MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246382561 · doi:10.3138/cjccj.48.1.31

Male and Female Youth Crime in Canadian Communities: Assessing the Applicability of Social Disorganization Theory

2006· article· en· W4246382561 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Joanna C. Jacob

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProperty crimeCriminologySocial control theoryCensusInformal social controlCultural criminologySociologySocial controlJuvenile delinquencyPsychologySocial psychologyViolent crimeDemographySocial sciencePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite an increasing awareness of female youths' involvement in criminal activities, few criminology theories and empirical studies account for female youth crime. Social disorganization theory provides an ecological explanation of youth crime rates. This theory is traditionally applied to male youth crime and has been studied predominantly using American data. Social disorganization theory contributes to understanding the social conditions associated with increased crime rates, and it is therefore also useful for understanding female crime. This article examines whether and to what degree social disorganization theory is applicable to male and female youth crime in Canadian communities. Several sources of data are integrated for the analysis of overall, property, and violent youth crime by gender, including the 1996 Canadian Census and the 1996 Canadian Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR). The results lend partial support for the application of this theory at the community level in Canada; however, they also suggest that predictors related to the informal social control of youth crime vary more by type of offence than by gender.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.521
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénaleSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207