MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412441274 · doi:10.1016/j.ijlcj.2025.100766

Cyber victimization and social cohesion: Unraveling correlates of cyberbullying and cyberstalking in Canada

2025· article· en· W4412441274 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shang‐Kwei Wang, Xiaohan Mei, Ming‐Li Hsieh, Liqun Cao, Zhishu Li

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of law, crime and justice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohesion (chemistry)PsychologyCriminologyComputer securitySocial psychologyComputer scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study leverages data from the Canadian General Social Survey, Cycle 34, to explore factors linked to cyberbullying and cyberstalking victimization over the past five years. Using theoretical frameworks such as social cohesion, social support, social disorganization , and routine activities, the research identifies variables associated with increased cyber victimization risk. The findings reveal both parallels and distinctions between cyberspace and physical space in the application of these theories. Higher levels of internet use, experiences of discrimination, concerns about personal safety, fewer close social ties, and unmarried status are linked to greater vulnerability to cyberbullying and cyberstalking. However, neighborhood contexts—such as community social support and collective efficacy—appear unrelated to cyber victimization. This research sheds light on the unique dynamics of cybervictimization and provides critical guidance for policymakers to inform targeted prevention and intervention strategies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of law, crime and justiceSame topicStalking, Cyberstalking, and HarassmentFrench-language works237,207