ArticlePloS one2025
Generative AI and criminology: A threat or a promise? Exploring the potential and pitfalls in the identification of Techniques of Neutralization (ToN).
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Inter-rater reproducibility in medico-legal injury assessment: a pilot study with an exploratory comparison to a large language model.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) such as GPT-4 refers to systems able to understand and generate new coherent and relevant text by learning from existing data sets. The great opportunities that GPT-4 offers are accompanied by great risks. Indeed, the ease of access and use of such a tool also makes it the platform of choice for malicious users. The purpose of this work is to test the machine's capabilities in identifying and reframing so-called Techniques of Neutralization (ToN), rationalizations employed by offenders to justify their deviant behavior. The identification of such theoretical cornerstone of criminology in interviews with offenders is crucial for criminologists, as it provides relevant information on criminodynamics, risk assessment and possible intervention strategies. Our outcomes show a high level of the machine's accuracy in general ToN recognition of Published and Crafted ToN sentences in both Test 1 (precision of 0.82 and recall of 0.75 for "Denial of Injury" in Crafted ToN, precision of 0.93 and recall of 1 for "Absence of ToN" in Published ToN) and Test 2 (precision of 1.00 and recall of 0.83 for "Denial of Injury" in Crafted ToN, precision of 1.00 and recall of 1.00 for "Absence of ToN" in both ToN categories). Regarding the reformulation of sentences to remove ToN (Test 3), the model demonstrates high success rates for most ToN categories and high credibility of the reformulated sentences, indicating its ability to maintain the integrity of the sentences while removing the ToN. Our work analyses the application of the machine with respect to a previously untested construct, with the aim of observing the potential and, above all, the possible pitfalls behind the use of AI models in a hitherto little-explored context such as criminology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.