MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153972369 · doi:10.1177/0093854812455739

A Developmental Taxonomy of Juvenile Sex Offenders for Theory, Research, and Prevention

2012· article· en· W2153972369 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Lussier, Chantal van den Berg, Catrien Bijleveld, J. Hendriks

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySex offenderDevelopmental psychologyJuvenilePsychological interventionPoison controlJuvenile delinquencyHuman factors and ergonomicsInjury preventionSex offenseSuicide preventionClinical psychologySexual abusePsychiatryMedicineMedical emergencyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study investigates the offending trajectories of juvenile sex offenders (JSOs) across and beyond adolescence. In doing so, the study examines the number, the rate, and the shape of nonsexual and sexual offending trajectories in a sample of JSOs followed retrospectively and prospectively from late childhood to adulthood. Using semiparametric group-based modeling, the study reveals the presence of five distinctive nonsexual offending and two sexual offending trajectories: adolescent-limited and high-rate slow desisters. The study does not find strong evidence of synchronicity between nonsexual and sexual trajectories, suggesting that the current taxonomy of antisocial behaviors may offer a limited perspective on sex offender types. Furthermore, sexual trajectories do not differ much across sex offender types, suggesting that the findings might be generalized to child and peer abusers. The study findings offer supporting evidence for the presence of two distinct JSO types with important implications for theory, research, and interventions.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.255
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations87
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminal Justice and BehaviorSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207