MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092613211 · doi:10.1080/10345329.2020.1818425

Framing fantasies: public police recruiting videos and representations of women

2020· article· en· W3092613211 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Issues in Criminal Justice · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHarassmentFraming (construction)Police brutalityPublic relationsSociologyPolice scienceCriminologyRacismCriticismDiversity (politics)Political scienceMedia studiesCriminal justiceGender studiesLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public police in countries around the world have faced criticism over a lack of diversity in their membership. This has led to various police recruitment efforts aimed at boosting the diversity of officers. In this paper, we examine public police attempts to recruit new and diverse police members in the social media age. Drawing from feminist criminologies of policing and the media to analyse public police YouTube recruitment videos in Canada, we investigate how women in particular are represented in this visual content. We focus on three forms of framing that appear in these visual communications: expert, ordinary and mythical. We argue that diversity is portrayed in ways that contradict and distract from the continuing history of sexism, sexual harassment and racism in public policing. In the discussion, we assess what our findings mean for literatures on public police recruitment and police image management.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.243 · 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