MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148878329 · doi:10.1348/135532502168324

Evolutionary theory and criminal behaviour

2002· article· en· W2148878329 on OpenAlexaff
Vernon L. Quinsey

Bibliographic record

VenueLegal and Criminological Psychology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyKinshipCausationEvolutionary psychologyArgument (complex analysis)Perspective (graphical)Criminal behaviorCoercion (linguistics)CriminologySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyEpistemologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose. To provide an introduction to evolutionary psychology by describing some of its applications in the literature on the psychology of criminal and antisocial behaviour. Argument. Selectionist thinking is applied to five areas: the relationship of age and sex to crime, the inverse correlation between degree of kinship and homicide, paedophilia, persistent antisociality, and sexual coercion. In each of these areas, ultimate causes of behaviour are distinguished from proximal causes. Ultimate causes are produced by selective forces in ancestral environments and are responsible for species typical characteristics. Proximal causes, in contrast, are contemporaneous developmental, genetic, and environmental determinants of behaviour. Conclusions. The interplay between ultimate and proximal causation provides new ways of understanding old problems and is a fruitful source of research hypotheses. Evolutionary psychology can provide a powerful integrative perspective on criminal and antisocial behaviour.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations54
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLegal and Criminological PsychologySame topicEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorFrench-language works237,207