MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132977382

Women's Use of Force Against an Intimate Partner: What Can We Learn From Police Data

2024· dissertation· W7132977382 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lisa Kathleen Heslop

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2024
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecidivismDomestic violenceHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionOccupational safety and healthInjury preventionPoison control
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation focused on women’s use of force against their intimate partner through an examination of police occurrences and risk assessments responding to these cases in a large Ontario (Canada) police service. Study One explored the predictive validity of the Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment (ODARA), a 13-item actuarial tool widely used by police to guide decision-making in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV). This study examined the ODARA’s ability to differentiate male compared to female recidivists. Overall, the ODARA performed significantly better at differentiating male recidivists (AUC = .60) compared to female recidivists (AUC = .66). Risk factors predicting recidivism differed significantly by gender, thus caution is suggested when using the ODARA to assess risk of recidivism for women charged with an IPV offence. Study Two examined variables identified by intersectional feminist and resistance theories as potentially related to recidivism. Specifically, this study examined how structural, relationship, and chronic vulnerable circumstances predict subsequent police IPV-related contact (IPV-related charges, IPV-related victimization) during the two-year follow-up. Results showed that women were more likely to be a victim of IPV in subsequent police contact than charged for using force against an intimate partner. Other key findings were that women had disproportionately high rates of mental health concerns and problematic substance; and women were highly involved with the police for matters unrelated to IPV before and after their index charge. Women who were charged with a subsequent IPV-related offence differed significantly from women charged with only breaching the conditions of their release. Compared to breach only women, violent IPV-recidivists were more likely to have histories of criminal offending, historical charges for use of violence against a person who was not an intimate partner, and their male victim was more likely to fear being re-assaulted. IPV-involved women were found to reach out to police for help during conflict with an intimate partner in the two years prior to their index charge on average between four and six times. Discussion focuses on the implications of the findings of both studies for police practice, domestic violence, and future research with women who use force.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.013
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicIntimate Partner and Family Violence→French-language works237,207→