MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382010862 · doi:10.1037/per0000623

Examining the economic costs of crime associated with psychopathic personality disorder: A reply to Verona and Joyner (2022).

2023· letter· en· W4382010862 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dylan T. Gatner, Kevin S. Douglas, Madison F. E. Almond, Stephen D. Hart, P. Randall Kropp

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality Disorders Theory Research and Treatment · 2023
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationPsycINFOAntisocial personality disorderPsychologyEconomic costIndirect costsPersonalityPsychiatryCriminologyPoison controlPolitical scienceSocial psychologyInjury preventionMedicineMEDLINEEnvironmental healthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In our article, "How much does that cost? Examining the economic costs of crime in North America attributable to people with psychopathic personality disorder" (Gatner et al., 2023, pp. 391-400), we estimated that psychopathic personality disorder (PPD) was associated with substantial crime costs, using a top-down approach of national costs in the United States and Canada. Verona and Joyner (2023) raised several concerns about our findings. Although we think some of their points help to map directions for future research, we disagree with others they raised related to the conceptualization of PPD, the problem of undetected crimes, and their concerns with putative national comparisons. We strongly welcome debate about the societal impacts of PPD in the hope that it spurs increased attention and innovation regarding the treatment and management of PPD. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0380.044
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality Disorders Theory Research and TreatmentSame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207