MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981721960 · doi:10.1080/07418820100094801

Conceptualizing criminal justice theory

2001· article· en· W1981721960 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas J. Bernard, Robin S. Engel

Bibliographic record

VenueJustice Quarterly · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminal justiceCriminologyField (mathematics)SociologyEconomic JusticePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an attempt to advance the development and generalization of criminal justice theory as a whole, we propose a framework for classifying specific criminal justice theories. We then present an interpretive history of the academic field of criminal justice to demonstrate how the field can be organized within that framework. We conclude by describing some lessons about theory learned in the field of criminology and applying these lessons to the field of criminal justice.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.005
Science and technology studies0.0090.060
Scholarly communication0.0120.014
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations104
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJustice QuarterlySame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207