Does the Relationship Between Family Structure and Delinquency Vary According to Circumstances? An Investigation of Interaction Effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Empirical research has shown that familial disruption is associated with delinquent behaviour. Recent investigations suggest that reduced levels of attachment in non-traditional families may be responsible for this effect. However, it is not known whether the impact of familial disruption varies according to familial socio-economic status (SES) or the gender of the children. Some authors have argued that the criminogenic influence is greater for boys, while others have maintained that girls are more adversely influenced. Similar contradictory evidence has been reported with respect to SES. Finally, a substantial number of studies have shown that the influence of familial disruption is largely invariant to gender and SES. The goal of this study was to determine whether or not familial disruption interacts with these two variables. Multivariate logistic regression was used in the investigation. A representative sample of Ontario school children was analysed (N = 1,891). The analysis reveals that family structure interacts with SES, but only with respect to one form of delinquent behaviour. This result may represent a chance finding. Overall, the relationship between family structure and delinquency is remarkably similar across circumstances.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".