MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057517328 · doi:10.1177/1073191107303569

Self-Report Measures of Child and Adolescent Psychopathy as Predictors of Offending in Four Samples of Justice-Involved Youth

2007· article· en· W2057517328 on OpenAlexaff
Marcus T. Boccaccini, Monica Epstein, Norman G. Poythress, Kevin S. Douglas, Justin S. Campbell, Gail Gardner, Diana M. Falkenbach

Bibliographic record

VenueAssessment · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychopathyPsychologyJuvenile delinquencyAntisocial personality disorderClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyEconomic JusticeInjury preventionPoison controlSocial psychologyPersonalityMedical emergencyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors examined the relation between self-report psychopathy measures and official records of offending in four samples of justice-involved youth (total N = 447). Psychopathy measures included the Antisocial Process Screening Device (APSD) and a modified version of the Childhood Psychopathy Scale (mCPS). Measures of offending included the total number of preadmission arrest charges for three samples (n = 392) and the total number of offenses in the year following release for two samples (n = 138). Neither measure was a strong correlate of preadmission offenses. Although mCPS scores were associated with postrelease offending in one sample, effects for the APSD were observed only when reoffending was conceptualized as a dichotomous variable, indicating a lack of robustness in this association. The findings suggest caution in the use of self-report measures of psychopathic features for decision making with respect to issues of delinquency risk among justice-involved youth.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations38
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAssessmentSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207