MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017295321 · doi:10.1177/1079063214544331

Routine Activities Preceding Adolescent Sexual Abuse of Younger Children

2014· article· en· W2017295321 on OpenAlex
Benoît Leclerc, Marcus Felson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSexual Abuse · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual abusePsychologyAdolescent developmentDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyMedicineSuicide preventionPoison controlMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adolescent abuse of younger children has long been recognized, but empirical research on the circumstances of this phenomenon is rare. This article examines how adolescent offenders find and gain access to victims, work out time alone with them, and set up or exploit settings for sexual contact. Prior researchers learned that adult sex offenders use certain routine activities to perform these tasks. The current research inquires whether adolescent offenders are similar. We administered Kaufman's Modus Operandi Questionnaire to a sample of 116 Canadian adolescent males undergoing treatment for a sexual offense against a child. Adolescent offenders follow routines similar to adults but are better able to use games and activities as a prelude to sexual abuse. We discuss how routine legal activities set the stage for activities and should be considered when devising situational prevention strategies.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.258 · 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