Systematic Review of the Effects of Second Responder Programs, 1992-2007 (ICPSR 31641)

Version Date: Aug 22, 2011

Cite this study |

Principal Investigator(s):
Robert C. Davis, RAND Corporation; David Weisburd, Hebrew University; Bruce Taylor, Police Executive Research Forum

https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR31641.v1

Version V1

Slide tabs to view more

Summary

The purpose of this systematic review was to compile and synthesize published and unpublished empirical studies of the effects of second responder programs on repeat incidents of family violence. The researchers employed multiple strategies to search for literature that met the eligibility criteria. A keyword search was performed on a variety of online databases. Researchers reviewed the bibliographies of all second responder studies they located. Researchers performed hand searches of leading journals in the field and searched the Department of Justice Office of Violence Against Women Web site for a listing of federally-funded second responded programs and any evaluations conducted on those programs. A total of 22 studies that discussed second responder programs were found by the research team. Of these, 12 were eliminated from the sample because they did not meet the inclusion criteria, leaving a final sample of 10 studies. After collecting an electronic or paper copy of each article or report, researchers extracted pertinent data from each eligible article using a detailed coding protocol. Two main outcome measures were available for a sufficient number of studies to permit meta-analysis. One outcome was based on police data (Part 1: Police Data, n=9), for example whether a new domestic violence incident was reported to the police in the form of a crime report within six months of the triggering incident. The second outcome was based on survey data (Part 2: Interview Data, n=8), for example whether a new domestic violence incident occurred and was reported to a researcher during an interview within six months of the triggering incident. Several of studies (n=7) included in the meta-analysis had both outcome measures.

Citation

Davis, Robert C., Weisburd, David, and Taylor, Bruce. Systematic Review of the Effects of Second Responder Programs, 1992-2007. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2011-08-22. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR31641.v1

Export Citation:

  • RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
  • EndNote

Funding

United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice (2007-IJ-CX-0045)

Subject Terms

Geographic Coverage

Smallest Geographic Unit

none

Distributor(s)

Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
Hide

Time Period(s)

1992 -- 2007

Date of Collection

2006 -- 2007

Data Collection Notes

  1. These data were collected as part of a systematic review for the Campbell Crime and Justice Coordinating Group (CCJG). Further information about the Campbell Collaboration and the Campbell Crime and Justice Group can be found at http://www.campbellcollaboration.org.

Hide

Study Purpose

The purpose of this systematic review was to compile and synthesize published and unpublished empirical studies of the effects of second responder programs on repeat incidents of family violence.

The review addressed the following questions:

  • Do second responder programs reduce the likelihood of repeat incidents of family abuse?
  • Do second responder programs increase the frequency with which family violence victims use services such as counseling, civil legal assistance programs, shelters, and so forth?
  • Do second responder programs increase the confidence of the victims in the police and satisfaction with police services?

Study Design

The researchers employed multiple strategies to search for literature that met the eligibility criteria. A keyword search was performed on a variety of online databases. Researchers reviewed the bibliographies of all second responder studies they located. Researchers performed hand searches of leading journals in the field and searched the Department of Justice Office of Violence Against Women Web site for a listing of federally-funded second responded programs and any evaluations conducted on those programs. After collecting an electronic or paper copy of each article or report, researchers extracted pertinent data from each eligible article using a detailed coding protocol. Two trained researchers independently coded all eligible studies. Uncertainty and disagreement between the two coders were resolved through discussion and consultation. A reconciliation process occurred where all disputed cases were resolved with one of the principal investigators. Two main outcome measures were available for a sufficient number of studies to permit meta-analysis. One outcome was based on police data (Part 1: Poice Data, n=9), for example whether a new domestic violence incident was reported to the police in the form of a crime report within six months of the triggering incident. The second outcome was based on survey data (Part 2: Interview Data, n=8), for example whether a new domestic violence incident occurred and was reported to a researcher during an interview within six months of the triggering incident. Several of studies (n=7) included in the meta-analysis had both outcome measures.

Sample

A total of 22 studies that discussed second responder programs were found by the research team. Of these, 12 were eliminated from the sample because they did not meet the following inclusion criteria:

  • Intervention: Included studies had to be evaluations of a second responder program; that is, a program operated in cooperation with a municipal law enforcement agency in which, in response to a family violence complaint (complaints involving intimate partners, family members, or persons cohabiting), the police summon a family violence specialist or specialists to visit victims at their homes. These specialists could be victim advocates and/or specially trained police officers. The content of the contact had to be aimed at reducing the likelihood of a repeat offense and could include information about the nature of family violence, safety planning, information about legal rights and services, shelter placement, relocation assistance, and referrals to socials services. Programs that contact victims only by mail or phone were not included.
  • Research Design: Studies had to include an acceptable comparison group which did not receive a second response. The comparison group had to consist of cases meeting the same criteria as treatment group cases (i.e. family violence complaints) and could be from the same geographic area as the treatment group or from another geographic area identified as having similar case and demographic make-up.
  • Outcome Measures: Included studies had to have at least one measure of new abuse following the intervention. These measures could include police reports or arrests of new offenses committed by the perpetrator against the same victim. Information about new offenses may also be derived from surveys of victims.

Time Method

Cross-sectional

Universe

All published and unpublished evaluations of second responder programs.

Unit(s) of Observation

study

Data Source

The following databases were included in the literature search:

  1. Criminal Justice Periodical Index
  2. Criminal Justice Abstracts
  3. National Criminal Justice Reference Services (NCJRS) Abstracts
  4. Sociological Abstracts
  5. Social Science Abstracts (SocialSciAbs)
  6. Social Science Citation Index
  7. Dissertation Abstracts
  8. National Institute of Justice
  9. Office of Violence Against Women
  10. Office of Victims of Crime
  11. British Home Office
  12. Australian Criminology Database (CINCH)
  13. Gover Publications Office, Monthly Catalog (GPO Monthly)
  14. C2 SPECTR (The Campbell Collaboration Social, Psychological, Educational and Criminological Trials Register)
  15. PsychInfo
  16. Google
  17. Google Scholar
  18. Academic Search Premier
  19. Web of Knowledge
  20. Mincava
  21. Justice Research and Statistics Association
  22. California Post Library
  23. Social Drugscope.org.uk

The following keywords were used to search the databases listed above (in all cases where "police" is listed researchers also used "policing"):

  1. Second responder program
  2. Coordinated community response
  3. Police OR law enforcement AND repeat domestic violence OR wife abuse OR marital violence
  4. Police OR law enforcement AND crisis intervention AND domestic violence OR marital violence OR wife abuse
  5. Police OR law enforcement AND domestic violence advocates OR battered wom*n OR family violence AND evaluation AND response OR services
  6. Police OR law enforcement AND home visitation AND evaluation
  7. Police OR law enforcement AND intimate partner violence AND evaluation AND response OR services

Data Type(s)

Mode of Data Collection

Description of Variables

Variables include the first author's last name, study title, and where the study was located (journal name, Web site, etc.). Study specific variables include a description of the sample (victim and offender characteristics), type of intervention, methodology and research design, outcome measures, effect size and reports of statistical significance.

Response Rates

Not applicable.

Presence of Common Scales

none

Hide

Original Release Date

2011-08-22

Version History

2018-02-15 The citation of this study may have changed due to the new version control system that has been implemented. The previous citation was:
  • Davis, Robert C., David Weisburd, and Bruce Taylor. Systematic Review of the Effects of Second Responder Programs, 1992-2007. ICPSR31641-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2011-08-22. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR31641.v1

2011-08-22 ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:

  • Standardized missing values.
  • Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
Hide

Weight

none

Hide

Notes

  • The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.