MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611368744 · doi:10.1080/10538712.2017.1283651

The Effect of Case Severity on Sentence Length in Cases of Child Sexual Assault in Canada

2017· article· en· W2611368744 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Patricia I. Coburn, Kristin Chong, Deborah A. Connolly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Sexual Abuse · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsOntario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental HealthSimon Fraser University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIntrusivenessSentencePsychologyPlaintiffContext (archaeology)Child sexual abuseHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlSexual abuseClinical psychologyPsychiatryDevelopmental psychologyMedicineMedical emergencyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surprisingly, little research exists on the determination of sentence length in cases of child sexual assault. This is striking given the profound short-term and long-term consequences this crime can have on victims and their families. Previous research shows that severity of the offense commonly accounts for much of the variability in sentences in this context. A critical point, however, is that the definition of offense severity varies widely and is often confounded with the age of the complainant. The current archival study, through the examination of 1,783 judicial sentencing decisions, evaluated the effects of key variables on length of sentence in cases of child sexual assault in Canada. Length of sentence increased as intrusiveness of the offense increased, as frequency increased, and as age decreased for children who experienced the most intrusive forms of abuse. In addition, offenders who pleaded guilty received shorter sentences than offenders who pleaded not guilty.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child Sexual AbuseSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207