Des pensées criminelles et des traits de personnalité de fraudeurs incarcérés, sous lâangle de la psychopathie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’élaboration de programme d’interventions propres aux fraudeurs soulève la question de la particularité de leur personnalité. Des écrits suggèrent que la personnalité des fraudeurs présenterait des similitudes avec les traits psychopathiques. L’objectif de l’étude est donc de décrire et d’explorer ces traits chez des fraudeurs spécialisés incarcérés, et ce, à l’aide des questionnaires Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) et Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (PICTS). Trois groupes de détenus (35 hommes, 17 femmes) ont rempli les questionnaires: fraudeurs spécialisés (n=23), autres délinquants sans crimes violents (ASV, n=19) et autres délinquants avec crimes violents (AAV, n=10). Un groupe d’étudiants (n=430) a aussi complété le PPI, permettant ainsi d’ajouter un groupe de comparaison. Les analyses ont permis de constater que le groupe de fraudeurs diffère peu des autres groupes quant à leurs traits psychopathiques. Cependant, ils sont moins enclins que le groupe d’AAV à adopter des pensées criminelles, fréquentes chez les psychopathes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".