Racial/Ethnic Connection with Confidence in the Police: Equal Treatment Matters
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
Recent discussions on confidence in the police by race/ethnicity call for shifting the research focus from whether race/ethnicity matters to why and how it matters. The purpose of this article is to decipher the mediating role of the quality of police treatment in a nuanced study of racial impact on confidence in the police. Data were collected from a two-wave random-sample telephone survey of approximately 2400 residents in Houston, TX. The results confirm the expected effect of race/ethnicity on confidence in the police, net of neighborhood contexts and respondents’ demographics. More importantly, we found that the three measures tapping into the quality of police treatment during police–resident encounters partially mediate the race/ethnicity effect on views of police. Perceived equal treatment emerged as having the strongest effect. When the combined race/ethnicity sample was divided into three racial/ethnic subsamples, perceived equal treatment exerted the largest effects on confidence in the police both within and across the groups. Its effect is most pronounced for the Black subsample. Implications for future research and policy are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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