Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37260967›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023

A method and app for measuring the heterogeneous costs and benefits of justice processes.

Matthew Manning, Gabriel T W Wong, Christopher Mahony, Anushka Vidanage

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Matthew ManningCity University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Gabriel T W WongCentre for Social Research and Methods, College of Arts and Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Christopher MahonyWorld Bank Group, Washington, DC, United States.
Anushka VidanageSoftware Innovation Institute, College of Engineering and Computer Science, Australian National University, Acton, ACT, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Can the impact of justice processes be enhanced with the inclusion of a heterogeneous component into an existing cost-benefit analysis (CBA) APP that demonstrates how benefactors and beneficiaries are affected? Such a component requires: (i) moving beyond the traditional cost benefit conceptual framework of utilising averages; (ii) identification of social group or population-specific variation; (iii) identification of how justice processes differ across groups/populations; (iv) distribution of costs and benefits according to the identified variations; and (v) utilisation of empirically informed statistical techniques to gain new insights from data and maximise impact to beneficiaries. In this paper, we outline a method for capturing heterogeneity. We test our method and the CBA online APP we developed using primary data collected from a developmental crime prevention intervention in Australia. We identify how subgroups in the intervention display different behavioural adjustments across the reference period revealing the heterogeneous distribution of costs and benefits. Finally, we discuss the next version of the CBA APP, which incorporates an AI-driven component that reintegrates individual CBA projects using machine learning and other modern data science techniques. We argue that the APP, enhances CBA, development outcomes, and policy making efficiency for optimal prioritization of criminal justice resources. Further, the APP advances policy accessibility of enhanced, social group-specific data illuminating policy orientation for more inclusive, just, and resilient societal outcomes.

Indexed as

cost–benefit analysisdata scienceheterogeneityjustice processesjustice reformmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID37260967
PMCPMC10228683

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.