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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".