MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On sexual violence

2006· review· en· W2056344541 on OpenAlexaff
John MW Bradford

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Psychiatry · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySadistic personality disorderSexual violenceCriminologyClinical psychologySocial psychologyPersonalityPersonality disorders

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Sexual violence is a multidimensional concept that is not completely understood even within forensic psychiatry. Violent sexual behaviour such as sexually sadistic homicides would be included within the definition, but it is commonly defined more broadly as any deviant sexual behaviour. In this review, the broadest definition of sexual violence is used in order to facilitate the most comprehensive review of scientific articles in the field. RECENT FINDINGS: This review covers sexual violence from the extreme of sexually motivated homicides to sexual violence in Internet crimes. The review can be divided into four subject areas. The first relates to extreme sexual violence such as sexually motivated homicide, the second area refers to Internet sexual offending, the third relates to studies on the characteristics of the perpetrators of sexual offending behaviour and the fourth relates to risk evaluation and the prevalence of sexual violence. SUMMARY: Significant advances have been made in relation to sexual sadism. Deviant sexual behaviour using the Internet is being studied. Significant research advances continue in understanding clinical characteristics of various types of sexual offenders. Other important areas of research relate to meta-analytical studies of sexual offenders.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.005

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.336 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in PsychiatrySame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207