Outcomes and Recidivism in Mandated Batterer Intervention Before and After Introducing a Specialized Domestic Violence Court
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both specialized domestic violence (DV) courts and batterer intervention programs were developed to more adequately address intimate partner abuse and recidivism; however, little research has studied them concurrently. The current research examined clinical outcomes and police-reported recidivism in 382 men mandated to attend the Calgary Counselling Centre's Responsible Choices for Men's (RCM) groups between 1998 and 2009, before and after a specialized DV court was established in 2001. The study examines associations between categorical demographic and criminal justice variables, most of which were not correlated with post-group recidivism. Before the specialized court was implemented, 45 RCM members reported significantly more clinical issues at pretest than the 282 RCM members after court implementation (all scores adjusted by social desirability), although the effect sizes were negligible. Regarding group outcomes, depression, anxiety, and self-esteem (adjusted for social desirability) significantly improved on average for all RCM members irrespective of court implementation. Before the specialized DV court was developed, recidivism occurred after RCM program completion for a large proportion of men (41.2%), compared with only 8.2% after court implementation, a significant difference with a moderate effect size. The recidivism results are interpreted in the context of the significant justice and community collaborations entailed in creating the specialized DV court.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".