Perceptions of personal safety in custody among a sample of serious and violent incarcerated young offenders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The new Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) (2003) contains the controversial sentencing option allowing young offenders convicted of certain serious and/or violent offences to receive adult length sentences.Critics of the YCJA, and specifically this sentencing option, argued that the impact of prison on young offenders was invariably negative and that society was neither protected, nor were incarcerated serious and violent offenders effectively deterred by longer sentences.Also, there is considerable research indicating that prisons are inherently violent institutions that cause fear among the most vulnerable incarcerated youth.The two predominant explanations for the high level of prison violence are the Importation model and the Deprivation model.The importation literature contends that prison violence is the result of the individual characteristics that offenders bring with them into the prison system.Conversely, the Deprivation model argues that it is the structure and nature of prisons that causes custody facilities to be violent.Utilizing a sample of 200 incarcerated serious and violent young offenders in Vancouver, B.C., this thesis examines the extent to which youth felt safe while in custody.In addition, a number of independent variables were assessed including age, gender, Aboriginal identity, offender classification, length of time spent in custody, being the victim of physical abuse, hard drug use, perceived levels of institutional violence, and level of custody to analyse their impact on youth's feelings of safety.Using a four stage multiple regression model indicated
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".