MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296510577 · doi:10.3138/cjccj.2021-0058

“Stop Resisting or You’re Gonna Get It Again”: Police Use of Force in a Canadian Crime Reality Television Show

2022· article· en· W4296510577 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ethan Pohl

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuspectCriminologyLaw enforcementSeriousnessUse of forcePossession (linguistics)PsychologyExtant taxonDeadly forceIdeologyPolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extant research suggests that crime reality television advances biased narratives about offenders, police officers, and the nature of crime. This study contributes to the literature by investigating the prevalence, severity, and proportionality of police use of force in Under Arrest, a Canadian crime reality television show. Using a content analysis of all 65 Under Arrest episodes, research reveals that police use of physical force is portrayed in nearly half of vignettes, and over half of force used is excessive force. Logistic regression indicates that the racial composition of the suspect pool does not predict use of force when controlling for other relevant variables. However, suspect race is the strongest predictor of excessive force even when controlling for initial crime seriousness, gender, suspect intoxication, and weapon possession. Results indicate that Under Arrest contributes to law and order ideology by portraying police use of force as a necessary and justified tool for controlling crime committed by racialized suspects.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.268
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.125 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénaleSame topicPolicing Practices and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207