MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398180514 · doi:10.1002/car.2875

‘Then I Met This Lovely Police Woman’ Young People's Experiences of Engagement with the Criminal Justice System

2024· article· en· W4398180514 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rosaleen McElvaney, Delphine Collin‐Vézina, Ramona Alaggia, Megan Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Abuse Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of TorontoMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCriminal justiceEconomic JusticeCriminologyPsychologySociologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Young people's voices detailing how they experienced engagement with the criminal justice system following child sexual abuse, what was helpful or unhelpful and how services can be improved to minimise secondary victimisation and maximise the potential for healing are largely absent from the research literature. This paper draws on semi‐structured interviews with a culturally diverse sample (n = 47) of young people aged 14 to 25 across Ireland and Canada about their experiences of disclosure and engagement with systems. Data were collected pertaining to experiences engaging with law enforcement personnel using thematic analysis with a trauma‐informed lens. The research identified three key themes: the importance of feeling safe through kindness, transparency and being believed; the importance of having a say; and the importance of timely court processes. The study builds on the small body of qualitative research illustrating young people's lived experiences of engaging with the criminal justice system and provides empirical support for promoting a trauma‐informed approach in how police engage with young people. Guidance is offered for police professionals on how to engage with adolescents following sexual abuse.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Abuse ReviewSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207