MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Suicide by Cop Among Officer‐Involved Shooting Cases

2009· article· en· W2141509357 on OpenAlexaff
Kris Mohandie, J. Reid Meloy, Peter Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forensic Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOfficerLaw enforcementSuicide preventionPsychologyPoison controlInjury preventionDemographyOccupational safety and healthIntraclass correlationPossession (linguistics)Medical examinerMedical emergencyMedicinePsychiatryCriminologyClinical psychologyLawSociologyPsychometricsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The frequency and characteristics of suicide by cop cases (SBC) among a large (n = 707) nonrandom sample of North American officer-involved shootings (OIS) were investigated. "Suicide by cop" is when a subject engages in behavior which poses an apparent risk of serious injury or death, with the intent to precipitate the use of deadly force by law enforcement against the subject. Thirty-six percent of the OIS in this sample were found to be SBC with high interrater agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.93) for category classification. SBC cases were more likely to result in the death or injury of the subjects than regular OIS cases. Most SBC cases were spontaneous, but had clear verbal and behavioral indicators that occurred prior to, and during the event. Findings confirm the trend detected in earlier research that there was a growing incidence of SBC among OIS. SBC individuals had a high likelihood of possessing a weapon (80%), which was a firearm 60% of the time. Half of those with a firearm discharged it at the police during the encounter. Nineteen percent simulated weapon possession to accomplish their suicidal intent. Other findings highlight the histories and commonalities in this high risk group.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations61
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Forensic SciencesSame topicStalking, Cyberstalking, and HarassmentFrench-language works237,207