Examining how credibility shapes public perception of police interventions in the media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The proliferation of recording technologies has increased the prevalence of police intervention videos in news media. Although previous research has explored the influence of such coverage on public opinion, the mechanisms underlying this impact have received limited attention. This study investigates the role of information credibility in the assessment of police interventions portrayed in news media videos. Design/methodology/approach A total of 634 participants were shown a mock-up TV news report that included a description and a brief clip of a police use-of-force event. A survey was conducted before and after the presentation of the report. Findings Camera perspective, anchor tone, viewer gender and pre-existing perceived TV news credibility were found to influence how credible the mock-up news report was perceived. Participants who judged the news report as complete and credible tended to have a more favourable opinion of the police intervention. Perceived credibility also acted as a moderator in the relationship between video and receiver characteristics and the assessment of the police intervention. Practical implications These findings offer valuable insights for law enforcement agencies and their public affairs units to develop effective strategies for managing public opinion. Originality/value This research highlights how important perceived credibility is in influencing public opinion and how different factors such as video and receiver characteristics can impact credibility assessment.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".