MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118603665 · doi:10.22215/etd/2016-11737

People in Crisis: Understanding the Impact of a Mental Health Response Unit on Police Culture

2016· dissertation· en· W3118603665 on OpenAlexaffabout
James Liles

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationMental healthDiscretionPerceptionPublic relationsUnit (ring theory)General partnershipPsychologyCriminologyPolitical scienceService (business)Social psychologySociologyLawPsychiatryBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fatal Canadian police interactions involving Sammy Yatim, Robert Dziekanski, and Paul Boyd played a major role in developing and implementing mental health units (MHUs).Based on interview and direct observation data, this thesis examines the impact of a Canadian MHU on police culture.I argue that there are a number of possible cultures that can emerge within police organizations.This thesis demonstrates the pervasiveness of the perception of danger and the resulting camaraderie amongst MHU members.Specifically, I evaluate the perception of danger held amongst MHU members, their conceptions of partnership, and the importance of defending and assisting colleagues.Herein, I also argue that this MHU gives rise to an emerging servicebased conceptualization of police culture.Here, I recognize the fluidity of police culture by examining the service-focused nature of the MHU, the application of discretion, and the measurement of success and emotional commitment amongst MHU members.Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………i Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………ii List of Appendices……………………………………………………………………………….iv Introduction…………………………………..…………………………………………………..

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0160.018
Scholarly communication0.0130.008
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.383 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolicing Practices and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207