Exploring adult cyber-harassment: key predictors of victimisation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This exploratory study assesses the correlates of adult cyber-harassment victimisation. Using data from an original survey of Canadian adults aged 25 or older (N = 948), we present descriptive and multivariate analyses which demonstrate that cyber-harassment does extend into adulthood and has significant impacts that should not be trivialised as youthful deviance. Linear regression modelling indicates that higher rates of victimisation are predicted by age, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability status, financial insecurity, internet use behaviours, and privacy calculus, which together suggest that experiences of cyber-harassment may intersect with broader inequalities and experiences of marginalisation. Additional logistic regression modelling shows that gender, internet use behaviours, and fear of victimisation are factors associated with support seeking behaviours and reporting one’s victimisation to the police. Overall, our findings add to the larger existing literature on youth victims and suggest that adult cyber-harassment is an overlooked issue that requires more scholarly attention to better inform broader responsive policies.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 it