MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044312029 · doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12513

Reducing speeding via inanimate police presence

2020· article· en· W3044312029 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rylan Simpson, Mark A. McCutcheon, Darryl Lal

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminology & Public Policy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsCoquitlam CollegeRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Government (linguistics)Transport engineeringComputer securityEngineeringComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research Summary The present research uses data from a police‐directed field study to explore the effects of police presence on speeding in two large cities in British Columbia, Canada. As part of the study, an inanimate but realistic‐appearing police cut‐out (“Constable Scarecrow”) was strategically positioned along roadways while motorist speed was measured using a radar‐recording device. The analyses of the multisite evaluation reveal that the presence of the cut‐out can reduce speeding when deployed along arterial roadways. Policy Implications Traffic collisions are a leading cause of death and nonfatal injuries for people worldwide. A well‐documented contributor to traffic collisions is speed. Controlling speed has thus become a priority for government, police, and community groups across the world. The findings from the present research demonstrate that police can reduce speeding via their inanimate presence. This is the first known study to evaluate the effects of an inanimate but realistic‐appearing police cut‐out on motorist behavior: a sustainable, low‐cost, and easily implementable intervention for communities of all sizes in all places.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminology & Public PolicySame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207