MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102805370 · doi:10.1177/0093854802029004004

Is the PCL-R Really the “Unparalleled” Measure of Offender Risk?

2002· article· en· W2102805370 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 · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecidivismPsychopathyPsychologyAssertionMeasure (data warehouse)Poison controlRisk assessmentHuman factors and ergonomicsPsychopathy ChecklistRisk measureSocial psychologyInjury preventionActuarial scienceAntisocial personality disorderCriminologyComputer securityPersonalityComputer scienceMedicineMedical emergencyBusinessData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The declaration that the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL-R) is the “unparalleled” measure of offender risk prediction is challenged. It is argued that such an assertion reflects an ethnocentric view of research in the area and has led to unsubstantiated claims based on incomplete attempts at knowledge cumulation. In fact, another more comprehensive risk measure, the Level of Service Inventory–Revised, notably surpasses the PCL-R in predicting general (φ = .37 vs. .23) and violent recidivism, albeit only modestly so in the case of the latter (φ = .26 vs. .21). In addition, other problematic issues regarding the PCL-R are outlined. Finally, it is suggested that a more useful role for psychopathy in offender risk assessment may be in terms of the responsivity dimension in case management. Finally, the authors suggest further research directions that will aid in knowledge cumulation regarding the general utility of offender risk measures.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.239 · 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