Recommendations for Measuring Intimate Partner Violence and Relationship Equity Among Queer and Trans Young Women and Non-Binary Youth in British Columbia Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extensive research documents the negative impacts of inequitable intimate relationship power dynamics on gender equity for cisgender, heterosexual women. However, limited research has explored this issue among queer and trans young women and non-binary youth aged 16–29, partly due to inadequate measurement tools. We aimed to (1) explore youth perceptions of existing scales that measure gender and relationship equity; and (2) develop recommendations for adapting and developing such measures for use among queer, trans, and non-monogamous young women and non-binary youth. Thirty youth (14 [46.7%] women [inclusive of transgender women] and 16 [53.3%] non-binary) aged 17–29 in a current (n = 23 [76.6%]) or recent (in past year, n = 7 [23.4%]) queer relationships and residing in British Columbia, Canada, completed qualitative cognitive interviews between August and November 2022. Scales assessed failed to acknowledge diverse relationship experiences, were at times hurtful, and lacked applicability depending on youth access needs, sexual orientation, gender, and relationship type. Youth highlighted that diversity and representation matter and recommended that future measures of relationship power should capture financial equity, shared responsibility, and emotional labor. To track and advance gender equity, existing scales must be adapted to be inclusive of queer, trans, and non-monogamous youth relationship dynamics.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".