“Prefrontal Deficits” Discriminate Young Offenders from Age-Matched Cohorts: Juvenile Delinquency as an Expected Feature of the Normal Distribution of Prefrontal Cerebral Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 36 male adolescent delinquents and 19 age-matched students from a male secondary school were administered several different performance-based tests. Although estimates of intelligence did not differ significantly between the groups, the incarcerated delinquents displayed more impulsivity, lower conceptual level, less conceptual flexibility, and poorer critical thinking than the reference group. The linear combination of only three variables, critical thinking, conceptual level, and numbers of errors during a conditioned spatial association task, correctly classified 89% of the 55 subjects. The results were considered consistent with the hypothesis that delayed or different development of complex functions associated with the left and (particularly) the right prefrontal cortices and their limbic inputs may be responsible for antisocial behavior. This variation will always be present due to the statistical variations in ontogeny and less than optimal parental structure within a consistent but small proportion of any generational cohort.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".