搜索结果：American journal of criminal justice : AJCJ

Rankings of scholarly journals based on citation data are often met with skepticism by the scientific community. Part of the skepticism is due to disparity between the common perception of journals' prestige and their ranking based on citation counts. A more serious concern is the inappropriate use of journal rankings to evaluate the scientific influence of authors. This paper focuses on analysis of the table of cross-citations among a selection of Statistics journals. Data are collected from the Web of Science database published by Thomson Reuters. Our results suggest that modelling the exchange of citations between journals is useful to highlight the most prestigious journals, but also that journal citation data are characterized by considerable heterogeneity, which needs to be properly summarized. Inferential conclusions require care in order to avoid potential over-interpretation of insignificant differences between journal ratings. Comparison with published ratings of institutions from the UK's Research Assessment Exercise shows strong correlation at aggregate level between assessed research quality and journal citation `export scores' within the discipline of Statistics.

A dominant critique of algorithmic fairness holds that increasing fairness reduces predictive accuracy, imposing a cost on society. We challenge that assumption by empirically analyzing the COMPAS dataset. We make two contributions. First, using causal inference methods, we show that racial bias is not only present in the COMPAS dataset but is also amplified by the models trained on it. Widely used models do more than replicate existing bias; they exacerbate it. This undercuts both the assumption that algorithmic decision-making offers a neutral improvement over human judgment and the weaker claim that it merely mirrors preexisting human bias. Second, we reframe the fairness-accuracy tradeoff. Applying fairness constraints does not necessarily cost predictive accuracy in criminal justice. Prediction systems operationalize concepts such as risk through implicit and often flawed normative choices about what to predict and how. The tradeoff claim assumes that the unconstrained model's prediction is an optimal baseline. Fairness constraints can instead correct distortions introduced by biased outcome variables: rearrest data, in this case, captures and magnifies systemic racial dispari

This paper examines the admissibility of AI-generated forensic evidence in criminal trials. The growing adoption of AI presents promising results for investigative efficiency. Despite advancements, significant research gaps persist in practically understanding the legal limits of AI evidence in judicial processes. Existing literature lacks focused assessment of the evidentiary value of AI outputs. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether AI-generated evidence satisfies established legal standards of reliability. The methodology involves a comparative doctrinal legal analysis of evidentiary standards across common law jurisdictions. Preliminary results indicate that AI forensic tools can enhance scale of evidence analysis. However, challenges arise from reproducibility deficits. Courts exhibit variability in acceptance of AI evidence due to limited technical literacy and lack of standardized validation protocols. Liability implications reveal that developers and investigators may bear accountability for flawed outputs. This raises critical concerns related to wrongful conviction. The paper emphasizes the necessity of independent validation and, development of AI-specific a

This study examines the social media uptake of scientific journals on two different platforms - X and WeChat - by comparing the adoption of X among journals indexed in the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) with the adoption of WeChat among journals indexed in the Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD). The findings reveal substantial differences in platform adoption and user engagement, shaped by local contexts. While only 22.7% of SCIE journals maintain an X account, 84.4% of CSCD journals have a WeChat official account. Journals in Life Sciences & Biomedicine lead in uptake on both platforms, whereas those in Technology and Physical Sciences show high WeChat uptake but comparatively lower presence on X. User engagement on both platforms is dominated by low-effort interactions rather than more conversational behaviors. Correlation analyses indicate weak-to-moderate relationships between bibliometric indicators and social media metrics, confirming that online engagement reflects a distinct dimension of journal impact, whether on an international or a local platform. These findings underscore the need for broader social media metric frameworks that incorporate locally dom

Algorithmic risk assessment instruments (RAIs) increasingly inform decision-making in criminal justice. RAIs largely rely on arrest records as a proxy for underlying crime. Problematically, the extent to which arrests reflect overall offending can vary with the person's characteristics. We examine how the disconnect between crime and arrest rates impacts RAIs and their evaluation. Our main contribution is a method for quantifying this bias via estimation of the amount of unobserved offenses associated with particular demographics. These unobserved offenses are then used to augment real-world arrest records to create part real, part synthetic crime records. Using this data, we estimate that four currently deployed RAIs assign 0.5--2.8 percentage points higher risk scores to Black individuals than to White individuals with a similar \emph{arrest} record, but the gap grows to 4.5--11.0 percentage points when we match on the semi-synthetic \emph{crime} record. We conclude by discussing the potential risks around the use of RAIs, highlighting how they may exacerbate existing inequalities if the underlying disparities of the criminal justice system are not taken into account. In light of

Using the Scopus dataset (1996-2007) a grand matrix of aggregated journal-journal citations was constructed. This matrix can be compared in terms of the network structures with the matrix contained in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) of the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI). Since the Scopus database contains a larger number of journals and covers also the humanities, one would expect richer maps. However, the matrix is in this case sparser than in the case of the ISI data. This is due to (i) the larger number of journals covered by Scopus and (ii) the historical record of citations older than ten years contained in the ISI database. When the data is highly structured, as in the case of large journals, the maps are comparable, although one may have to vary a threshold (because of the differences in densities). In the case of interdisciplinary journals and journals in the social sciences and humanities, the new database does not add a lot to what is possible with the ISI databases.

Objectives: Discussions of fairness in criminal justice risk assessments typically lack conceptual precision. Rhetoric too often substitutes for careful analysis. In this paper, we seek to clarify the tradeoffs between different kinds of fairness and between fairness and accuracy. Methods: We draw on the existing literatures in criminology, computer science and statistics to provide an integrated examination of fairness and accuracy in criminal justice risk assessments. We also provide an empirical illustration using data from arraignments. Results: We show that there are at least six kinds of fairness, some of which are incompatible with one another and with accuracy. Conclusions: Except in trivial cases, it is impossible to maximize accuracy and fairness at the same time, and impossible simultaneously to satisfy all kinds of fairness. In practice, a major complication is different base rates across different legally protected groups. There is a need to consider challenging tradeoffs.

A number of journal classification systems have been developed in bibliometrics since the launch of the Citation Indices by the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI) in the 1960s. These systems are used to normalize citation counts with respect to field-specific citation patterns. The best known system is the so-called "Web-of-Science Subject Categories" (WCs). In other systems papers are classified by algorithmic solutions. Using the Journal Citation Reports 2014 of the Science Citation Index and the Social Science Citation Index (n of journals = 11,149), we examine options for developing a new system based on journal classifications into subject categories using aggregated journal-journal citation data. Combining routines in VOSviewer and Pajek, a tree-like classification is developed. At each level one can generate a map of science for all the journals subsumed under a category. Nine major fields are distinguished at the top level. Further decomposition of the social sciences is pursued for the sake of example with a focus on journals in information science (LIS) and science studies (STS). The new classification system improves on alternative options by avoiding the problem

Mental health disorders are particularly prevalent among those in the criminal justice system and may be a contributing factor in recidivism. Using North Carolina court cases from 1994 to 2009, this paper evaluates how mandated mental health treatment as a term of probation impacts the likelihood that individuals return to the criminal justice system. I use random variation in judge assignment to compare those who were required to seek weekly mental health counseling to those who were not. The main findings are that being assigned to seek mental health treatment decreases the likelihood of three-year recidivism by about 12 percentage points, or 36 percent. This effect persists over time, and is similar among various types of individuals on probation. In addition, I show that mental health treatment operates distinctly from drug addiction interventions in a multiple-treatment framework. I provide evidence that mental health treatment's longer-term effectiveness is strongest among more financially-advantaged probationers, consistent with this setting, in which the cost of mandated treatment is shouldered by offenders. Finally, conservative calculations result in a 5:1 benefit-to-cost

Using three years of the Journal Citation Reports (2011, 2012, and 2013), indicators of transitions in 2012 (between 2011 and 2013) are studied using methodologies based on entropy statistics. Changes can be indicated at the level of journals using the margin totals of entropy production along the row or column vectors, but also at the level of links among journals by importing the transition matrices into network analysis and visualization programs (and using community-finding algorithms). Seventy-four journals are flagged in terms of discontinuous changes in their citations; but 3,114 journals are involved in "hot" links. Most of these links are embedded in a main component; 78 clusters (containing 172 journals) are flagged as potential "hot spots" emerging at the network level. An additional finding is that PLoS ONE introduced a new communication dynamics into the database. The limitations of the methodology are elaborated using an example. The results of the study indicate where developments in the citation dynamics can be considered as significantly unexpected. This can be used as heuristic information; but what a "hot spot" in terms of the entropy statistics of aggregated cit

We present a survey of tools used in the criminal justice system in the UK in three categories: data infrastructure, data analysis, and risk prediction. Many tools are currently in deployment, offering potential benefits, including improved efficiency and consistency. However, there are also important concerns. Transparent information about these tools, their purpose, how they are used, and by whom is difficult to obtain. Even when information is available, it is often insufficient to enable a satisfactory evaluation. More work is needed to establish governance mechanisms to ensure that tools are deployed in a transparent, safe and ethical way. We call for more engagement with stakeholders and greater documentation of the intended goal of a tool, how it will achieve this goal compared to other options, and how it will be monitored in deployment. We highlight additional points to consider when evaluating the trustworthiness of deployed tools and make concrete proposals for policy.

In criminal justice risk forecasting, one can prove that it is impossible to optimize accuracy and fairness at the same time. One can also prove that it is impossible optimize at once all of the usual group definitions of fairness. In the policy arena, one is left with tradeoffs about which many stakeholders will adamantly disagree. In this paper, we offer a different approach. We do not seek perfectly accurate and fair risk assessments. We seek politically acceptable risk assessments. We describe and apply to data on 300,000 offenders a machine learning approach that responds to many of the most visible charges of "racial bias." Regardless of whether such claims are true, we adjust our procedures to compensate. We begin by training the algorithm on White offenders only and computing risk with test data separately for White offenders and Black offenders. Thus, the fitted algorithm structure is exactly the same for both groups; the algorithm treats all offenders as if they are White. But because White and Black offenders can bring different predictors distributions to the white-trained algorithm, we provide additional adjustments if needed. Insofar are conventional machine learning

Prosecutors are essential in combating organized crime, making key decisions about prosecution, target selection, and structuring imputation strategies. Despite their importance, the configuration of these strategies remains empirically underexplored. This study engages with that premise by considering the cases investigated by the International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) and focusing specifically on the role of prosecutors, aiming to uncover how their discretionary decisions translated the CICIG mandate into operational practices intended to achieve systemic deterrence, and to what extent, can we talk about deterrence effectiveness. The research employs a multilevel Exponential Random Graph Model (ERGM) analysis, integrating three networks: the criminal network of actors involved in illegal activities, the legal framework network that represents offenses, and the prosecution network that connects actors to offenses. The model assesses whether the observed network aligns with deterrence-based theoretical assumptions and examines how punishment severity can be effective when it disrupts functional ties that sustain criminal activity -both through long-term sanc

Early studies of risk assessment algorithms used in criminal justice revealed widespread racial biases. In response, machine learning researchers have developed methods for fairness, many of which rely on equalizing empirical metrics across protected attributes. Here, I recall sociotechnical perspectives to delineate the significant gap between fairness in theory and practice, focusing on criminal justice. I (1) illustrate how social context can undermine analyses that are restricted to an AI system's outputs, and (2) argue that much of the fair ML literature fails to account for epistemological issues with underlying crime data. Instead of building AI that reifies power imbalances, like risk assessment algorithms, I ask whether data science can be used to understand the root causes of structural marginalization.

Commercial or in-house developments of probabilistic AI systems are introduced in policing and the wider criminal justice (CJ) system worldwide, often on a force-by-force basis. We developed a systematic way to characterise probabilistic AI tools across the CJ stages in a form of mapping with the aim to provide a coherent presentation of the probabilistic AI ecosystem in CJ. We use the CJ system in England and Wales as a paradigm. This map will help us better understand the extent of AI's usage in this domain (how, when, and by whom), its purpose and potential benefits, its impact on people's lives, compare tools, and identify caveats (bias, obscured or misinterpreted probabilistic outputs, cumulative effects by AI systems feeding each other, and breaches in the protection of sensitive data), as well as opportunities for future implementations. In this paper we present our methodology for systematically mapping the probabilistic AI tools in CJ stages and characterising them based on the modes of data consumption or production. We also explain how we collect the data and present our initial findings. This research is ongoing and we are engaging with UK Police organisations, and gove

Using "Analyze Results" at the Web of Science, one can directly generate overlays onto global journal maps of science. The maps are based on the 10,000+ journals contained in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) of the Science and Social Science Citation Indices (2011). The disciplinary diversity of the retrieval is measured in terms of Rao-Stirling's "quadratic entropy." Since this indicator of interdisciplinarity is normalized between zero and one, the interdisciplinarity can be compared among document sets and across years, cited or citing. The colors used for the overlays are based on Blondel et al.'s (2008) community-finding algorithms operating on the relations journals included in JCRs. The results can be exported from VOSViewer with different options such as proportional labels, heat maps, or cluster density maps. The maps can also be web-started and/or animated (e.g., using PowerPoint). The "citing" dimension of the aggregated journal-journal citation matrix was found to provide a more comprehensive description than the matrix based on the cited archive. The relations between local and global maps and their different functions in studying the sciences in terms of journal lit

This two part paper argues that seemingly "technical" choices made by developers of machine-learning based algorithmic tools used to inform decisions by criminal justice authorities can create serious constitutional dangers, enhancing the likelihood of abuse of decision-making power and the scope and magnitude of injustice. Drawing on three algorithmic tools in use, or recently used, to assess the "risk" posed by individuals to inform how they should be treated by criminal justice authorities, we integrate insights from data science and public law scholarship to show how public law principles and more specific legal duties that are rooted in these principles, are routinely overlooked in algorithmic tool-building and implementation. We argue that technical developers must collaborate closely with public law experts to ensure that if algorithmic decision-support tools are to inform criminal justice decisions, those tools are configured and implemented in a manner that is demonstrably compliant with public law principles and doctrine, including respect for human rights, throughout the tool-building process.

Is environmental injustice driven by a global network of multinational companies? Is there a global environmental justice movement resisting extractivism? This study addresses these questions through a social network analysis of firms and Environmental Justice Organizations (EJOs) involved in socioenvironmental conflicts. Using Environmental Justice Atlas (EJAtlas) data, we examine 3,396 conflicts involving 6,244 companies and 11,231 EJOs. The findings reveal evident structural asymmetries. Corporations form cohesive, sector-specific global networks that support coordination across regions. Conversely, EJOs form a larger, decentralized, and self-organized network characterised by sparse localised interconnections that enable regional coordination across sectors. A limited number of international EJOs involved in many conflicts worldwide weaves a global environmental justice network to match the global spread of multinational corporations and supply chains. This research study shows that these contrasting network structures reflect the distinct purposes of their constituent actors: sectoral expansion for corporations and environmental and territorial defense for EJOs.

Much attention has been paid to algorithms related to sentencing, the setting of bail, parole decisions and recidivism while less attention has been paid to carceral algorithms, those algorithms used to determine an incarcerated individual's lived experience. In this paper we study one such algorithm, the Pennsylvania Additive Classification Tool (PACT) that assigns custody levels to incarcerated individuals. We analyze the PACT in ways that criminal justice algorithms are often analyzed: namely, we train an accurate machine learning model for the PACT; we study its fairness across sex, age and race; and we determine which features are most important. In addition to these conventional computations, we propose and carry out some new ways to study such algorithms. Instead of focusing on the outcomes themselves, we propose shifting our attention to the variability in the outcomes, especially because many carceral algorithms are used repeatedly and there can be a propagation of uncertainty. By carrying out several simulations of assigning custody levels, we shine light on problematic aspects of tools like the PACT.