Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine how police authority – in its “soft” form – is used and understood by staff and detainees in police custody in England, examining how these meanings are shaped by this unique police setting. It is argued that the nature of this setting, as fraught and uncertain, along with the large volume of citizens who come into contact with the police therein, makes police custody the ultimate “teachable moment”.

The present paper is based on in-depth qualitative data collected between March 2014 and May 2015 in four custody suites (in four forces). In each site, the researchers spent three to four weeks observing and then interviewed 10-15 staff (largely police officers, detention officers but also a few other criminal justice practitioners) and 10-15 detainees. In total, the paper is based on 532 hours of observing and 97 interviews (47 with staff and 50 with detainees).

One way that the staff used their authority in the custody suites in the research was softly and innocuously; this entailed for example staff communicating in a respectful manner with detainees, such as by being deliberately polite. The authors conclude that this “soft” power was a dynamic, processual matter, shaped in particular by the physical conditions of the suite, the uncertain and insecure nature of detainees’ circumstances, as well as by the sense of disempowerment they felt as a result of being deprived of their liberty and autonomy, all of which contributed to police custody being the ultimate “teachable moment”.

The paper draws on a range of qualitative data collected from both staff and detainees in four types of police custody suites as part the “good” police custody study. It therefore makes an original contribution to the field which has tended to rely on cross-sectional surveys of citizens not policed populations (Harkin, 2015; Worden and Mclean, 2017).

This paper aims to examine the types of user misbehaviours in the sharing economy (SE) context. SE offers a fruitful study setting due to the scope of potential misbehaviour and the expanded role of consumers.

The study drew on online archival data from the AirbnbHell.com website, where people share their stories about their Airbnb-related negative experiences. The authors reviewed 405 hosts’, guests’ and neighbours’ stories and coded the identified forms of misbehaviours into categories. The typology thus developed was validated in the context of the Uber Rides service.

User misbehaviours in the SE context can be distinguished based on the domain in which the user role is violated and the nature of violated norms. These two conceptual distinctions delineate a four-fold typology of user misbehaviours: illegal, unprofessional, unbefitting and uncivil behaviours.

The trustworthiness of the stories could not be assessed.

The presented typology can be used as a mapping tool that facilitates detection of the full scope of misbehaviours and as a managerial tool that provides ideas for effective management of misbehaviours that correspond to each category.

The paper presents the first empirically derived comprehensive typology of user misbehaviours in SE settings. This typology enables classification of a broad set of misbehaviours, including previously overlooked unprofessional behaviours carried out by peer-service providers. The study also puts forward a revised definition of consumer misbehaviours that encompasses the impact of misbehaviours on parties not directly involved in the SE-mediated exchange.

Although consumers feel that the move toward service robots in the frontline so far was driven by firms' strive to replace human service agents and realize cost savings accordingly, the COVID-19 pandemic has led customers to appreciate frontline robots' ability to provide services in ways that keep them safe and protected from the virus. Still, research on this topic is scant. This article offers guidance by providing a theoretical backdrop for the safety perspective on service robots, as well as outlining a typology that researchers and practitioners can use to further advance this field.

A typology is developed based on a combination of a theory- and practice-driven approach. Departing from the type of behavior performed by the service robot, the typology synthesizes three different service robot roles from past literature and proposes three new safety-related role extensions. These safety-related roles are derived from a search for examples of how service robots are used in practice during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The typology's roles are corroborated by discussing relevant robot implementations around the globe. Jointly, the six roles give rise to several ideas that jointly constitute a future research agenda.

This manuscript is (one of) the first to provide in-depth attention to the phenomenon of service customers' physical safety needs in the age of service robots. In doing so, it discusses and ties together theories and concepts from different fields, such as hierarchy of needs theory, evolutionary human motives theory, perceived risk theory, regulatory focus theory, job demand–resources theory, and theory of artificial intelligence job replacement.

The growth in cryptomarkets has reinvigorated the research on illicit drug distribution due to the availability of large-scale data. This data has enabled researchers to ask new and detailed questions about how participants in these markets trust each other enough for the market not to collapse. This question deserves more attention because it has become a taken-for-granted notion that repeated transactions and social categories create trust. Whether online or on the street, economic exchanges under illegality are more uncertain than transactions in the legal economy. This puts higher demands on trust, as there is less information and the stakes are higher. In this chapter, the author presents definitions, typologies, and disciplinary contributions to the study of trust and examine how it has been operationalised in a sample of 13 peer-reviewed articles. These articles focus on three dimensions of trust: process-based trust that derives from repeated transactions with known partners; character-based trust measured by the networked reputation scores; and institutional-based trust in the platform and its administrators. In practice, the trust bases are intertwined. Drawing on the broader social science literature on trust, a mesolevel operationalisation that centres on networked reputation scores as embedded in processes and institutions can draw the research together in a multidisciplinary framework.