IRT-Based Differential Item Functioning Analysis of the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory Across Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Even though risk assessments are routinely conducted in the criminal justice system to inform sentencing and case management, their cross-cultural applicability remains contested. This study investigated the generalizability of the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI), a widely implemented youth forensic risk assessment instrument, using an Item Response Theory framework, in a sample of Indigenous ( n = 205) and non-Indigenous ( n = 193) youth. Differential item functioning analyses demonstrated similar discrimination across groups. However, despite similar latent risk levels, non-Indigenous youth were more likely to have items from the Education domain endorsed, while Indigenous youth were more likely to have items from the Substance Abuse domain endorsed. Predictive accuracy analyses indicated that total YLS/CMI scores significantly predicted general recidivism (without administration of justice convictions) for non-Indigenous youth, but not for Indigenous youth. There is an urgent need for more research investigating the applicability of the YLS/CMI to diverse groups of Indigenous youth.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".