MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144120186 · doi:10.1177/0011128706294438

Differential Cost Avoidance and Successful Criminal Careers

2006· article· en· W2144120186 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lila Kazemian, Marc Le Blanc

Bibliographic record

VenueCrime & Delinquency · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDifferential (mechanical device)Longitudinal studyPsychologySample (material)Social psychologyStatisticsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a sample of adjudicated French Canadian males from the Montreal Two Samples Longitudinal Study, this article investigates individual and social characteristics associated with differential cost avoidance. The main objective of this study is to determine whether such traits are randomly distributed across differential degrees of cost avoidance or whether they reflect some degree of rationality. Differential cost avoidance is a composite measure that includes the ratio of self-reported career length to officially recorded career length, the ratio of self-reported offending gravity to officially recorded gravity, and the ratio of time “free” to periods of incarceration. Findings reveal that it is particularly difficult to predict differential cost avoidance at early ages. The main predictors of the residual degree of differential cost avoidance in the early 30s include substance use (especially drugs), the accumulation of debts, and the use of violence in the perpetration of crime. Implications for desistance research 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations33
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrime & DelinquencySame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207