MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416620118 · doi:10.1080/13668803.2025.2591788

The non-uniformed TAC member: exploring the impact of tactical team membership on family systems and family well-being

2025· article· en· W4416620118 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity Work & Family · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily systemsSystems analysisFamily systems theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rate at which police tactical (TAC) officers have contact with direct exposure to potentially psychologically traumatic events (PPTEs) and physical/psycho-emotional risk is higher compared to other police officers due to the nature of their work. To interpret these impacts, we bring the perspectives of n = 24 full-time TAC officers from two large-scale urban police services in Canada to the forefront by using semi-structured interviews to unpack the synergistic relationship between TAC membership and family stress. The findings from the current article suggest that occupational risk can affect the well-being of TAC officers and how structural lifestyle demands tied to logistics, identities and risk can have synergistic impacts on TAC officers and their families. We conclude with suggestions for police leadership, emphasizing how TAC families may be at risk of experiencing psychological stress tied to their loved ones’ occupation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.321 · 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