Showing papers by "Barak Ariel published in 2018"

The Deterrence Spectrum: Explaining Why Police Body-Worn Cameras ‘Work’ or ‘Backfire’ in Aggressive Police–Public Encounters

Abstract: Police body-worn cameras (BWCs) are an increasingly prominent research area in criminal justice. This trend mirrors current practice, with more and more law enforcement agencies implementing or procuring BWCs. Yet the evidence on BWCs is substantially long on evidence but rather short on theory. Why should BWCs ‘work’ and under what conditions or on whom? This article offers a more robust theoretical composition for the causal mechanisms that can explain the efficacy of BWCs. What sets them apart from other surveillance devices, such as closedcircuit televisions (CCTVs), speed cameras, or bystanders’ mobile cameras? We introduce the deterrence spectrum, within which BWCs can de-escalate or exacerbate aggressive encounters. We argue that the deterrent effect of BWCs is a function of discretion, whereby strong discretion is inversely linked to a weak deterrent effect that consequently leads to more use of force, and weak discretion is inversely linked to a strong deterrent effect and less forceful police responses. We show that the deterrence effect of BWCs ranges from ‘minimal deterrence’ to ‘maximum deterrence’ depending on the officer’s discretion. At one extreme, ‘over-deterrence’ and even ‘inertia’ are possible, which are manifested in police withdrawal. Given the mechanisms that are in play, more attention ought to be given to officers’ discretion, training on appropriate use of BWCs, and technological fixes. We conclude by linking these findings to BWCs discretion policy, as well the willingness of the agency to adopt an evidence-based policing framework. Police body-worn cameras (BWCs) are everywhere. These small devices, enthusiastically endorsed by the police, politicians, civil rights advocates, and the public, have generated a growing Barak Ariel, PhD, Lecturer in Experimental Criminology, Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge CB3 9DA, UK, ba285@cam.ac.uk and Assistant Professor, Institute of Criminology, Faculty of Law, Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem 91905, Israel, barak.ariel@mail.huji.ac.il Alex Sutherland, PhD, Research Leader, Communities, Safety & Justice RAND Europe, Westbrook Centre, Milton Road, Cambridge, CB4 1YG, UK, and Research Associate and Member of Violence Research Centre, Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge CB3 9DA, UK Darren Henstock, Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge CB3 9DA, UK Josh Young, Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge CB3 9DA, UK Gabriela Sosinski, Institute of Criminology, Faculty of Law, Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem 91905, Israel 1 Policing, pp. 1–21 doi:10.1093/police/paw051 The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com multimillion-dollar industry, yet we know little about them (White, 2014). Although evidence is beginning to build (Lum et al., 2015; Cubitt et al., 2016), both the intended and unintended consequences of using this emergent technology in policing remain broadly unclear. Evaluations of the use of BWCs simply cannot keep pace with the speed at which they are being deployed by police departments. Despite the imminent risks associated with non-evidence-based policymaking (Sherman, 2013), it is no surprise that policymakers are grabbing onto this technology: in an environment where legitimacy and trust are low in many police departments worldwide, BWCs have been heralded as the panacea to all that ails policing. To be sure, BWCs are relatively simple devices. Some devices perform poorly, while others are far superior in their ability to assist law enforcement agencies (Sykes, 2014), but ultimately, they all are ‘just’ cameras. This poses a basic question: why do they ‘work’, in the sense of having a civilizing effect on police–community interactions? Why do BWCs cause a reduction of more than 90% in complaints filed against the police (Ariel et al., 2016c)? Why does the use of BWCs, in some places, causes a reduction of more than one-half in the force applied by officers in encounters with members of the public (Ariel et al., 2015; Jennings et al., 2015) but fails to do so in other sites (Ariel et al., 2016b)? Under what circumstances could BWCs become ‘game-changers’ in American policing (Sherman and Strang, 2015)? When contemplating the answers to these questions, we need to pay attention to how cameras are used, bearing in mind that ‘used’ denotes not only the actual activation and recording of evidence but also, most importantly, whether and how the footage is then used by the law enforcement establishment (Drover and Ariel, 2015). Causal mechanisms have already been suggested (Ariel et al., 2015) that relate to both officer and suspect behaviour, but a more robust theoretical exposition seems to be missing from the debate on the efficacy of BWCs. In what follows, we set out to explain not only why BWCs trigger a desired effect on police behaviour, suspects’ behaviour, or both, but also what sets official BWCs apart from other video-recording innovations, such as closedcircuit television (CCTV), dashcams, and everyday smartphone cameras. We argue that deterrence theory can potentially ‘settle the score’ and address these findings, under what we refer to as the deterrence spectrum. In broad terms, we will claim that the deterrence effect of BWCs causes officers to comply with the rules of engagement. The effect moves within a spectrum, from minimal deterrence, through optimal deterrence and maximum deterrence, and up to inertia. As the degree of deterrence increases, officers are less likely to use force. We argue that, while our model explains the use of force within the context of BWCs, it can be generalizable to other surveillance apparatuses as well. The article is structured in the following way: first, we review the available evidence on surveillance devices, namely CCTV, mobile phones/bystander cameras, and speed cameras. We look at these recording devices mainly to show why BWCs are in fact unique and particularly to lay out the background for our theoretical model. We then present the evidence on BWCs, which is continuously growing [editor—enter here details of this special volume on BWCs], with particular attention to the Cambridge Replication Experiments, their main effects, and subgroup analyses that focused on police discretion. Based on this evidence, we then introduce the ‘deterrence spectrum’ as a possible model for explaining when BWCs work or can backfire, in terms of use of force. We review what minimal, maximum, and optimum deterrence mean under these conditions and contextualize the effects of BWCs within social psychology, risk preferences, and practice. We also look at inertia, which refers 1 http://www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/technology/pages/body-worn-cameras.aspx. 2 Policing Article B. Ariel et al.

Paradoxical effects of self-awareness of being observed: testing the effect of police body-worn cameras on assaults and aggression against officers

Abstract: Recently, scholars have applied self-awareness theory to explain why body-worn cameras (BWCs) affect encounters between the public and police, with its most immediate manifestation being a reduction in the use of force by and complaints against police. In this study, we report on the paradoxical effects of BWCs in the context of assaults on officers. A multisite randomized controlled trial in ten departments, with officers wearing (or not wearing) BWCs based on random assignment of shifts. Odds ratios are used to estimate the treatment effect on assaults, along with “one study removed” sensitivity analyses. Further subgroup analyses are performed in terms of varying degrees of officers’ discretion, to enhance the practical applications of this multisite experiment. Finally, before-analyses are applied as well, including Bootstrapping and Monte-Carlo simulations to further validate the results under stricter statistical conditions, to illustrate the overall effects. A total of 394 assaults per 1000 arrests occurred during 3637 treatment shifts (M = 39.35, SD = 17.89) compared with 284 assaults per 1000 arrests during 3697 control shifts (M = 28.38; SD = 15.99), which translate into 37% higher odds of assault in treatment shifts than in control conditions. The perverse direction and relative magnitude in each experimental site in eight out of ten sites were consistent. The backfiring treatment effect was substantially more pronounced in low discretion sites, i.e., where officers strongly followed the experimental protocol (OR = 2.565; 95% CI 1.792, 3.672). At the same time, before–after analyses show that assaults were overall reduced by 61% in the participating police departments, thus suggesting paradoxical effects. We explain these findings using self-awareness theory. Once self-aware that their performance is being observed by BWCs, officers become at risk of being assaulted. Results suggest that under some circumstances, self-awareness can lead to excessive self-inspection that strips power-holders of their ability to function under extreme situations. This mechanism is potentially a function of “over-deterrence”. The study further demonstrates the benefits of applying psychosocial theories to the study of social control and deterrence theories more broadly, with a robust and falsifiable mechanism that explains the conditions under which being observed stimulates either appropriate or perverse consequences.

Racial stratification and multiple outcomes in police stops and searches

Abstract: The present study explores ethnic differences in stop-and-search outcomes. It uses data from 53,858 stop-and-search incidents recorded by a United Kingdom police force. Prior studies often focused on single outcomes – notably, arrests – and based on a binary majority-versus-minority categorisation of ethnicity/race. Our analysis departs from this approach by examining multiple outcomes across different ethnic groups. Focusing first on the binary categorisation, we found that stops-and-searches involving minorities were more likely to lead to arrests or to informal advice by officers than Whites, but less likely to receive formal warnings. No differences emerged in terms of encounters that resulted in ‘no further action’. However, there was no consistent pattern across any of the outcomes once the minority group was disaggregated into specific ethnic groups, despite having sufficient statistical power. Furthermore, a multivariate analysis shows that while ethnicity predicts stop-and-search outcomes...

Measuring the effect of body-worn cameras on complaints in Latin America: The case of traffic police in Uruguay

Abstract: More than a half a dozen published studies have observed the effect of body-worn cameras (BWCs) on complaints against the police. Nearly all, with varying degrees of methodological sophistication, tell a similar story: a strong reduction in complaints filed against the police once BWCs are in use. However, the entirety of the published evidence comes from English speaking countries, limited to the USA and the UK, and is restricted to the effects of BWCs on response policing. The purpose of this paper is to extend this body of research to Latin America, and to specialized policing jobs.,The authors measured the consequence of equipping traffic police officers with BWCs in five out of the 19 traffic police departments in Uruguay (n=208), and compared these settings to both the pre-test figures as well as to the non-treatment departments. Interrupted time-series analyses and repeated measures of analysis were used for significance testing.,Statistically significant differences emerged between the before–after as well as the between–groups comparisons: complaints were five times higher in the comparison vs the treatment jurisdictions, and there were 86 percent fewer cases compared to the pre-treatment period.,These outcomes suggest that the effect of BWCs on complaints is ubiquitous.,The findings indicate that BWCs provide an effective solution for reducing grievances against the police, which can potentially be a marker of increased accountability, transparency and legitimacy for the Latin American law enforcement departments.,This study is an extension of findings on BWCs to non-English-speaking police departments, with a focus on specialized policing rather than patrol policing.

Spatiotemporal patterns and distributions of harm within street segments: The story of the “harmspot”

Abstract: Purpose Virtually all analyses of hotspots have been devoted to a crude counting system, i.e. tallying the number of occurrences that take place in pre-specified units of space and time. Recent research shows that while usually half of all criminal events are concentrated in about 3 percent of places commonly referred to as “hotspots” of crime, similar proportions of harm concentrate in only 1 percent of places. These are “harmspots.” Identifying that harm is a more concentrated issue suggests wide policy and research implications, but what are the dynamics of these harmspots? The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides a descriptive framework for measuring, as well as evidence about, these patterns and concentrations, harmspots in Sussex, England. Findings There are four discrete offense categories that account for 80 percent of all the harm within harmspots. These categories include: sexual offenses, violence against the person, robbery and theft. Within these high harmspots, crime counts and harm are strongly correlated (r=0.82, p=0.001). Temporal analyses show that harmspots are not evenly spread across time and place, with night time and weekends becoming substantially more susceptible to harm – more than count-based models. Harmspot trajectory analysis suggests evidence of stability over time within the high harmspots; most harmspots remain chronically inflicted with harm. Violence and sexual offenses are random in their spatial distribution between the harmspots, but robberies and theft are more closely coupled to particular harmspots than others. Originality/value Implications of these findings are discussed in terms of future research avenues and crime policy.