MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116983854 · doi:10.1037/a0020044

The Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version and adolescent and adult recidivism: Considerations with respect to gender, ethnicity, and age.

2010· article· en· W2116983854 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keira C. Stockdale, Mark E. Olver, Stephen C. P. Wong

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Assessment · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecidivismPsychopathy ChecklistPsychologyPsychopathyChecklistEthnic groupIncremental validityJuvenile delinquencyClinical psychologyPoison controlAntisocial personality disorderDemographyInjury preventionPsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyPersonalityTest validitySocial psychologyMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study investigated the predictive accuracy of the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL: YV; A. E. Forth, D. S. Kosson, & R. D. Hare, 2003) for youth and adult recidivism, with respect to gender, ethnicity, and age, in a sample of 161 Canadian young offenders who received psychological services from an outpatient mental health facility. The PCL: YV significantly predicted any general, nonviolent, and violent recidivism in the aggregate sample over a 7-year follow-up; however, when results were disaggregated by youth and adult outcomes, the PCL: YV consistently appeared to be a stronger predictor of youth recidivism. The PCL: YV predicted youth recidivism for subsamples of female and Aboriginal youths, and very few differences in the predictive accuracy of the tool were observed for younger vs. older adolescent groups. Both the 13-item (i.e., D. J. Cooke & C. Michie, 2001, 3-factor) and the 20-item (i.e., R. D. Hare, 2003, 4-factor) models appeared to predict various recidivism criteria comparably across the aggregate sample and within specific demographic subgroups (e.g., female and Aboriginal youth). The Antisocial facet contributed the most variance in the prediction of adult outcomes, whereas the 3-factor model contributed significant incremental variance in the prediction of youth recidivism outcomes. Potential implications concerning the use of the PCL: YV in clinical and forensic assessment contexts are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.592

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations69
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological AssessmentSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207