MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413072438 · doi:10.1080/17448689.2025.2531194

Political violence and women’s political participation in Kenya

2025· article· en· W4413072438 on OpenAlexaff
Eugene Emeka Dim, Harmata Aboubakar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Civil Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsCivil societyPolitical sciencePolitical violencePolitical economyGender studiesSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For many emerging democracies, violence plays a major role in the political sphere as it becomes ingrained in the logic of what it means to be political. Political violence disrupts democratic processes and prevents marginalized groups, particularly women, from fully expressing their political agency. This study examines the relationship between political violence and women's political participation in Kenya. The study employs data from the eighth round of Afrobarometer, which surveyed 2,400 respondents. We analyzed the interaction effects between gender and experiences of political violence on protesting and voting behaviours. The findings reveal that women are significantly less likely to protest (11% decline) or vote (12% decline) following experiences of violence, whereas men exhibit opposite trends, with an 11% increase in protest participation and a 12% increase in voting. These gendered divergences highlight how political violence disproportionately hinders women's political engagement while reinforcing male dominance in the political sphere. The study concludes by exploring strategies women can adopt to navigate hostile political environments, including leveraging online platforms for mobilization and fostering community-based safe spaces. This study ultimately finds that political violence is associated with political participation, with several gendered ramifications.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Civil SocietySame topicGender Politics and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207