MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897999578 · doi:10.1093/police/pay079

Innovation and Policing: Factors Influencing the Adoption of Social Medias by Members of Quebec Police Organizations

2018· article· en· W2897999578 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julie Delle Donne, Francis Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicing A Journal of Policy and Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRespondentPerceptionSocial mediaPublic relationsDiffusion of innovationsBusinessKnowledge managementPsychologyMarketingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The literature on members of police organizations adopting new technology is generally descriptive and rarely explanatory. However, the Diffusion of Innovation Theory and the studies that have grown out of it have contributed to creation of a model that helps explain adoption rates of new technology by individuals working in an organization. To verify whether this model can be used to study the adoption of technology in police organizations, our study examines the factors that influence the adoption of social media (SM) by members (n = 177) of Quebec police organizations. Our findings confirm that the factors identified in the literature on innovation—the perception that potential users have of the new technology as well as organizational factors, such as the respondent’s role in the organization—can also help explain why and how frequently a member uses SM in his or her work.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicing A Journal of Policy and PracticeSame topicPolicing Practices and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207