Search Results

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. This study examined how police managers would use information about their officers' performance in procedural justice terms. The project provided for the injection of citizen assessment of service quality into systems of police performance measurement and accountability. Information on the quality of police-citizen encounters was drawn from surveys of citizens who had contact with the police in each of two cities, Schenectady and Syracuse, New York. Following the accumulation of survey data to form a baseline, survey results on citizens' satisfaction and judgments about procedural justice in their police contacts were summarized and reported to command staffs on a monthly basis through the departments' respective Compstat meetings. In this way the project provided for measures of police performance with respect to procedural justice with sufficient periodicity that the information was potentially useful in managing performance. The study addressed four specific questions: Does performance on these outcomes - procedural justice and citizen satisfaction - improve when information on these outcomes is incorporated into departments' systems of performance measurement and accountability? What do police managers do with this information, and how (if at all) are field supervisors and patrol officers affected by it? Are survey-based measures of citizens' subjective experiences valid measures of police performance, that is, do they reflect the procedural justice with which police act? Can survey based measures be deployed economically (e.g., through targeted sampling), and can other, less expensive measures of the quality of police-citizen encounters be substituted for survey-based measures? To answer these questions, researches used a mixed methods data collection plan. In both Schenectady and Syracuse, a survey was administered to people who had recent contact with the police. Semi-monthly samples were randomly drawn from police records of calls for service, stops, and arrests from mid-July, 2011, through mid-January, 2013. Across the 18 months of surveying, 3,603 interviews were completed. Also carried out, was a survey of key informants in each city - neighborhood association leaders - in order to extend the assessment of public perceptions of the local police beyond those who have direct contact with police to the larger community. Interviews with patrol officers and supervisors were also conducted in both sites, once at about the mid-point of the 18-month police services survey and again at the conclusion of the surveying. Interviews were conducted with the commanders shortly after the project was introduced to them in October of 2011. Finally, in Schenectady, "armchair" observation of a subset of the 1,800 encounters about which the citizen had already been interviewed was conducted. The collection contains 7 SPSS data files and 6 Syntax files: archive_Census_beat.sav (n=30; 28 variables) ,>archive_keyinformant_analysis.sps archive_keyinformant_survey.sav (n=90; 28 variables) archive_obs_byenc.sav (n=476; 79 variables) archive_obs_byobserver.sav (n=1,078; 476 variables) archive_obs_enc_analysis.sps archive_obs_enc_var_construction.sps archive_police_data.sav (n=3,603; 9 variables) archive_policeservices_survey_analysis.sps archive_policeservices_survey_closed.sav (n=3,603; 148 variables) archive_policeservices_survey_open.sav (n=1,218; 23 variables) archive_policeservices_survey_var_construction.sps Syntax to replicate results - list by table.pdf For confidentiality reasons, the qualitative interviews with citizens, police sergeants, patrol officers, and commanders regarding their experiences are not available as part of this collection.

This study aimed to improve the understanding of procedural justice during police-citizen encounters with a comprehensive approach including officer surveys, systematic social observations, and citizen surveys. First, the study used officer surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of a procedural justice training program in Norfolk, Virginia. In 2017, an eight-hour training was conducted for all Norfolk police officers. A pretest and posttest survey was given to each officer during the training, which asked about their opinions on a multitude of statements representing the key elements of procedural justice in policing (e.g., voice, respect, trustworthiness, and neutrality). In 2019, the officers were given a second-wave survey to assess the long-term effects of the training. The study also examined officers' procedurally fair behavior during interactions and citizens' behavioral responses through systematic social observations of police-citizen interactions captured by the police body-worn cameras. Patrol shifts were randomly selected and observed between December 2017 and March 2019. The third component included a survey of citizens who interacted with the police during the observation period. Randomly selected officers were, prior to the shift, encouraged to hand out survey cards to all citizens they encountered. These cards invited the citizens to take a survey online. Citizens could also give their phone numbers to the officers so that they could be contacted to take the survey over the phone. The goal of the citizen survey was to obtain information about the citizens' opinions of the Norfolk police in general and the specific encounters they had with the Norfolk police. Taken together, the three components of this study offered a systematic understanding of the policing issues related to procedural justice, including officers' perceptions about procedural justice, officers' procedurally fair behavior during interactions, citizens' behavioral responses, and citizens' subjective evaluations of their encounters.

The contained collection was designed to assess potential perceptions of two hypothetical health science research collaborations. The studies were also designed to test the utility of using procedural justice concepts to assess perceptions of research legitimacy as a theoretical way to determine public opinions on conflicts of interest. The researchers performed three experimental studies to examine how different combinations of partners in a research collaboration influence subjects' perceived procedural fairness and legitimacy based on collaborative partnerships. Datafiles: Experience 1: 1000 cases, 92 variables Experience 2: 1058 cases, 88 variables Experience 3: 2107 cases, 76 variables For more information about this study, please visit the study publication here.

The National Initiative for Building Community Trust and Justice (the National Initiative) is a joint project of the National Network for Safe Communities, the Center for Policing Equity, the Justice Collaboratory at Yale Law School, and the Urban Institute, designed to improve relationships and increase trust between communities and law enforcement. Funded by the Department of Justice, this mixed-methods evaluation aimed to assess outcomes and impacts in six cities that participated in the National Initiative, which include Birmingham, AL; Fort Worth, TX; Gary, IN; Minneapolis, MN; Pittsburgh, PA; and Stockton, CA. The data described herein represent two waves of surveys of residents living in the highest-crime, lowest-income residential street segments in the six National Initiative cities. The first wave was conducted between September 2015 and January 2016, and the second wave was conducted between July and October 2017. Survey items were designed to measure neighborhood residents' perceptions of their neighborhood conditions--with particular emphases on neighborhood safety, disorder, and victimization--and perceptions of the police as it relates to procedural justice, police legitimacy, officer trust, community-focused policing, police bias, willingness to partner with the police on solving crime, and the law. The data described herein are from pre- and post-training assessment surveys of officers who participated in three trainings: 1) procedural justice (PJ) conceptual training, which is the application of PJ in the context of law enforcement-civilian interactions, as well as its role in mitigating historical tensions between law enforcement and communities of color; 2) procedural justice tactical, which provided simulation and scenario-based exercises and techniques to operationalize PJ principles in officers' daily activities; and 3) implicit bias, which engaged officers in critical thought about racial bias, and prepared them to better identify and handle identity traps that enable implicit biases. Surveys for the procedural justice conceptual training were fielded between December 2015 and July 2016; procedural justice tactical between February 2016 and June 2017; and implicit bias between September 2016 and April 2018. Survey items were designed to measure officers' understanding of procedural justice and implicit bias concepts, as well as officers' levels of satisfaction with the trainings.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. The purpose of the study was to implement a "platform-based" methodology for collecting data about police organizations and the communities they serve with the goals of generating in-depth standardized information about police organizations, personnel and practices and to help move policing in the direction of evidence-based "learning-organizations" by providing judicious feedback to police agencies and policy makers. The research team conducted three web-based Law Enforcement Organizations (LEO) surveys of sworn and civilian law enforcement employees (LEO Survey A Data, n=22,765; LEO Survey B Data, n=15,825; and LEO Survey C Data, n=16,483). The sample was drawn from the 2007 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) database. Agencies with 100 to 3,000 sworn police personnel were eligible for participation. To collect data for the Police-Community Interaction (PCI) survey (PCI Data, n=16,659), each week department employees extracted names and addresses of persons who had recent contact with a police officer because of a reported crime incident, traffic accident or traffic stop. Typically, the surveys were completed within two to four weeks of the encounter.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. For this study, researchers conducted an experimental evaluation of a training program aimed at promoting the use of procedural justice by officers in the Seattle Police Department (SPD). After identifying eligible officers using a specially designed High Risk Circumstance (HRC) model, researchers arranged non-disciplinary supervisory meetings for participants in which procedural justice behaviors were modeled. Participating officers were then asked to fill out comment cards about the experience. Using the control and engagement groups, researchers evaluated the impact that procedural justice training had on a number of outcomes including arrests, warnings and citations, use of force, and citizen complaints. In addition to participant comment cards, researchers assessed outcomes by analyzing the administrative data collected by the Seattle Police Department.

This research sought to evaluate the implementation of body worn cameras (BWCs) in the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). Researchers employed three strategies to evaluate the impact of BWCs in the department: 1) two-wave officer surveys about BWCs, 2) two-wave Systematic Social Observations (SSOs) of citizen interactions from officer ride-alongs, and 3) a time series analysis of existing LAPD data of use of force and complaint data. The officer surveys were conducted in the Mission and Newton divisions of the LAPD before and after BWCs were implemented. The survey instrument was designed to measure perceptions of BWCs across a variety of domains and took approximately 20 minutes to complete. Researchers attended roll calls for all shifts and units to request officer participation and administered the surveys on tablets using the Qualtrics software. The pre-deployment survey was administered in both divisions August and September 2015. The post-deployment surveys were conducted with a subset of officers who participated in the pre-deployment surveys during a two-week period in the summer of 2016, approximately nine months following the initial rollout of BWCs. The SSO data was collected in the Mission and Newton divisions prior to and following BWC implementation. The pre-administration SSOs were conducted in August and September 2015 and the post-administration SSOs were conducted in June and August, 2016. Trained observers spent 725 hours riding with and collecting observational data on the encounters between officers and citizens using tablets to perform field coding using Qualtrics software. A total of 124 rides (71 from Wave I and 53 from Wave II) were completed between both Newton and Mission Divisions. These observations included 514 encounters and involved coding the interactions of 1,022 citizens, 555 of which were deemed to be citizens who had full contact, which was defined as a minute or more of face-time or at least three verbal exchanges. Patrol officers (including special units) for ride-alongs were selected from a master list of officers scheduled to work each day and shift throughout the observation period. Up to five officers within each shift were randomly identified as potential participants for observation from this master list and observers would select the first available officer from this list. For each six-hour observation period, or approximately one-half of a shift, the research staff observed the interactions between the assigned officer, his or her partner, and any citizens he or she encountered. In Wave 2, SSOs were conducted with the same officers from Wave 1. The time series data were obtained from the LAPD use of force and complaint databases for each of the 21 separate patrol divisions, a metropolitan patrol division, and four traffic divisions of the LAPD. These data cover the time period where BWC were implemented throughout the LAPD on a staggered basis by division from 2015 to 2018. The LAPD operates using four-week deployment periods (DPs), and there are approximately 13 deployment periods per year. These data span the period of the beginning of 2012 through the 2017 DP 12. These data were aggregated to counts by deployment period based on the date of the originating incident. The LAPD collects detailed information about each application of force by an officer within an encounter. For this reason, separate use of force counts are based on incidents, officers, and u,se of force applications. Similarly, the LAPD also collects information on each allegation for each officer within a complaint and public complaint counts are based on incidents, officers, and allegations.