Adolescent rights comprehension: The influence of age, intelligence, and interrogative suggestibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research demonstrates that many adolescents show poor comprehension of their legal arrest rights.This finding is concerning given recent trends towards the increased availability of severe punishments for youths convicted of serious crimes.This study investigates the relationship between age, intellectual ability, interrogative suggestibility and arrest rights comprehension in a Canadian sample of 94 adolescents 12 to 19 years of age.Participants completed the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence, Grisso's Instruments for Assessing Understanding and Appreciation of Mirundu Rights, and the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales.Results showed that age and IQ significantly and independently predicted rights comprehension.Younger adolescents did not understand their rights as well as older adolescents, and youths with lower intellectual ability levels also demonstrated more impaired comprehension of their rights.Interrogative suggestibility was inversely related to rights comprehension, and this relationship was mediated by IQ, but not moderated by age.The implications of these findings are discussed.First and foremost, I would like to acknowledge my supervisor, Dr. Ronald Roesch, for his support, guidance, and mentorship.His belief in my ability to succeed bolstered my own (sometimes fleeting) self-confidence and gave me the courage to tackle such a demanding project.I would also like to thank Dr. Kevin Douglas for his strong calming presence, for being available whenever needed, and for his assistance in simplifying seemingly complex statistical riddles.Thank you to all of my peers for trying to help me answer challenging questions, and for showing me the way through this program.I am indebted to the staff at Newmarket, Burnaby, and Coquitlam youth centres, who graciously facilitated my data collection and to the study participants who gave their time and trust.Thanks to my research assistants, especially Melissa, for taking on this commitment.I would like to thank my parents for
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".