MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404803966 · doi:10.1016/j.chipro.2024.100085

“Once you see it you can't unsee it”: Law enforcement trauma and immersion in child sexual abuse material

2024· article· en· W4404803966 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jonah Rimer, S. C. Brown, Jennifer Martin, Andrea Slane

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Protection and Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ontario Institute of TechnologyToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLaw enforcementChild sexual abuseCriminologySexual abusePsychologyLawForensic engineeringMedical emergencyPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsPolitical scienceEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Police working with child sexual abuse material (CSAM) have a complex and significant job. Their experiences have potential to cause trauma, and so to inform better responses and supports, more must be understood about their work from their perspectives. This article focuses on internet child exploitation law enforcement (ICE LE) experiences and perspectives regarding the impacts of working with CSAM, trauma, and implications for professional practice. The sample encompassed 27 ICE LE investigators and supervisors in Ontario, Canada whose main job is investigations involving CSAM. Three focus groups were conducted with participants, followed by an inductive thematic analysis, whereby themes were developed through a multi-stage process of coding and clustering. Instead of simply viewing, seeing, hearing, being exposed to, or working with CSAM, participants described immersion in/with the material. Framed within a taxonomy of trauma focusing on events, experiences, and effects, participants described being warned about the depravity and difficulty of CSAM, continually seeing and hearing distressing content, working closely with CSAM, and being greatly impacted by audio. They reported effects including shock, never forgetting CSAM, feeling suspicious, and wanting distance. Events, experiences, and effects were recounted as experiential and detrimental. Therefore, it is more accurate to categorise participants’ immersion in/with CSAM as a direct experience of primary trauma, not “secondary” or “vicarious” trauma. Implications for multiple sectors involved in child protection and practice are discussed. • Reports the experiences of police immersed in child sexual abuse material (CSAM). • Employs a holistic trauma framework focused on events, experiences, and effects. • Argues participants experience primary trauma and not “secondary” or “vicarious.”. • Suggests how to better support professionals working with CSAM. • Provides learnings for sectors likely to work with CSAM and experience trauma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.020
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Protection and PracticeSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207