Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39691915›Full record

ArticlePolicing & society2025

Exploring the relationship between shared identity and interoperability: a mixed methods analysis of discussion-based multi-agency emergency response exercises.

Louise Davidson, Holly Carter, John Drury, Richard Amlôt, S Alexander Haslam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Policing & society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Collaboration among emergency first responders at major incidents - an explorative focus group study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Louise DavidsonSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Holly CarterBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, Porton Down, UK.
John DrurySchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Richard AmlôtBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, Porton Down, UK.
S Alexander HaslamSchool of Psychology, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous research has shown ongoing difficulties between Police, Fire and Rescue, and Ambulance Service responders during multi-agency emergencies. Recently, researchers have used the Social Identity Approach to gain insight into these challenges, offering a psychological framework for understanding relations within and between response organisations. This study builds upon previous work by engaging responders from the emergency services in six discussion-based exercises. By analysing participants' identity levels and their perceptions of joint working performance, we found a positive association between shared identity and interoperability. Analysis of the discussion transcripts highlighted areas where joint working faced obstacles, such as the use of organisation-specific terminology. Furthermore focus group discussions after the exercise revealed key factors linking shared identity to effective multi-agency response, including increased motivation to collaborate and increased trust and respect. This research deepens our understanding of multi-agency working from a social identity perspective, highlighting the importance of shared identity in enhancing joint efforts. Practical implications are addressed.

Indexed as

interoperabilitymajor incident managementmulti-agency emergency responseShared identity

Identifiers

PMID39691915
PMCPMC11649211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.