MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2306176763 · doi:10.1525/nclr.2016.19.1.42

Engineering Comprehensible Youth Interrogation Rights

2016· article· en· W2306176763 on OpenAlex
Joseph Eastwood, Brent Snook, Kirk Luther, Stuart Freedman

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Criminal Law Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeception detection and forensic psychology
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityToronto Metropolitan UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWaiverInterrogationComprehensionPsychologyComputer securitySocial psychologyPolitical scienceMathematics educationLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although youth in many Western countries have been afforded enhanced legal protections when facing police interrogations, the effectiveness of these protections may be limited by youth’s inability to comprehend them. The ability to increase the comprehension of Canadian interrogation rights among youth through the simplification of waiver forms was assessed. High school students (N = 367) in grades 9, 10, and 11 were presented with one of three waiver forms that varied in level of complexity. Comprehension of the information in the forms was assessed using free recall and multiple-choice questions. Results showed that comprehension levels increased as waiver form complexity decreased and comprehension levels increased as the age of the youth increased. The implications of these findings for the development of comprehensible youth interrogation rights 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0120.007

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.271 · 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