Women Convicted of Promoting Prostitution of a Minor Are Different From Women Convicted of Traditional Sexual Offenses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some jurisdictions have legally decreed that certain nonsexual offenses (e.g., promoting prostitution of a minor, arson, burglary) can be considered sexual offenses. Offenders convicted of these crimes can be subjected to sexual offender-specific social control policies such as registration, as well as be included in sexual offender research such as recidivism studies. No studies, however, have systematically examined differences and similarities between this new class of sexual offenders and more traditional sexual offenders. The current study used a sample of 94 women convicted of sexual offenses to investigate whether women convicted of promoting prostitution of a minor differed on demographic and criminogenic features from those convicted of more traditional sexual offenses. Results show that women convicted of promoting prostitution offenses have criminal histories more consistent with general criminality and exhibit more general antisocial features than women convicted of traditional sexual offenses. These results support the notion that the inclusion of legally defined sexual offenders with traditional ones obscures important differences in criminogenic features among these women.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".