Lateral violence and lateral empowerment in relation to young Indigenous populations across the CANZUS nations: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Young Indigenous people are vulnerable to lateral violence, where negative feelings and behaviours are directed towards members within their own oppressed group. Lateral empowerment, in contrast, is where young people can promote resilience and strength and collectively prevent and repair the effects of lateral violence. The aim of this scoping review was to describe how young Indigenous people aged between 0 and 25 years across the CANZUS nations (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States) experience lateral violence particularly relating to the context and forms in which young people are experiencing it; and what mechanisms of lateral empowerment pertaining to healing programmes and interventions, address young Indigenous people's healthy wellbeing? Methods: A scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework to search for peer-reviewed publications between January 1980 and May 2024. In total, 170 peer-reviewed publications were thematically mapped into nine themes to provide an overview of the existing literature. Results: Four themes to describe how young people experience lateral violence were identified: Familial and/or community violence; Interpersonal violence victimization (IVV); Peer and gang violence and Self-harm behaviour. Five themes related to the mechanisms of lateral empowerment which included: Community informed treatment approaches; Cultural identity and resilience; Family wellbeing; Use of digital technology; and Trauma intervention. Conclusion: Young Indigenous people are experiencing lateral violence in many forms. Fortunately, empowering strategies were identified that strengthen young people's wellbeing, cultural identity, connectedness to community and country to mitigate the negative impacts of lateral violence were identified.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".