MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106189607 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/9h7c4_v1

Patterns of Misogynistic Violence in Canada: A Latent Class Analysis of Perpetrator Ideology, Power, and Legal Response

2025· article· W7106189607 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarassmentLatent class modelContext (archaeology)IdeologyVerbal abuseSexual assaultPoison controlDomestic violence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective(s): The study aimed to identify patterns among cases of misogynistic violence in Canadian legal cases and explore how sexist ideology, victim-perpetrator power dynamics, and violence type interact. We also examined perpetrator demographics and whether specific case features were related to legal decisions.Hypotheses: We hypothesized that perpetrators with more extreme sexist ideologies would engage in more severe forms of violence, that victim-perpetrator power imbalances would influence violence context and legal outcomes, and that distinct perpetrator profiles would emerge. Methods: We conducted a secondary data analysis of 179 Canadian case files (1997-2023) that involved male perpetrators of misogynistic violence. Cases were coded for perpetrator characteristics (i.e., demographic information, including sexist ideology), victim characteristics (i.e., number of victims, demographic information), and case characteristics (i.e., setting, presence of witnesses). We analyzed violence prevalence and conducted a latent class analysis. Results: Verbal and emotional abuse were the most prevalent. The latent class analysis revealed four perpetrator classes: “Isolated Sexual Assailants,” “Virtual Sexist Harassers,” “Detached Verbal Abusers,” and “Complex Aggressors”. “Isolated Sexual Assailants” showed high probabilities of sexual assault in personal settings with close relationships. “Virtual Sexist Harassers” often engaged in online harassment and exhibited significantly more incel-like views and non-sexist ideologies (e.g., racism). “Detached Verbal Abusers” exhibited workplace verbal harassment and more favorable, but not statistically significant, legal outcomes. “Complex Aggressors” exhibited high probabilities of physical violence and verbal harassment, and significantly more incel-like views. Conclusions: Findings suggest the heterogeneity of misogynistic violence and that perpetrator ideology and context may meaningfully impact behavior. The results have implications for understanding gender-based violence in Canada, developing tailored interventions for perpetrators, and informing legal policy.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesFrench-language works237,207