MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114527169 · doi:10.7202/017407ar

Expérience communautaire pour les hommes pédophiles

2005· article· en· W2114527169 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marc Daigle

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpathyOpenness to experiencePsychologyPedophiliaFacilitatorGatekeepingnobodySocial psychologyNoveltyTriangulationPsychotherapistApplied psychologyMedicineComputer sciencePoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evaluation of the self-help program "Le groupe d'entraide Amorce" for pedophilic men showed they were progressing regarding certain pedophilic characteristics, particularly with respect to a better integration of their adult sexuality. However, nobody in this program claimed to be "treating" pedophilia directly. In fact, all of them relied upon the sharing and supporting dynamics of a self-help group to face other related problems and to reach the preliminary but necessary steps for deeper changes. The beneficial effect of the program was felt regarding mainly stopping withdrawal, changing attitudes, increasing empathy, motivating for change, improving communication skills, discharging emotions, clarifying immediate problems, repositionning as adults, supporting when depressed or decreasing anxiety. The triangulation of the points of view of facilitators, external parties, and participants did confirm these results both regarding pedophilia and other problems. Beyond these effects, the evaluation showed that the main strengths of the program were: the support and sharing of experiences between participants ; the motivation and availability of those involved ; the openness to external critics, novelty, uniqueness, pro-gressiveness, communal, non-medical, and preventive approach of pedophilia ; and the respect for and "responsibilisation" of the participants. Some aspects of the program also needed to be improved and specific recommendations were provided to the administrators.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.371
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.060 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminologieSame topicSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesFrench-language works237,207