MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Antisocial Personality Pattern

2010· book-chapter· en· W182407662 on OpenAlexaff
D. A. Andrews, James Bonta

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonalityPsychologyPsychopathyAntisocial personality disorderMeaning (existential)Sadistic personality disorderPersonality disordersSocial psychologyPoison controlPsychotherapistInjury preventionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antisocial personality is one of the best predictors of criminal behavior. This chapter explores the notion of antisocial personality in more depth, with discussions of different perspectives of antisocial personality. There are different meanings that can be assigned to the term “antisocial personality.” The first meaning is simply the extremes of normal dimensions of personality that are common to all. The second meaning is rooted in psychopathology, which considers antisocial personality as a mental disorder, sees it as unhealthy and abnormal, as a disease. The chapter outlines current knowledge of personality in general. The study of personality is one of the branches of psychology and the latest thinking about personality informs the understanding of criminal conduct. Criminology's position on personality and traces the remarkable transition in criminology's respect for personality is reviewed. The chapter also examines forensic/clinical psychology and psychiatry's preoccupation with mental disorder through the study of antisocial personality disorder and psychopathy. Finally, it concludes with a critique of forensic/mental health conceptualizations of antisocial personality.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.005

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending→French-language works237,207→