Adolescent rights comprehension: The influence of age, intelligence, and interrogative suggestibility
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it