The characteristics of the child dragged into crime among university students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Getting involved in crime in children is classified as a risk-taking behaviour. Risk-taking behaviour is defined as a behaviour that creates proportionately the possibility of undesirable consequences. According to many studies, risk-taking behaviour and crime statistics reaches a peak during late adolescence and early adulthood. In our study, we aimed to search the prevalence of the crime behaviour and related factors in young adults dragged into the crime but somehow managed to receive university education. Method: 706 university students from 1st and 4th grades were involved into this study. Results: 15.3% of the participants state that they have committed a crime at least once; moreover, male gender is more frequently observed in children who are dragged into crime. The probability of being abused (physical-emotional-negligence) and self-harming behaviour are more common in children dragged into the crime. Conclusions: The reason why most of the children dragged into crime are male; thus can be explained such factors as taking part of males ones in work and social life more, controlling and protection of females' spending time out of home. The frequency of getting involved into crime by those evaluating their income as inadequate is higher than the other group. Children living in a poor family, environment and privation may cause children to lead criminal and problematic behaviours. Self-harming behaviour is more common in children dragged into crime. Self-harming behaviour in lower-income people and in certain social groups has been observed more commonly; furthermore, it may be thought that what children dragged into crime live is related to the social environment and the levels of their income. As a result, it was found that children dragged into crime are the ones who are often males, belonging to the lower income group, having frequently self-harming behaviour; moreover, they are the children whose families have criminal past and they are the children who experience abuse more frequently. Child abuse, child neglecting and self-harming behaviour should be searched in all children who dragged into the crime.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".