“Kind of backed into this corner:” exploring gendered interpretations and responses to violence in long-term residential care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Violence in long-term residential care (LTRC) is primarily directed at women who make up a disproportionate share of residents and staff, yet gender has been relatively understudied and undertheorized in research on violence in this setting. In this paper we draw together the concept of gender structure and Pierre Bourdieu's concepts of habitus and field to explore staff perspectives on violent situations and learn about gendered power dynamics in LTRC. Our analysis of interviews with 29 staff in two Canadian provinces explored how gender infused the ways in which staff interpreted, experienced, and responded to violence in LTRC. Gendered perceptions and assumptions manifested in how participants spoke of orienting to the importance of body size, strength, speed, and perceived capability when anticipating who might perpetrate violence. Likewise, gender and gendered bodily characteristics also appeared to shape work roles (e.g., who was expected to provide ‘back-up’ in violent situations). Staff accounts also provided insight into how past experiences of gender-based violence and gendered power dynamics outside of LTRC shaped violent situations and power dynamics inside LTRC. Lastly, in response to violent situations, staff routinely minimized, downplayed, and trivialized violence to cope with their positions within these situations, illuminating a gendered duty to care. Our findings advance understandings of gendered interpretations and strategies employed in response to violence in LTRC, raising questions about the consequences for both residents and staff. • Long-term residential care (LTRC) can be a site of gendered violence. • Gender has received limited attention in research, policy and theory on violence in LTRC. • Narratives reveal gender plays an important role in how staff experience violence. • Past experiences of gendered power dynamics outside of LTRC shape dynamics inside LTRC. • Bourdieusian theory helps advance understandings of gendered power dynamics in LTRC.
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 | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".