The Role of Financial Literacy in Gender-based Violence: Developing Financial Freedom and Confidence for Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In more recent years, many governments worldwide at their different levels have started to recognize intimate partner violence (IPV) as an epidemic and serious matter of public health and safety. Despite this, there is still a level of work to be done to provide women who experience intimate partner violence with the appropriate tools to successfully remove themselves from their abusive environments. This study will look specifically at IPV where economic and financial abuse may be involved and the relationship it has to financial literacy. Economic abuse can be perpetrated through various methods that aim to deprive victims of financial independence, keeping them reliant on their abusers for financial stability. Social policies at the provincial level that aim to implement financial literacy programs is one area that may provide women’s shelters and organizations with adequate resources for women experiencing IPV and economic abuse. In the literature review, the topic of social policy, financial abuse and financial literacy, and intimate partner violence will be explored to provide an outline of the problem. An exploration of an Australian study reveals the benefits and setbacks with applying these curriculums at women’s shelters and within social work. This research and area of social policy proves itself valuable as a model for Canadian governments, primarily provincial jurisdictions, to draw from to develop strong tools in the battle against intimate partner violence.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".