Research on the Processes Involved in Treating Sexual Offenders
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article summarizes preliminary findings from a series of pilot studies on the processes involved in treating sexual offenders. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used on samples of 15 to 24 child molesters undergoing a prison-based cognitive-behavioral and relapse prevention treatment program. Results are presented and discussed in the form of 5 questions: (1) Are therapists just "technicians"? The offenders' point of view (2) Does confronting the therapist mean treatment resistance? (3) Are the therapists perceived as therapists, parents, or a bit of both? (4) Is the structure of the program important? The offenders' point of view and (5) Is a sense of mastery important in a prison setting? It is suggested that researchers investigate the processes underlying the treatment of offenders, especially the common factors which have been shown to have an effect on therapeutic outcome.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it