MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6997371972

Victim Services’ Implementation of Mobile Tracking Systems for Victims of High-Risk Gender-Based Violence Cases in Ontario

2023· dissertation· en· W6997371972 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLaw in Society and Culture
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaw enforcementTracking systemMobile deviceMobile technologyService providerContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Tracking (education)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2012, Ontario Victim Services providers have been a leading force in implementing Mobile Tracking Systems, a technological device some victim advocates and law enforcement officials believe will reduce risks in gender-based violence cases. The Mobile Tracking System resembles a small pager-like device that clients carry at all times. When activated in a high-risk gender-based violence emergency, the device aims to facilitate timely law enforcement assistance by emitting a GPS tracking signal and alerting first responders to a ‘Priority 1’ call. Mobile Tracking Systems have undergone a rapid increase in attention by the media, government, service providers, and wider public as the devices are perceived to be a safety-enabling technology for gender-based violence cases. Mounting calls to fund such technologies have emerged in light of pandemic safety measures and during a 2022 Coroner’s Inquest held to investigate a triple femicide in Renfrew County, Ontario. In this Inquest, the Jury recommended that Mobile Tracking System technologies be funded by the Government of Ontario, while recently in Quebec, 41 million dollars was invested into GPS tracking technologies for gender-based violence cases. Despite gaining substantial traction in public and media discourse, Mobile Tracking Systems have been underrepresented in scholarly literature. To respond to this gap, this thesis employs qualitative methods to examine Mobile Tracking Systems in the context of gender-based violence cases in Ontario. In particular, through the examination of 91 textual documents and 10 semi-structured interviews with service providers involved in case referral and the administration of Mobile Tracking Systems, this study traces the history, development, and use of Mobile Tracking System devices in the context of gender-based violence cases in Ontario, and investigates the impact of panic button alarms on criminal justice responses to gender-based violence. To examine Mobile Tracking Systems, this thesis draws on relevant theoretical frameworks in the fields of Science and Technology Studies and critical perspectives on law and criminal justice. By tracing the development of panic button alarms to their current use in Ontario, this thesis reveals a shift toward pro-carceral safety measures that embrace technology as a perceived tool to reduce gender-based violence. As this thesis details, approaching safety work in this manner not only reflects, but also perpetuates particular assumptions about victims that pressure them to align their behaviour with the goals of the criminal legal system. The thesis argues that designing and administering a technological tool for victims of gender-based violence that centers the criminal legal system has direct impacts on victims when seeking support. The findings of this project have implications for Ontario Victim Services providers, police services in Ontario, and other agencies that support victims of gender-based violence cases, as they draw attention to how the implementation of panic button alarms as a perceived safety-enabling technology directly impact victims accessing support services for gender-based violence cases. Finally, the study’s findings can inform policy and practice related to the GPS tracking \ntechnologies in the context of mounting calls to fund panic button alarm technologies in Ontario.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0140.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)→Same topicLaw in Society and Culture→French-language works237,207→