Moral Reasoning, Interpersonal Skills, and Cognition of Rapists, Child Molesters, and Incest Offenders
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
54 inmates were subdivided into four groups and classified according to their index offense. The groups included Rapists (n = 14), Incest Offenders (n = 9), Child Molesters (n = 11), General Offenders (n = 20). Nonoffenders (n = 20) were included as a control group. Psychometric tests including the Test of Nonverbal Intelligence, the Defining Issues Test, Survey of Interpersonal Values, Porteus Maze, and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory were administered to all inmate and control groups. Analysis showed the rapists and child molesters scored higher on moral reasoning on the Defining Issues Test; also rapists' scores were more elevated on the Psychopathic Deviate and Paranoia scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory than those of other offender and control groups. These results imply that rapists and child molesters have the ability to understand moral issues; however, given their personality orientation, they ignore these interpersonal social values.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it