Authoritarian policing during the pandemic and its consequences for police stress in Taiwan
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose The COVID-19 pandemic drastically altered work modalities across professions, including law enforcement. This study examines factors influencing both general work stress and pandemic-specific stress among police officers in Taiwan, where officers were mobilized as enforcers of emergency regulations. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected in the fall of 2020, six months into pandemic-related control measures. A comparative analysis of general and pandemic-specific stressors was conducted, with structural equation modeling applied to responses from 628 officers. Findings Results indicate that supervisory support and media consumption significantly predicted both general and pandemic-related stress. However, fewer variables were significantly associated with pandemic-specific stress. The findings suggest that authoritarian policing practices persisted beneath democratic rhetoric during the pandemic, highlighting the politicization of law enforcement in Taiwan. Research limitations/implications The study did not directly measure pandemic policies, which were only implicated by model variables and stress measures. The nature of the convenience sample challenges the generalizability of the findings. Implications of democratic law enforcement during disasters like the COVID-19 pandemic were discussed. Practical implications As for future policy-making, when responding to a crisis like the pandemic, the police should maintain the role of complementary, temporary and reactive responders, instead of the primary and first responders. Mandatory policies, as a coping strategy for emergent crisis, should be well-thought-out before issuing and implementing, given the fact that their collateral consequences are more problematic, such as elevated work stress, strained police–public relationships and increased social cynicism. Moreover, regular supervisor training on crisis management, including human rights and the use of discretion, is necessary since supervisory support significantly affects work stress among police officers. Originality/value The current study provides a case study on Taiwan because the pandemic control policies were politicized. By focusing on police pandemic stress, the current research advances our understanding of police stress through a comparison of factors associated with both general work stress and pandemic work stress.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».