Sexual Offending in Adolescence: A Comparison of Sibling Offenders and Nonsibling Offenders across Domains of Risk and Treatment Need
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sibling sexual offending has received limited empirical attention, despite estimates that approximately half of all adolescent-perpetrated sexual offenses involve a sibling victim. The present study addresses this gap by examining male adolescent sibling (n = 100) and nonsibling offenders (n = 66) with regard to maltreatment histories and scores on two adolescent risk/need assessment instruments, the ERASOR and YLS/CMI. Adolescents who sexually abused a sibling, versus a nonsibling, were more likely to have histories of sexual abuse and been exposed to domestic violence and pornography. There were no group differences on ERASOR and YLS/CMI scales. This study adds to the limited discourse on sibling sexual offending and the larger literature on the heterogeneity of adolescents who have sexually offended.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it