MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084182809 · doi:10.1177/0044118x11398365

Expectations, Fears, and Strategies

2011· article· en· W2084182809 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueYouth & Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstruct (python library)PsychologyJuvenile delinquencyRace (biology)Quarter (Canadian coin)JuvenileSocial psychologyCapital (architecture)Work (physics)CriminologySociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current article explores the possible selves, or future expectations, of 543 incarcerated juvenile offenders in four Western states in the United States. We argue that juveniles who are able to articulate future expectations and fears and generate concrete strategies for achieving their goals have higher levels of motivational capital (i.e., resources which provide momentum for behavior) and thus greater readiness for transitioning back into society. We found that a majority of juveniles were able to articulate simple expectations about the future; however, less than a quarter recognized the relationship between hopes and fears and connected them to concrete strategies. Findings did not differ significantly according to race or gender. We point to a need for juvenile corrections to work with all youth to construct plausible reentry plans. Furthermore, we suggest that research is needed to compare postincarceration success of youth with varying levels of motivational capital.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.245 · 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