An examination of the role of shame in the relationship between teen dating violence victimization and internalizing symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This longitudinal study examined the relationship between teen dating violence (TDV), shame-proneness, and internalizing symptoms among high school students in Canada. Participants included 188 adolescents (Mage = 16.01, SD = 1.17, 58.5% girls) who reported having a dating partner at the first time point. A just-identified path analysis was conducted to investigate the role of shame-proneness on the relationship between three types of TDV (i.e., psychological, physical/sexual, and relational) and internalizing symptoms (i.e., psychosomatic symptoms and emotional problems). The results indicated that among the three types of TDV victimization, only psychological victimization predicted greater emotional problems and higher shame-proneness approximately eight months later. Shame-proneness fully mediated the effect of psychological TDV victimization on internalizing problems. Results also indicated significant sex differences in the association between TDV victimization and shame-proneness. Limitations, future study directions, and practical implications of these findings were addressed.Keywords: teen dating violence, shame, internalizing symptoms
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".