Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42903989›Full record

ArticlePolice quarterly2026

Why Police Pull Back? Organizational Injustice and Depolicing.

Gabriel Béliveau, Massimiliano Mulone, Maude Pérusse-Roy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Police quarterly, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Gabriel BéliveauUniversité de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3104-1911
Massimiliano MuloneUniversité de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9065-9228
Maude Pérusse-RoyUniversité de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4620-4132

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Depolicing refers to a perceived decline in police engagement, particularly in proactive enforcement. Although widely invoked in political and media debates, the concept remains theoretically and empirically contested. Existing research suggests that overall police activity remains relatively stable and that only a minority of officers report reducing their own interventions, raising questions about the origins of disengagement narratives. Drawing on an organizational justice framework, this study analyzes 59 in-depth interviews with Quebec police officers to examine how officers construct accounts of disengagement through lived experiences of oversight. We identify three interrelated dynamics associated with radical disengagement: employer-initiated internal investigations that constrain blame externalization and disrupt occupational solidarity; precautionary administrative measures that produce stigmatization and isolation; and disciplinary responses to morally framed proactive practices, often interpreted as noble cause corruption. We argue that radical depolicing is rooted less in external scrutiny than in perceived organizational injustice.

Indexed as

depolicinginternal investigationsorganizational justicepolice oversight

Identifiers

PMID42903989
PMCPMC13682682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.