Scandals, sagging morale, and role ambiguity in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police: the end of a Canadian institution as we know it?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), an iconic and highly respected Canadian institution, has come under extreme criticism in recent years, leaving its future existence in question. This paper reviews the pivotal problems that led the RCMP to this state of crisis, using four recent scandals that have particularly eroded its reputation to illustrate. It suggests that signs of the malaise have been present for some time, but downplayed or missed due to the RCMP’s stellar reputation. The authors bolster their contention with data collected a number of years ago demonstrating that a sample of 129 RCMP constables perceived themselves to be less in control, to have less workplace social support, and experienced greater levels of psychological distress than a control group of 60 municipal constables. They conclude that the RCMP will have to undertake immediate and significant reform to regain its respected role in Canadian society.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.056 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".