Does Change in Hostility Predict Sexual Recidivism?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to examine whether scores on a widely used measure of hostility--the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI)--and change on this measure predicted sexual recidivism in a sample of 120 adult male incarcerated sexual offenders. Pre- and posttreatment scores, simple difference scores, and clinically significant change were examined. The majority of participants had functional scores on the BDHI prior to treatment. Of those who had dysfunctional pretreatment scores, the majority remained unchanged. Higher posttreatment scores on the Assault and Verbal Hostility subscales significantly predicted sexual recidivism. The remaining pre- and posttreatment scores as well as change scores and classifications did not significantly predict sexual recidivism. Our findings suggest that the Assault and Verbal Hostility subscales may be useful for predicting sexual recidivism but were not clearly consistent with the notion that the BDHI assesses a dynamic risk factor(s) for sexual recidivism. Due to a number of limitations of the current study, however, more rigorous research is needed before firm conclusions can be drawn.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".