Criminal Trajectories of Adult Sex Offenders and the Age Effect: Examining the Dynamic Aspect of Offending in Adulthood
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several policies have been implemented to manage the risk of sex offenders in the community. These policies, however, tend to target older repeat sex offenders. This is the first study to examine and describe the offending trajectories of adult sex offenders from early adolescence to adulthood. The current study is based on a quasipopulation of convicted adult sex offenders in the province of Quebec, Canada. The number of convictions was examined from the period of adolescence up to age 35 using a group-based modeling technique. The study uncovered four offending trajectories: (a) very low-rate group (56%); (b) late-bloomers (12%); (c) low-rate desistors (25%); and (d) high-rate chronics (8%). These trajectories differed on several key criminal career dimensions such as age of onset, frequency, diversity, and specialization in different offence types. The study findings challenge the conception of sex offenders’ risk as high, stable, and linear. The implications for the risk assessment and the risk prediction of recidivism are discussed.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it