MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050777775 · doi:10.1177/1098611115577144

Moving Beyond Arrest and Reconceptualizing Police Discretion

2015· article· en· W2050777775 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolice Quarterly · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeriousnessDiscretionSituational ethicsPsychologyAction (physics)Observational studySocial psychologyCriminologyPolitical scienceLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on police discretion largely focuses on explaining the arrest disposition, while little attention is directed to the range of nonarrest decisions within an encounter. The research objective is to contribute to the discourse on police behavior by exploring the factors affecting different types of discretionary outcomes, a reconceptualization of demeanor, and the role of offence seriousness in different contexts. Using field observational data from a mid-sized Canadian police service, logistic regression models investigate the factors affecting police action identified in prior discretion research on three measures: conversational requests and directives, police assistance, and laying a criminal charge. The results support demarcating demeanor into disrespect and noncompliance, as they have unique independent effects on the use of discretion. Contrary to expectations, offence seriousness is only a significant predictor of noncoercive actions, while situational factors are better predictors of the arrest or charge decision than nondispositional outcomes.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.303 · 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