The Impact of Racial Profiling on Consumers in Canadian Retail Settings: A Mixed-Method Study Exploring Negative Emotions
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
This research investigated the negative emotions of 514 Canadians who reported being suspected of shoplifting in retail settings. Consumer racial profiling (CRP) is an important topic of consideration due to the links to General Strain Theory, everyday racism, and victimization. The research focused on two research questions. First, does race have a significant association with negative emotions following incidents of CRP? Second, are factors beyond race, like profiler characteristics, retail demographics, profiling method, and victim demographics, associated with negative emotions among customers who have experienced CRP? Descriptive information is provided to contextualize the relevance of each variable. Quantitative and qualitative analyses indicated that the number of profilers, victim gender, retail location, and the profiling method are associated with changes in negative emotions following CRP. Practical implications regarding the examination of the profiling method and the number of profilers are discussed at length.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it