MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096180358 · doi:10.1177/0093854809349438

General Risk and Need, Gender Specificity, and the Recidivism of Female Offenders

2009· article· en· W2096180358 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.

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

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecidivismPsychologyPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsHarmInjury preventionDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologySocial psychologyMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examined the predictive performance of social cognitive variables derived from a gender-neutral theory of criminal behavior in relation to several variables suggested as relevant by feminist perspectives. Multivariate analyses revealed that eight gender-neutral risk factors—assessed via the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI)—performed very well in the prediction of the general and violent recidivism of more than 400 adult female offenders. None of the gender-specific factors, including parenting responsibility and stress, victimization history, and self-harm, had incremental validity over the gender-neutral risk and need variables. However, financial problems and a measure of personal misfortune did predict reoffending among low-risk/low-need women. The findings suggest that risk factors derived from a gender-neutral social cognitive theory of crime are relevant for adult females and that perhaps gender-specific concerns may be best viewed as specific responsivity factors.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.267 · 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