MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085573931 · doi:10.1300/j070v12n03_08

Treatment of Adult Sexual Offenders: A Therapeutic Cognitive-Behavioural Model of Intervention

2003· review· en· W2085573931 on OpenAlex
Pamela M. Yates

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Sexual Abuse · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsShared Services Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnger managementPsychologyAngerCognitionSexual arousalClinical psychologyEmpathyIntervention (counseling)PsychotherapistCognitive therapySexual abuseDevelopmental psychologyPoison controlPsychiatryInjury preventionSexual behaviorMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent research indicates that, of the various forms of treatment available to sexual offenders, cognitive-behavioural methods are likely to have the greatest impact in reducing rates of sexual re-offending. Cognitive-behavioural treatment typically targets attitudes that support sexual offending, anger management, victim empathy, deviant sexual arousal, and relapse prevention. More recently, treatment has targeted cognitive processes more generally, management of other emotional states in addition to anger, intimacy deficits, and risk self-management (Marshall, Anderson, & Fernandez, 1999; Yates, Goguen, Nicholaichuk, Williams, & Long, 2000). This article describes the components of cognitive-behavioural treatment with sexual offenders, including recent developments, assessment, treatment methods, and the importance of therapist characteristics on the therapeutic process and on treatment outcome.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.257 · 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