An Examination of the Latent Constructs in Risk Tools for Individuals Who Sexually Offend: Applying Multidimensional Item Response Theory to the Static-2002R
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multidimensional item response theory (MIRT) was used to study the construct validity of the Static-2002R, an actuarial scale for the assessment of reoffending among adult men who sexually offended. Using a sample of 2,569 individuals with a history of sexual crime, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) extracted three factors: Persistence/Paraphilia, General Criminality, and Youthful Stranger Aggression. MIRT confirmed the factor structure identified in the EFA model and provided item-level data on discrimination and difficulty. All Static-2002R items showed moderate to very high discrimination and covered a wide range of risk levels (i.e., difficulty). MIRT analyses attested to the construct validity of the scale, as no items were identified as problematic and the resulting factor structure was consistent with that of earlier studies. Considering the stability of results pertaining to the factor structure of the Static-2002R and the advantages of dimensional scoring, we recommend the integration of dimensional scores in the scale.
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.
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 | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it