Psychopathy, Sexual Deviance, and Recidivism Among Sex Offenders
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
The relationships between psychopathy, sex offender type, sexual deviance, and recidivism were examined in 156 federally incarcerated sex offenders in a 10-year follow-up study. The rapists and mixed offenders demonstrated higher psychopathy scores than did the child molesters and incest offenders (total scores and Factor 2 scores on the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised [PCL-R]; R. D. Hare, 2003). Factor 1 scores were approximately the same in all groups. The PCL-R was a weak predictor of sexual recidivism but consistently predicted nonsexual violent recidivism and general recidivism (mainly via Factor 2). Sexual deviance measured by a structured rating scheme predicted sexual recidivism. Sexual deviance, so rated, was a stronger predictor of sexual recidivism than psychopathy but the two interacted significantly suggesting that psychopathy could potentiate sexual recidivism. Although psychopathy was a strong positive predictor of general nonsexual recidivism, sexual deviance was inversely related, and no interaction was observed between psychopathy, sexual deviance, and nonsexual recidivism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it