Developmental Sequela for Sexual Homicide: Testing an Integrated Multi-Theoretical Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research focusing on the role of adverse childhood experience (ACE) of individuals involved in sexual homicide (SH) is scarce. Theoretical models of SH have postulated a connection between these adverse experiences and the development of internal risk factors. However, such assumptions have never been empirically tested. Therefore, the current research aims to identify how ACEs affect the development of personality disorders and problematic behaviors during adolescence, which constitute internal risk factors for the commission of SH. The sample comes from a database including 613 individuals involved in sexual crimes in Canada among which 60 committed a SH. Bivariate and multiple regression analyses were conducted to identify personality disorders and problematic behaviors during adolescence associated with the presence of ACEs. Next, path analysis was used to identify the direct and indirect relationships between ACEs, internal risk factors, and the commission of SH. Results showed that individuals who experienced ACEs were more likely to develop internal risk factors involved in the commission of SH. Moreover, findings suggest that the impact of these adverse experiences will differ, depending on whether the child has been victim of violence or if he/she has witnessed it.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".