diverse populations and marginalized groups are not represented in the current literature; (b) there is a vast number of interchangeable terminologies used; (c) there are limited studies that examine the predictors of victimization of IBSA; (d) the United States and Australia are the dominant countries of study of IBSA.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.339 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrauma Violence & AbuseSame topicSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesFrench-language works237,207