MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Justice System Needs to Improve Response to Those With Asperger’s

2012· article· en· W2066100234 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aaron Levin

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric News · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic JusticePsychologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Legal NewsFull AccessJustice System Needs to Improve Response to Those With Asperger'sAaron LevinAaron LevinPublished Online:7 Dec 2012https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.47.23.psychnews_47_23_14-bAbstractThe criminal-justice system often has a hard time understanding defendants with Asperger's syndrome because of the nature of their verbal and psychiatric symptoms, according to Madelon Baranoski, Ph.D., M.S.N., an associate professor of psychiatry at Yale University School of Medicine."There is a disparity between their verbal capacity and their practical behavior," Baranoski said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law in Montreal in October. "They don't get idioms or context and this 'odd-yet-normal' presentation is seen by the court as arrogant and defiant."Forensic psychiatrists, judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys need to be aware of and sensitive to symptoms of Asperger's syndrome.Aaron LevinWhile they are not "intellectually disabled" in the usual sense, their high cognitive abilities are hard to square with their social deficits, said Alexander Westphal, M.D., a fellow in the Department of Law and Forensics at Yale.Intense but circumscribed interests can get them into trouble, said Westphal, recounting the case of a patient who stole a train, not for material gain but because he was obsessed with transportation."However, we know very little about the intersection of autism and forensics," said Westphal. He searched and came up with just 55 articles on the combined subject—and only 15 were research reports."Be careful of case reports, especially if the authors haven't met the subject," he cautioned.Many low-level charges might be resolved at arraignment, Baranoski said, but an obsessive focus on vocabulary coupled with mood lability and a vulnerability to anxiety, depression, and paranoia can often mean trouble if judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys are unaware of Asperger's manifestations.A first step for the forensic psychiatrist in such cases is diagnostic clarity, Baranoski said."Psychosis and autism are often confused," she explained. If the diagnosis is incorrect, and the treatment doesn't produce the expected response, the clinician may decide the patient is faking. "But in psychosis, the syntax is disturbed," she pointed out. "When you do neuropsychiatric testing for Asperger's or autism, what you never see is a disorder in syntax, as you might see in psychosis. If you can parse that out, you can define an entity that has its own trajectory and its own course of treatment."If the forensic psychiatrist can induce more understanding by courtroom participants (including the defendant) of the frequent manifestations of Asperger's and other autism spectrum disorders, it might lead to disposition at lower levels of charges and better outcomes for the patient/defendant, she said.Once inside the criminal-justice system, though, people with Asperger's are essentially set up for being misunderstood, said another panelist, Kenneth Weiss, M.D., a clinical associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania."Because they have odd mannerisms and speech and are not attuned to others, they become magnets for suspicion," said Weiss.They often cannot foresee the consequences of their actions and appear to lack concern for outcomes. To other individuals, they seem to shift quickly from boring to fear-inducing, especially in instances in which they physically push others away in order to preserve their personal space. This can lead to perceived law-breaking in the community but also to victimization, injury, or extended sentences in jail. ISSUES NewArchived

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0110.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1840.035

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric NewsSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207