Body‐Worn Cameras and Policing: A List Experiment of Citizen Overt and True Support
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Police body‐worn cameras (BWCs) have gained popularity in recent years. However, many minimize the complexity of this transparency initiative and elevate the potential benefits. While BWCs can promote police accountability, they may also reduce citizen trust in police organizations. For BWCs to achieve win‐win solutions, police organizations should determine the level of citizen support for specific BWC practices. However, measuring citizen support presents several challenges. Social desirability may impact polling results, as participants underreport responses they perceive to be outside the norm. The authors employ a list experiment design to measure true citizen support for BWC practices. They find statistically significant levels of social desirability for police discretion in the activation of BWCs and for restriction of footage accessibility regarding suspects with mental illness. Decision makers should not rely on public opinion polls as a gauge of true citizen support for BWC use .
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it