MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124495799 · doi:10.1177/0093854807301561

Systemic Issues and Correctional Outcomes

2007· article· en· W2124495799 on OpenAlexaff
Carl B. Clements, Richard Althouse, Robert K. Ax, Phillip R. Magaletta, Thomas J. Fagan, J. Stephen Wormith

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnintended consequencesScope (computer science)Criminal justiceWork (physics)Engineering ethicsConfusionPublic relationsHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlEconomic JusticePsychologySociologyPolitical scienceMedicineCriminologyComputer scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professional work in corrections is beset with issues ranging from conflicting justice-system goals, lack of resources, role confusion, ethical dilemmas, and an atmosphere often hostile to empirical research and program evaluation. The authors describe several systemic issues that impact the work of correctional psychologists and their effectiveness. Recognizing the critical need for evidence-based clinical practice, the authors argue, in addition, that the correctional psychologist's mission should be expanded to include macro-level systems issues. These include questions of social responses to crime, unintended consequences of correctional practice, the need for research on institutional policy, and methods for system-wide evaluation of correctional programs and settings. The authors describe the nature and scope of each issue and offer a suggested research agenda.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.086
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.086
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations34
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminal Justice and BehaviorSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207