Rehabilitating sexual offenders: lessons from the Correctional Service of Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The rehabilitation of sex offenders is a controversial and problematic issue.This study critically appraises the research that has been conducted regarding this issue and places it in a Canadian context by examining the programs offered by the Correctional Service of Canada.A complete review of the literature that exists was conducted and, from this, three themes were identified as the most problematic areas for the rehabilitation of sex offenders: additional programs for offenders, release of offenders into the community, and the effectiveness of the programs.The information gathered was critically appraised to ensure the credibility and validity of the information.Once verified, the information regarding these themes was compared to current information from the Correctional Service of Canada.After being compared, discussion into the differences between the research and the Correctional Service of Canada's practices was conducted, and several recommendations were made into what the Correctional Service of Canada is thought to be doing effectively, and areas in which they may be able to improve. Literature Search MethodologyIn order to start the research on these issues a thorough search and review of the Justice Institute of British Columbia's (JIBC) online library resource, as well as various articles and papers published by the CSC, was conducted.Various different keywords and combinations of search terms were used to explore the JIBC's online database.The original search term used was: 'sexual offender rehabilitation'.From this initial search, the JIBC's library system returned almost three thousand hits for review; therefore, a more narrow and condensed search criteria needed to be used.The entire library database was limited to a few, more relevant, sub-databases such as Criminal Justice Abstracts with Full Text, PsycINFO, and SocINDEX with Full Text.The search criteria were then narrowed further by limiting the results to only peer reviewed scholarly articles, articles that included full texts, and articles from the year 1990 to the present.These inclusion criteria helped to narrow the results to articles that were more meaningful to the current research question.Although these exclusion criteria helped reduce the number of reviewable articles to around one thousand five hundred, this still left far too many articles to give any meaningful information relating to rehabilitation programs that are offered to sex offenders by the CSC.Therefore, the search terms and keywords were also narrowed.The new keywords used were: 'sex offender', 'Canada', 'rehabilitation', 'Correctional Service of Canada', 'high risk', 'moderate intensity', 'low intensity', 'community based' and 'programs'.After limiting the search criteria, and focusing the search terms, the JIBC's library system returned around thirty results, for each search.This number of results is a much more manageable number
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,902 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».