MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4383559505 · doi:10.36939/ir.202307071115

Incarceration and Re-entry for Provincial Prisoners: Is there Hope?

2023· dissertation· en· W4383559505 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kelsie N. Zerebeski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingImprisonmentPrisonQualitative researchPsychologyEconomic JusticeCriminologySocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis explores the impacts of hope on the experience of incarceration and re-entry into the community and how ex-prisoners make sense of and foster hope in their lives. This research was conducted through qualitative interviews with nine participants in the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada. Qualitative interviews discerned four main themes emerging: the overall experience of provincial incarceration and the positive and negative aspects of that experience, the process of re-entry and the barriers that ex-prisoners face in that process, the motivations to change and begin desisting from crime and finally, the way in which ex-prisoners feelings of hope impacted their experiences throughout this process. Amongst the key findings is, the participants who lacked the feeling of hope during their imprisonment generally felt more disoriented during their re-entry in the community. Next, although prisons are painful and negative spaces, they can also offer an opportunity for reinvention (Crewe and Ievins, 2020). As such, many of the participants in this research found various ways to “reinvent” themselves post-imprisonment. In alignment with procedural justice literature, this research found that when prisoners had positive interactions with correctional officers, it profoundly impacted their feelings of hope. As such, the participants who had procedurally just interactions described feeling more hopeful in their prison sentence and later re-entry into the community. This research also found that although these ex- prisoners had shorter sentences, they still felt various strains in their process of re-entry. The most predominant way that the participants navigated their re-entry into the community and further desistance from crime was by distancing or “knifing off” old peers (Laub & Sampson, 2001). Despite having difficulty interpreting hope, after thought and reflection, each participant made sense of the term by attributing it to a more positive future.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis→French-language works237,207→