MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411639509 · doi:10.1080/07418825.2025.2520545

The Influence of Workplace Friendships on Police Firearm Use

2025· article· en· W4411639509 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

VenueJustice Quarterly · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Collaborative on Gun Violence Research
KeywordsCriminologyPsychologyBusinessSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early police ethnographies suggest that officers are shaped by the colleagues around them. A common observation is that Officers’ workplace networks, including friendships and routine, day-to-day interactions are theorized to serve as key channels through which behaviors such as use of force spread. Yet few studies have directly traced the how these networks transmit force-related behaviors. To address this gap, we mapped the workplace friendship ties of more than 1,500 officers in a large US police department. We then asked whether officers’ firearm use is shaped by the colleagues they consider close friends. Longitudinal network models show that officers tend to adopt similar levels of firearm use to that of their workplace friends, even when accounting for individual characteristics and situational variables. These findings indicate that firearm behavior is shaped not only by personal attributes and work environments, but also by officers’ friendships.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.337 · 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