Assessing the Relationship Between Religiosity and Recidivism Among Adult Probationers in Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although empirical evidence supports a relationship between religiosity and criminal behavior, debate continues about the theoretical mechanisms by which they are related. Moreover, the topic has been largely ignored by practicing clinicians and correctional workers. The Muslim Religiosity-Personality Inventory: Abridged was administered to low-risk Pakistani probationers and factor analyzed, after which probationers' recidivism was monitored. Five oblique factors were obtained, three of which were correlated with recidivism (Religious Practice, Religious-Moral Values, and Fundamental Religious Beliefs), as was the full scale, while two were not (Importance of Religion and Rejection of Nonbeliever). In a logistic regression, Religious-Moral Values and Religious Practices contributed to the prediction of probationer recidivism. However, when demographic characteristics were introduced, education and marital status replaced Religious Practices. This study supports the religiosity-crime link in a non-Western, Muslim culture. Implications for assessing religiosity and for practitioners in the justice system 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".