MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115572331 · doi:10.3138/cjccj-2025-0022

Culture as Healing: A Delphi Study on Access to Culture and Justice Involvement for Indigenous Persons

2025· article· en· W7115572331 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNew Caledonia Indigenous Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousRigourCriminal justiceConsistency (knowledge bases)Delphi methodPsychological interventionEconomic JusticeScope (computer science)Subject (documents)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among other factors, Indigenous peoples’ unique cultures must be considered in decisions throughout Canada’s criminal legal system, including bail, sentencing, parole, and corrections. However, several studies have found weak implementation of these obligations in practice. Existing literature speaks to the importance of culture-based interventions for Indigenous persons in many contexts and from many distinct disciplinary perspectives. However, it is unclear where consensus can be found on basic contours of the relationship between access to culture and justice involvement for Indigenous persons. Consensus is an important threshold, as it can support judges and other adjudicative decision-makers considering expertise from outside law without an expert witness. To support greater rigour and consistency in how adjudicative decision-makers in the criminal legal system approach culture-based interventions for Indigenous persons, this study used the Delphi method to determine where consensus could be identified among subject matter experts. The findings outline substantial areas of agreement amongst a group of experts that included both academic and front-line experts. The scope of consensus and the implications of these findings for the consideration of Indigenous cultures in the criminal legal system are discussed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénaleSame topicNew Caledonia Indigenous StudiesFrench-language works237,207