ReviewFrontiers in sociology2026
Controlling control: toward a reflexive concept of officer safety.
Review in Frontiers in sociology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Police responses to psychosocial crises frequently unfold in ambiguous, emotionally charged situations. While many encounters are handled professionally, others escalate, sometimes fatally. This paper observes such outcomes through a systemic lens rather than isolated individual decisions. Drawing on systems theory, we argue that the dominant model of officer safety, what we term Officer Safety 1.0, relies on three core assumptions: that safety is a producible condition, that violence is an external threat, and that thinking is guided by a linear, input-output logic concerning police-citizen interaction. These assumptions shape how officers perceive and act in complex situations, often reinforcing rigid and reactive forms of engagement that may inadvertently escalate risk. Officer Safety 1.0, in this sense, is grounded in a logic of linear control. We introduce an alternative model-Officer Safety 2.0-which retains the functional goal of control but reconfigures its foundation through reflexivity. In this model, safety is understood as a socially constructed fiction, violence as an interactive risk, and thinking is guided by a nonlinear understanding of social interactions. Within this model, control emerges from insight: the reflexive capacity to observe one's own assumptions and their effects on the unfolding situation. Officers are encouraged not only to observe events, but also to reflect on the interpretive frameworks guiding their perceptions and actions. This reflexive approach aims to expand the behavioral repertoire available to officers, enabling more adaptive and situationally attuned responses that reduce the likelihood of escalation. Officer Safety 2.0 is not a replacement for existing tactics, but an educational framework that reframes them within a broader understanding of system logic and human interaction. It shifts the foundation of safety thinking from the pursuit of linear control to the cultivation of insight as a form of reflexive control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.