MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143933647 · doi:10.1177/0093854810373587

Factors Affecting Juror Decisions in Historic Child Sexual Abuse Cases Involving Continuous Memories

2010· article· en· W2143933647 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJury Decision Making Processes
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVerdictPsychologySexual abuseSentenceSocial psychologySuicide preventionPoison controlMedicineLawMedical emergencyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study investigated how jurors perceived historic child sexual abuse (HCSA) cases involving continuous rather than repressed memories of the abuse. Mock jurors ( N = 295) read a simulated trial transcript involving a case of HCSA that varied the length of delay between the end of the alleged abuse and time of reporting (2 vs. 15 vs. 30 years), relationship to the alleged victim (uncle vs. former coach), and abuse frequency (1 vs. 12 times). The effects of these variables on mock jurors’ decisions were investigated. The shorter delay led to significantly higher guilt ratings and lengthier sentence recommendations compared with longer delays. Mock jurors assigned higher guilt ratings when the defendant was the uncle rather than the coach but only when the abuse was perpetrated once rather than 12 times. Mock jurors were more confident in their verdict decisions when the defendant was the uncle rather than the coach and when the abuse occurred 12 times rather than once.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.280 · 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