Sexual orientation and experiences with police contact in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between sexual orientation and police contact-including police contact with intrusion (i.e., use of intrusive verbal or physical force) and police contact with harassment (i.e., actions making one feel inferior based on appearance, identity, or demographic background)-among a national sample in Canada. METHODS: Logistic and multinomial logistic regression were used to assess the association between sexual orientation and experiences with police contact among a sample of 940 persons ages 16-30 across Canada. RESULTS: Compared to heterosexual participants, persons identifying as bisexual were significantly more likely to report having any police contact in the past 12 months (OR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.09, 2.70). Bisexual (RRR = 3.45, 95% CI = 1. 83, 6.50) and queer, questioning, and other (RRR = 2.33, 95% CI = 1.15, 4.73) identifying participants were more likely to report having experienced police contact with harassment relative to no police contact, compared to heterosexual individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The current study provides the first analysis of the relationship between sexual minority identity and experiences with adverse police contact in Canada, revealing higher levels of police contact and police contact with harassment, especially among bisexual and queer, questioning, other individuals. Findings suggest that sexual minority persons in Canada experience potentially harmful police contact at elevated rates, which may have significant ramifications for health and traumatic stress responses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".