MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313306070 · doi:10.35502/jcswb.243

Exploring the genesis and praxis of restorative justice in Nova Scotia, Canada

2022· article· en· W4313306070 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Muhammad Asadullah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Safety and Well-Being · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersSimon Fraser UniversityDalhousie University
KeywordsNova scotiaGovernment (linguistics)PraxisRestorative justicePolitical scienceNova (rocket)Economic JusticeCriminologySociologyPsychologyLawEthnologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nova Scotia has seen the most systematic growth of restorative justice (RJ) in Canada. Initially moving from a pilot RJ phase to province-wide implementation for young offenders, a similar model was used to implement RJ for adult offenders. Nova Scotia has received national and international attention for its innovations in RJ. Extensive articles and reports have been published about the RJ movement in Nova Scotia, focusing mainly on the impact of RJ practices. Few peer-reviewed journal articles document the factors that contributed to the actual growth of RJ in Nova Scotia. To address this research gap, this study employed 8 in-depth key informant interviews and a survey. Two distinct stages—Catalytic and Innovative—emerged as salient factors shaping the growth of RJ in Nova Scotia. This study also reveals contemporary discourses and issues prevalent among RJ visionaries and practitioners in Nova Scotia, such as relational theory of justice, the moratorium against the use RJ for gender-based violence, and the role of government. This research offers a comprehensive debate on the concept of a moratorium against gender-based violence and the role of government. The paper concludes by addressing limitations and areas for future research.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community Safety and Well-BeingSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207