Enhancing police engagement: An examination of the links between fair treatment and job engagement in a Canadian police organization
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
This study examined the relationships between organizational justice and job engagement, and whether these relationships were stronger for civilian staff vs police officers. Using survey data from a Canadian police organization, the results suggested that when police personnel perceived they were treated fairly, they were more likely to have a sense of psychological safety, which, in turn, enhanced their identification with their organization and increased their engagement with work. Findings further demonstrated that distributive justice (i.e., equitable outcomes) was more important to police officers than civilian staff, particularly, in relation to enhancing their attachment with the organization. In other words, as perceptions of distributive justice increased so did organizational identification; however, this effect was strongest for police officers. In general, organizational justice has positive implications for police organizations, namely in encouraging police personnel to engage their full selves at 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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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