Investigating Characteristics of the Nonrecidivating Psychopathic Offender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psychopathic offenders are at higher risk to violently reoffend than nonpsychopathic offenders; however, about one in four psychopathic offenders are not reconvicted for a violent offense even over extended follow-ups. The characteristics of nonrecidivating psychopathic offenders (NRPs) remain underexamined. In a sample of 123 offenders with a minimum Hare Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL-R) score of 25, community follow-up of 5 years, and 4 months in a violence reduction program, 65 men receiving a violent conviction within 5 years (recidivating psychopathic offenders [RPs]) were compared with 58 who had not (NRPs). Comparatively, NRPs were older at release, had better community support, and were rated lower violence risk. NRPs also had significantly lower PCL-R Factor 2 scores, but higher Factor 1 scores. Post hoc analyses revealed prominent NRP characteristics included exploitative personality traits and a predilection for instrumentally violent crimes. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for the risk assessment and treatment of psychopathic offenders.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".