Psychopathology of Youth in Custody and Detention: The impact of socialization of emotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study profiled the mental health needs of youth incarcerated in southern Ontario. The objectives were three-fold. 1) To demonstrate that incarcerated youth endorsed more externalizing than internalizing difficulties on a self-report measure of psychopathology. 2) To demonstrate that incarcerated youth had cognitive vulnerabilities consistent with anxiety and depression, despite their general lack of overt endorsement of internalizing symptoms. 3) To demonstrate that socialization practices in the home and community predicted the endorsement of psychopathology, and to provide a possible explanation for this relationship by considering alexithymia as a mediating variable. The Adolescent Psychopathology Scale – Short Form, Mill Hill Vocabulary Scale, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Family Expressiveness Questionnaire, Street Codes Questionnaire, Cultural Mistrust Inventory, and a Dot Probe task were administered to 91 adolescents incarcerated in Southern Ontario. Results indicated that incarcerated youth endorsed significantly greater externalizing than internalizing symptoms. Youth demonstrated significant attentional biases toward threatening, but not depressive faces. Negative dominant socialization practices in the home predicted the endorsement of both externalizing and internalizing symptoms, and there was partial support for alexithymia mediating these relationships. Youth who embraced community practices that socialized violence endorsed externalizing but not internalizing difficulties. These results challenge clinicians to consider the internalizing difficulties of incarcerated youth more carefully during assessment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".