MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141475376 · doi:10.5663/aps.v1i2.9845

“Hope is Absolute”: Gang-Involved Women - Perceptions from the Frontline

2011· article· en· W2141475376 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jana Grekul, Petrina LaRocque

Bibliographic record

Venueaboriginal policy studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploratory researchPerceptionPsychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsWork (physics)Suicide preventionCriminologySocial psychologyPoison controlSociologyMedicineEngineeringMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Part of a larger ongoing project examining the gendered nature of Aboriginal gangs on the Prairies, this exploratory study focuses on the types of programs and services that have the potential to be effective in facilitating exits for women involved in these gangs. Based on interviews with eighteen frontline professionals and three (formerly) gang-involved women, the paper is informed by research by Giordano et al. (2002), which found that offenders, female and male, often experience environmental catalysts for change that precede their decision to leave the criminal lifestyle. Through interviews with staff who work directly with gang-involved individuals, we begin to explore the gang exit process and the types of programs and services that might capitalize on the readiness of women in particular to leave the gang lifestyle. While there is overlap between supports required to facilitate gang exit for males and females, respondents suggest gendered and racialized pathways into gangs have implications for gang exit processes.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueaboriginal policy studiesSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207