Police legitimacy in the making: the underlying social forces for police legitimacy among religious communities
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
Literature focusing on race and policing has consistently reported a decline in recent years in police legitimacy among minority communities. Yet, the effect of religion on policing has not received similar attention. A focus on police-Haredi community relations provides an opportunity to explore how a religious community might present positive change in police legitimacy, indicated by trust and cooperation. Utilising a mixed method approach, this study aims to (a) clarify what role religion plays in police legitimacy, as distinguished from race or ethnicity; and (b) identify major social forces that shape police legitimacy as a collective and historic phenomenon. The findings highlight the complex interplay of religious constraints, cultural integration, and police legitimacy, showcasing a gradual, yet significant shift in the Haredi community's approach to law enforcement and societal engagement. The study suggests that religion may be a negotiable factor, and that legitimacy fluctuates along with movements of modernisation. The findings are further theorised and discussed along with directions for future investigation.
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 | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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