MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169129816 · doi:10.3138/cjccj.50.4.399

Street Youth, Unemployment, and Crime: Is It That Simple? Using General Strain Theory to Untangle the Relationship

2008· article· en· W2169129816 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Stephen W. Baron

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnemploymentCasualAttributionAngerPunishment (psychology)PsychologySocial psychologyYouth unemploymentCriminologyEconomicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers have called for greater attention to be paid to the variables linking unemployment to crime. In particular, it has been suggested that people's interpretation of their labour market situation plays a large role in shaping their responses to it. Utilizing general strain theory, this research examines the role that unemployment plays in the criminal behaviour of 400 homeless street youths. Of particular interest is the way that these youths interpret their labour market experiences and how together these interpretations and experiences influence criminal behaviour. Findings reveal that the effect of unemployment on crime is mediated and moderated primarily by other variables. In particular, unemployment is conditioned by external casual attributions that lead to anger over unemployment, which in turn leads to crime. The direct effect of unemployment on crime is moderated by monetary dissatisfaction and minimal employment searches. Anger over unemployment is also the result of negative subjective interpretations of economic situations and a continued attachment to the labour market. In addition, these negative subjective perceptions, the lack of state support, a decrease in social control, and prolonged homelessness lead to greater participation in criminal activities directly. Criminal involvement is also encouraged by peers, deviant values, and a lack of fear of punishment. Findings are discussed and suggestions for future research are offered.

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)0.004
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.342
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.047 · 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

Citations94
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénaleSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207