MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A New Response to Youth Crime edited by D.J.Smith (Ed.). Abingdon: Routledge (2010) 424pp. £27.50pb IBSN 978‐1‐84392‐754‐9

2012· article· en· W2012779838 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vicky Kemp

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Howard Journal of Criminal Justice · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlueprintCommissionCriminologyEconomic JusticeCriminal justiceSociologyPolitical scienceLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The youth justice system has been subjected to a series of wide-ranging reforms over recent years, but researchers and other commentators have been critical of these changes for failing to provide effective responses to crime and anti-social behaviour. In response to such criticisms, and with concerns over the high costs of public spending on youth justice, an Independent Commission on Youth Crime and Antisocial Behaviour was set up to critically review the youth justice system. Its purpose was to provide a blueprint for an effective, humane and sustainable approach to youth crime and anti-social behaviour that is based on clear principles and sound evidence. The findings were published in the Commission's 2010 report, Time for a Fresh Start. David Smith is a member of the Commission and in this edited book he brings together contributions from leading experts to provide ‘a framework of evidence and analysis’ in order to support the Commission's work. The book contains twelve considered chapters which present its ‘blueprint for reform’. In the first chapter, Smith sets out ‘the need for a fresh start’ and in the next he explores ‘changing patterns of youth’. The key themes explored in the subsequent chapters include the causes and responses to youth crime and anti-social behaviour (Rutter, Graham and Pople), preventing youth crime (Hawkins, Welsh and Utting), families and parenting (Maughan and Gardner), models of youth justice (McAra), youth justice reform in Canada (Bala, Carrington and Roberts), and ‘public opinion, politics and the response to youth crime’ (Jones). In the concluding chapter, Smith summarises some of the main failures of the current system and sets out nine main recommendations for reform, which are said to reflect key issues arising out of this collection of essays. These include reducing the number of cases brought to court as well as the number of young people taken into custody, increasing the use of restorative conferences and requiring resources to be targeted more towards prevention. While this nine-point plan for reform is to be welcomed, it does not provide the radical approach as suggested in the book's title, A New Response to Youth Crime. However, the apparent conservatism of the main recommendations is likely to be influenced by the book's relationship with the Independent Commission. In particular, with the effective politicisation of youth crime over recent years, the editor will be aware that bringing about change will not be easy. Rather than set out a radical blueprint for reform, therefore, Smith's final chapter can be seen as an appeal to policy makers, with a section on ‘costs and benefits’ helping to present a persuasive argument for the need to bring about change. Nevertheless, this collection of essays does provide evidence and analysis which can help to inform change. McAra's chapter is particularly illuminating, as she grapples with some of the complexities involved when examining different models of youth justice. From my own experience of conducting research into an adversarial system of justice, which includes observing children both in police stations and at court, I would argue that the need for alternative models based on welfare and restorative justice principles are long overdue.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Howard Journal of Criminal JusticeSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207