MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385949575 · doi:10.1080/15614263.2023.2246620

In the eye of the powerholder: examining the relationship between uniform and accoutrement combinations and police self-legitimacy

2023· article· en· W4385949575 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolice Practice and Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersGriffith University
KeywordsLegitimacyOfficerPerceptionCertificateSample (material)Social psychologyPsychologyTest (biology)Political sciencePublic relationsSociologyLawPoliticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scholars and police organizations argue that when police officers don a uniform, they imbue a certificate of legitimacy. In our study of 238 police officers, we test the assumption that the police uniform impacts officers’ beliefs about their own legitimacy, and, in turn, their projected behavior when in uniform. We find that, when comparing across various combinations of uniforms and accoutrements, officers in our study tended to prefer their standard uniform as a legitimating device. Moreover, we find that the legitimacy attributed to the standard uniform can impact officers’ willingness to engage in certain behaviors when in uniform, at least for the female officers in our sample. This research supports the important role of officer appearance in shaping police perceptions and behaviors, complementing existing research that examines citizens’ perceptions of police uniforms and accoutrements.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.321
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.204 · 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