MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387956106 · doi:10.46692/9781529228519.005

Sports and Tertiary Crime Prevention: Desistance from Crime

2022· other· en· W4387956106 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDoping in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversity of the Fraser Valley
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminologyCrime preventionPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the tertiary level of crime prevention, the goal of interventions is to prevent recidivism or support desistance from crime. In that context, sport-based programmes either in the community or in a correctional setting are sometimes proposed as a means to contribute to the rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders. However, there are still very few such programmes for young offenders, whether in the community or in institutions. For instance, there was not a single sport-based programme for convicted young offenders among those we reviewed in British Columbia. Despite the fact that sport-based programmes targeting known young offenders remain a rarity and that their crime prevention outcomes have never been properly evaluated, these programmes have nevertheless been declared ‘promising’ (Meek, 2020). Without necessarily disputing that premature conclusion, it is important to realize that the promise in question remains largely theoretical. Some preliminary research has attempted to link sport-based interventions and offenders’ desistance from crime. However, at this point, the effectiveness of rehabilitation efforts through sport remains uncertain (Meek, 2012, 2014, 2018; Meek, Champion, and Klier, 2012; Lewis and Meek, 2012; Gallant, Sherry, and Nicholson, 2015; Meek and Lewis, 2014a, 2014b; Parker, Meek, and Lewis, 2014; Sempé, 2018; Psychou et al, 2019). There are still many unanswered questions around whether these sport-based crime prevention programmes (whether administered in the system or in the community) can aid in desistance from crime and how this process works. Supporting desistance It is important to understand the process of change that tertiary crime prevention programmes are trying to support. That process is perhaps best described as ‘desistance from crime’. The importance of understanding that process is well recognized within criminal career research which tries to account for the onset of, maintenance of, and desistance from criminal behaviour. However, despite its importance to the criminal career paradigm, desistance is relatively understudied in criminology (Lussier, McCuish, and Corrado, 2015). Several desistance studies are relevant to the topic of sports and crime prevention. The best-known among them was Laub and Sampson's (2003) ground-breaking multiple-wave longitudinal study on 500 male delinquents from Boston. The study was based on an impressive dataset that stretched over 40 years, with interviews conducted at various points throughout many of the offenders’ lives.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2440.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDoping in SportsFrench-language works237,207