MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413173266 · doi:10.1080/02255189.2025.2525121

“Love on top of mercy”: complex decision making among women who survived wartime forced marriage in Northern Uganda

2025· article· en· W4413173266 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ketty Anyeko

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender studiesForced marriageSociologyHistoryPolitical scienceDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twenty years after the war (1986–2006) between the Lord’s Resistance Army rebels and Ugandan government ended in Uganda, girls who were abducted by the rebels still experience reintegration challenges. Forced to serve as fighters, laborers, wives and mothers to rebel commanders’ children, these women escaped abduction and returned to an impoverished community. While some women, upon escaping captivity, rejected the rebel commanders they were forced to act as wives to, several women remained in these relationships. Little information exists on women’s lives in the aftermath of violence, and even few studies have documented the complex decision-making and choices of women as they strive to rebuild their lives and support their children following the war. Using the frameworks of “love on top of mercy,” this article explores why some women elected to formalize and continue with relationships that began as wartime forced marrriages. Through the analysis of qualitative research documenting women’s voices and experiences, this article argues that women navigate numerous structural and systemic challenges, as well as experiences of discrimination and stigmatization, while engaging in strategic and agentic decision-making in relation to their decisions about who to marry or stay married to, and why. These findings highlight how documenting “agency within constraints” provides rich insights into complex decision-making as linked to survival, wellbeing and feminist flourishing.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

Study designObservational
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 venueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développementSame topicHuman Rights and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207