MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003975946 · doi:10.3138/cjccj.52.5.527

Punishing Processes in Youth Court: Procedural Justice, Court Atmosphere and Youths' Views of the Legitimacy of the Justice System

2010· article· en· W2003975946 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Carolyn Greene, Jane B. Sprott, Natasha S. Madon, Maria Jung

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityAthabasca UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegitimacyAtmosphere (unit)ConfusionEconomic JusticeNegotiationLawProcedural justicePsychologyPolitical scienceInterviewCriminologyPoliticsPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For those who are negotiating their way through court, there are potentially many aspects of the court-room atmosphere that can be perceived as unpleasant. Moreover, issues arising from general delays, confusion, and unprofessional conduct may be related to broader evaluations of the entire justice system, independently of how fairly people feel that they, personally, were treated by specific court actors. We explored this by interviewing youths after their first court appearance and by independently coding the overall atmosphere of the court-room. We found that, independently of how fairly youths felt they themselves had been treated, the atmosphere of the courtroom was significantly related to their overall assessments of the legitimacy of the criminal justice system. Those who experienced an atmosphere of confusion and unprofessionalism tended to view the entire justice system as less legitimate than did those who experienced better days.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations43
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénaleSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207