MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995468441 · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.72.4.636

Psychopathy and Offending From Adolescence to Adulthood: A 10-Year Follow-Up.

2004· article· en· W1995468441 on OpenAlexaff
Heather M. Gretton, Robert D. Hare, Rosalind E. H. Catchpole

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychopathy ChecklistPsychopathyPsychologyYoung adultInjury preventionAntisocial personality disorderPoison controlJuvenile delinquencyHuman factors and ergonomicsEarly adulthoodSuicide preventionChecklistOccupational safety and healthDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPersonalitySocial psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the predictive validity of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) from adolescence to early adulthood. The authors coded the PCL:YV using file information and collected criminal record information over a 10-year follow-up period on 157 boys, ages 12 through 18, referred to Youth Forensic Psychiatric Services for assessment in 1986. The risk for violence into early adulthood was greater among those with high PCL:YV scores than among those with low scores, even after controlling for conduct disorder, age at first offence, and history of violent and nonviolent offending. These results indicate that the PCL:YV provides meaningful information about young offenders' risk for violence into early adulthood. Clinical implications are discussed, with reference to pertinent ethical issues.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 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

Citations326
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Consulting and Clinical PsychologySame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207