DELINQUENT BEHAVIOR, OFFICIAL DELINQUENCY, AND GENDER: CONSEQUENCES FOR ADULTHOOD FUNCTIONING AND WELL‐BEING*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The general aim of this article is to evaluate the consequences of both delinquent behavior and institutionalization as a juvenile delinquent on the quality of adult functioning and well‐being, with a specific focus on gender differences. Data were gathered from two related data sources: a sample of previously institutionalized offenders (n=210) and a sample of individuals living in private households (n=721). Males and females in both samples were interviewed initially in 1982 when they were adolescents and re‐interviewed in their late twenties. Results showed that having been institutionalized as an adolescent seriously compromises multiple life domains in adulthood, especially for females. The data also show that an official delinquent status and a high level of involvement in delinquency during adolescence each has independent consequences for male and female adult functioning and well‐being. Institutionalization is strongly predictive of precarious, premature, unstable, and unsatisfied conditions in multiple life domains but much less predictive of behavioral outcomes. On the other hand, a high level of delinquency involvement in adolescence is predictive of antisocial behavior in adulthood, but it tends to have no direct effects on adversity in other life domains. These results are mostly invariant across gender.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".