The social and economic impact of the Montreal Longitudinal and Experimental Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of early prevention programmes and their viability as a public policy option have increasingly caught the attention of scholars and policymakers. Given the implementation costs of such programmes, it is important to assess whether they achieved anticipated objectives and whether they made efficient use of taxpayer money. AIM: To discuss the social and economic impact of a 2-year randomised intervention aimed to improve social skills and self-control (i.e., non-cognitive skills) among disruptive boys from low-income neighbourhoods in Montreal. METHOD: We review findings from published studies documenting the impact of the intervention at different stages of the life course, as well as its cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit. RESULTS: The intervention improved behavioural indicators throughout adolescence and eventually led to greater high school graduation rates, reduced crime, and better labour market outcomes in adulthood. Importantly, the prevention programme generated considerable returns to taxpayer investments. CONCLUSION: Findings from the Montreal Longitudinal Experimental Study have been well-received and have contributed to an early prevention 'awakening' in Quebec and elsewhere.
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 | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".