MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967470895 · doi:10.1080/10683160903318876

Predictors of sex offender treatment dropout: psychopathy, sex offender risk, and responsivity implications

2010· article· en· W1967470895 on OpenAlexaff
Mark E. Olver, Steve Wong

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology Crime and Law · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychopathyPsychologyPsychopathy ChecklistSex offenderDropout (neural networks)Logistic regressionClinical psychologyDiscriminant function analysisMental healthRecidivismPoison controlPsychiatryAntisocial personality disorderInjury preventionPersonalitySocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We examined sex offender treatment dropout predictors, in particular, the relationship of psychopathy and sex offender risk to treatment dropout in a sample of 154 federally incarcerated sex offenders treated in a high intensity sex offender treatment program. Demographic, criminal history, mental health and treatment-related data as well as data on risk assessment measures including the Static 99, Violence Risk Scale – Sexual Offender version (VRS-SO), and Psychopathy Checklist – Revised (PCL-R) were collected. Logistic regression and discriminant function analyses were used to identify predictors that made significant and unique contributions to dropout among all the variables under study. The Emotional facet of Factor 1 of the PCL-R and never being married were found to be the most salient predictors of treatment dropout and correctly identified about 70% of the cases. The implications of the findings for managing treatment dropout and for the treatment of psychopathic offenders are discussed.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.313 · 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.

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

Citations100
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology Crime and LawSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207