Personality Profiles of Royal Canadian Mounted Police Cadets Starting the Cadet Training Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Personalities of those entering the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Cadet Training Program (CTP) are unknown and may differ to the general public. The current study provides the first known detailed analyses of personality trait, sociodemographic, and gender differences among RCMP cadets. The current study draws data from the RCMP Longitudinal PTSD Study ( www.rcmpstudy.ca ). Participating RCMP cadets ( n = 772) starting the CTP completed a web-based questionnaire which included sociodemographic questions and the six-factor HEXACO personality inventory. Cadet women reported significantly higher scores on the HEXACO factors of Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, and Conscientiousness and lower scores on Agreeableness and Openness to Experience than cadet men. Older cadets (+ 40 years old) and cadets with more education (university degree or higher) also scored significantly higher on all factor-level scales, except for Extraversion. Relative to the general population, participating cadets reported significantly higher levels of Honesty-Humility, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness and lower levels of Emotionality and Openness to Experience. Cadets also reported significantly higher scores on the HEXACO facet-level scales of Fairness and lower scores on Fearfulness and Unconventionality. The current results highlight potentially important HEXACO factor-level and facet-level differences between cadet men and women and between the general population and RCMP cadets.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".