MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320884913 · doi:10.24043/isj.412

1 Victims navigating justice in island communities: An exploration of victims’ experiences of the criminal justice system and quality of justice services provided in Trinidad and Tobago

2023· article· en· W4320884913 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Leah L. Cleghorn

Bibliographic record

VenueIsland Studies Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Illicit Activities, and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic JusticeSolidarityCriminal justiceNegotiationInterpersonal communicationCriminologyRestorative justiceNarrativeFeelingSociologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsPsychologySocial psychologyLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The criminal justice system in Trinidad and Tobago, like other Anglophone Caribbean islands, is a remnant of its colonial past. While there have been some reforms to improve the quality and type of police and justice services provided, the issues justice users encounter in their access and engagement remain underexplored. Using interview data from direct and indirect victims, this paper explores the complexities of victims’ experiences and their implications on the quality and type of police and justice services provided. Victims’ narratives expressed varied experiences in interpersonal treatment, information services, input and engagement, and effectiveness and efficiency of the process. Many were required to navigate interpersonal, structural, and systemic barriers which led to institutionalized secondary victimization, as well as feelings of silencing and inequality. The findings suggest that victims’ experiences were influenced by the legacies of colonialism which continue to persist in island communities. Such as, imbalances in power, behaviours within institutions that promote solidarity networks, negotiation, informal systems, and processes. The narratives of victims intimate that there is a need for change and the adoption of an approach that not only improves the quality of justice services provided but empowers victims through the process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0170.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIsland Studies JournalSame topicCrime, Illicit Activities, and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207