Characteristics of sexual homicides committed by psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the relationship between psychopathy and the prepetration of sexual homicide was investigated. The official file descriptions of sexual homicides committed by 18 psychopathic and 20 nonpsychopathic Canadian offenders were coded (by coders unaware of Psychopathy Checklist--Revised [PCL--R] scores) for characteristics of the victim, victim/perpetrator relationship, and evidence of gratuitous and sadistic violent behavior. Results indicated that most (84.7%) of the sexual murderers scored in the moderate to high range on the PCL--R. The majority of victims (66.67%) were female strangers, with no apparent influence of psychopathy on victim choice. Homicides committed by psychopathic offenders (using a PCL--R cut-off of 30) contained a significantly higher level of both gratuitous and sadistic violence than nonpsychopathic offenders. Most (82.4%) of the psychopaths exhibited some degree of sadistic behavior in their homicides compared to 52.6% of the nonpsychopaths. Implications for homicide investigations 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".