Duck...duck...don't shoot : evading dangerous shooter bias outcomes by cover rather than utilizing firearms
2014
- 56Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage56
- Abstract Views50
- Downloads6
Project Description
In a 2 x 2 x 3 experiment patterned after Correll and his colleagues' (2002), participants were randomly divided into three experimental groups and asked to respond to images of Black or White males holding guns or other less threatening items by selecting a response option to shoot, not shoot, or duck. The first group was given the option to shoot or not shoot the targets. The second group was given the same options as the first and an additional option to duck at their own discretion. A final group was given identical options as the second group, but members of this group were initially trained to select duck in response to individuals holding guns during a series of practice trials. I observed a main effect for the response option variable on shooting frequency. Ducking significantly reduced shooting behavior in the condition in which participants were trained to select the duck option. Results also revealed a main effect for the race of target indicating that participants made decisions to shoot and not shoot White targets more quickly than Black targets. An interaction between race and item was also observed indicating that participants correctly chose to not shoot White targets without guns the quickest and were slowest in selecting the don't shoot key in response to Black targets without a gun. Findings suggest that self-protective ducking may reduce dangerous outcomes for police officers, potential targets, and bystanders.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know