Police body camera effectiveness Myth or Reality Dr Jason Armstrong Albany State University Background In the last few years there has been a national and even a global push to outfit police officers with bodyworn cameras Ariel Farrar amp Sutherland 2015 Ariel et al 2016 ID: 767570
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Police body camera effectiveness:" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Police body camera effectiveness: Myth or Reality? Dr. Jason Armstrong Albany State University
BackgroundIn the last few years there has been a national, and even a global, push to outfit police officers with body-worn cameras (Ariel, Farrar, & Sutherland, 2015; Ariel et al., 2016; Cubitt , Lesic , Myers, & Corry, 2016; Stratton, Clissold , & Tuson , 2015). The demand for body cameras became a social justice issue after the 2014 police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO . The U.S. Government pledged $263 million in matching funding to equip officers and train officers with body-worn cameras Just like dash cameras became a normal piece of equipment in the late 90’s/early 00’s, citizens expect to see body camera footage from controversial situations .
Myth or Reality?Are police body worn cameras an effective tool in monitoring police behavior and reducing injuries during police-citizen encounters? Effectiveness is defined as a reduction in the total number of use of force incidents, the number of citizen complaints, the number of offender injuries, and the number of officer injuries from after body cameras were implemented within a police department. First peer-reviewed study was published in 2015.
Literature ReviewUse of force1 increase, 6 decrease, 6 no change Complaints 1 increase, 8 decrease, 3 no change Offender injuries 1 increase, 2 decrease Officer injuries 3 increase, 2 decrease, 1 no change
Theoretical FrameworkSocial surveillance theory Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832 ) & Michel Foucault (1926-1984) Social surveillance theory is the idea that individuals will modify their behavior to accepted norms if they believe they are being watched. If individuals are self-aware they are being watched, or in the case of body cameras being recorded, then they will follow rules and regulations
Theoretical FrameworkDeterrence theory Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) Deterrence theory states that when the chances of being caught are high, individuals are less likely to engage in illegal or unethical behavior because of rational decision making . If a police officer is wearing a body camera while committing an illegal or improper act, then the chance of that behavior being detected is high.
Research designThe purpose of this research was to evaluate if body-worn cameras were effective in reducing: Police use of force Citizen complaints against police Offender injuries during apprehension situations Officer injuries during apprehension situations Quantitative methodology Single-group interrupted time-series design
Research QuestionsRQ1: Is there a statistically significant difference in the number of use of force incidents by police after body cameras were deployed in the field compared to data from similar time periods before body cameras were implemented? RQ2: Is there a statistically significant difference in citizen complaints against police after body cameras were deployed in the field compared to data from similar time periods before body cameras were implemented? RQ3: Is there a statistically significant difference in offender injuries during apprehension situations after body cameras were deployed in the field compared to data from similar time periods before body cameras were implemented? RQ4: Is there a statistically significant difference in officer injuries during apprehension situations after body cameras were deployed in the field compared to data from similar time periods before body cameras were implemented?
Research settingSecondary data obtained from a large police department in the Southeastern U.S.Entire population of officers assigned cameras was evaluated. The number of years (three) selected was a nonprobability purposive sample.
Data Year 2012 2013 2014 3 year avg. 2015 2016 2017 3 year avg. Use of force 214 217 261 231 237 273 433 314 Citizen complaints 66 58 119 81 79 71 79 76 Offender injuries N/A N/A 9 9 29 21 N/A 25 Officer injuries 18 24 31 24 22 27 38 29 # of officers 552 570 530 551 525 (419) 558 (444) 582 (542) 555 (468) Total calls 478,438 466,143 428,067 457,549 396,138 465,979 546,874 469,664
Results – Research Question 1Is there a statistically significant difference in the number of use of force incidents by police after body cameras were deployed in the field compared to data from similar time periods before body cameras were implemented ? The result was significant (p<.001, officers; p=.001, calls) 231 (before) vs. 314 (after) = 36% increase
Results – Research Question 2Is there a statistically significant difference in citizen complaints against the police after body cameras are deployed in the field when compared to data from similar time periods before body cameras were implemented ? The result was not significant (p=.631, officers; p=.574, calls) 81 (before) vs. 76 (after) = 6.5% decrease
Results – Research Question 3Is there a statistically significant difference in offender injuries during apprehension situations after body cameras are deployed in the field when compared to data from similar time periods before body cameras were implemented ? The result was significant (p=.006, officers; p=.006, calls) 9 (before) vs. 25 (after) = 278% increase
Results – Research Question 4Is there a statistically significant difference in officer injuries during apprehension situations after body cameras are deployed in the field when compared to data from similar time periods before body cameras were implemented ? The result was not significant (p=.498, officers; p=.523, calls) 24 (before) vs. 29 (after) = 21% increase
Limitations of the StudyNot generalizable to departments that are much smaller (avg. dept. = 46 officers)The city served by the police department is a tourist destination. The city is diverse and results may vary in municipalities with less diverse demographics. The exact same officers were not evaluated over the 6 year period.
Myth or Reality?Body-worn cameras are or will be in 95% of law enforcement agencies in the near future. What results can be anticipated from the body-worn camera programs? BWCs are not a “magic bullet” to solve all of the issues with police legitimacy and community relations. LE agencies and communities may need to temper their expectations. Agencies will want to define the expectations of body camera programs (transparency vs. results).