Predictive and Convergent Validity of the Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument in a Sample of Male and Female Justice-Involved Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sufficient evidence exists that gender should and does matter in offender management. This study examined the predictive validity of risk and strength factors extracted from the Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument (YASI) and the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) in a sample of 254 justice-involved youth (148 males, 106 females) from Ontario, Canada. Overall, total risk scores from both measures predicted recidivism (area under receiver operator characteristic curve [AUCs] = .62-.70). Domain-level analyses illustrated that criminal attitudes and associates (scored as risks or protective/strengths) were among the strongest predictors of recidivism in both genders. The YASI demonstrated strong convergent validity with the YLS/CMI. The results support the YASI and the YLS/CMI as viable risk assessment measures for justice-involved male and female youth. Given that the YASI includes both gender neutral and gender responsive items, it may be a particularly good choice for use with justice-involved females.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".