Impact of Community Policing at the Street Level: An Observational Study in Richmond, Virginia, 1992 (ICPSR 2612)

Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)

Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes

Hide

Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose

At the time of this study there had been no systematic accounts of American street-level police work conducted in a community policing framework. This study's purpose, therefore, was twofold: to learn something about the nature of police patrol work in a community policing context and to field-test data collection instruments designed for systematic social observation. The project, conducted in Richmond, Virginia, where its police department was in the third year of a five-year plan to implement community policing, was designed as a case study of one police department's experience with community policing, focusing on officers of the patrol division. The instruments were designed to capture the enduring features of police work (e.g., "encounters" between police and public), plus other features that might arise out of the new directions of community policing (special community policing "activities," such as dealing with community groups and problem-solving). Additionally, the project attempted to introduce several data collection refinements, including a detailed accounting of how officers spent their work time, debriefing officers after some of their encounters with the public, and employing a coded data entry system using CODIT, a specially developed software package for IBM-compatible personal computers. The methods used guided field researchers in their observations to systematically record information on what police officers do, how they interact with members of the public, and what the immediate consequences are on the scene. The researchers also sought to capture how and where officers spend their time when not engaging the public. The data enable researchers to learn more about differences in how the officers reacted to community policing, their degree of support for the community policing "environment" provided by the program, how officers exercised their discretion, what accounted for variations in officer behavior, and how citizens responded to police.

Study Design View help for Study Design

The methods and instruments employed for this study were derived from the systematic social observation process used as a means of applying methodological rigor to "quantitative" research. Observations were conducted in the spring and summer of 1992, providing a cross-sectional picture of patrol practices during one brief time period. A team of eight researchers conducted observations: the principal investigator, the site director (a graduate student), and six observers (three graduate students, two recently graduated honors undergraduates, and one currently enrolled undergraduate). The race/gender breakdown of the research team was three white males, two Black males, and three white females. The field researchers were employed full-time on the project during field observation. Observers reported to the precinct station at least 15 minutes before roll call, reporting to the sergeant in charge of the incoming squad. Observation began at the beginning of the official start time of the shift and ended when the officer ended his or her tour of duty. A total of 120 officers were observed during 125 observation sessions. Officers were given a brief, one-page description of the study before observations began and fuller explanations of the project, including information on confidentiality and legal issues, as soon as time permitted. Observers accompanied officers throughout their regular work shifts, taking brief field notes on officers' activities and encounters with the public, generally at times and in a manner that would not distract the officer or citizens. All of an observed officer's time during the shift was accounted for by either encounters or activities. Observers also interviewed officers about their views of community policing at convenient times during the ridealong (usually at the beginning as part of the introduction to the study). Within 15 hours of the completion of the ridealong, the observer prepared a detailed narrative account of events that occurred during the ridealong and coded key items associated with these events according to a protocol available on personal computers at the research office. The study generated five nested quantitative datasets that can be linked by common variables. Part 1, Ridealong Data, provides information pertinent to the 125 observation sessions or "rides." Part 2, Activity Data, focuses on 5,576 activities conducted by officers when not engaged in encounters. Data in Part 3, Encounter Data, describe 1,098 encounters with citizens during the ridealongs. An encounter was defined as a communication between officers and citizens that took over one minute, involved more than three verbal exchanges between an officer and a citizen, or involved significant physical contact between the officer and citizen. Part 4, Citizen Data, provides data relevant to each of the 1,630 citizens engaged by police in the encounters. Some encounters involved more than one citizen. Part 5, Arrest Data, was constructed by merging Parts 1, 3, and 4, and provides information on 451 encounters that occurred during the ridealongs in which the citizen was suspected of some criminal mischief.

Sample View help for Sample

Richmond, Virginia, was chosen as the research site because it was a medium-sized center city that was experiencing many of the problems for which community policing was designed. The Richmond Police Department was selected because it expected all officers to engage in its practices and had initiated implementation of its community policing program more than two years prior to the research project's data collection. To obtain a representative sample of police patrol behavior, each beat and special unit was observed. The sample reflected a race and sex profile similar to that of the entire patrol division.

Universe View help for Universe

All patrol officers in the Richmond, Virginia, Police Department in the spring and summer of 1992.

Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation

Data Source View help for Data Source

Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)

Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables

Variables from Part 1 include date, start time, end time, unit, and beat assignment of the observation session, and the primary officer's and secondary officer's sex, race/ethnicity, years as an officer, months assigned to precinct and beat, hours of community policing training, and general orientation to community policing. Variables in Part 2 specify the time the activity began and ended, who initiated the activity, type, location, and visibility of the activity, involvement of the officer's supervisor during the activity, and if the activity involved problem-solving, or meeting with citizens or other community organizations. Part 3 variables include time encounter began and ended, who initiated the encounter, primary and secondary officer's energy level and mood before the encounter, problem as radioed by dispatcher, and problem as it appeared at the beginning of the encounter includes at the end of the encounter. Information on the location of the encounter includes percent of time at initial location, visibility, officer's prior knowledge of the initial location, and if the officer anticipated violence at the scene. Additional variables focus on the presence of a supervisor, other police officers, service personnel, and bystanders and participants, if the officer filed or intended to file a report, if the officer engaged in problem-solving, and factors that influenced the officer's actions. Citizen information in Part 4 includes sex, age, and race/ethnicity of the citizen, role in the encounter, if the citizen appeared to be of low income, under the use of alcohol or drugs, or appeared to have a mental disorder or physical injury or illness, if the citizen was representing an establishment, if the citizen lived, worked, or owned property in the police beat, and if the citizen had a weapon. Also presented are various aspects of the police-citizen interaction, such as evidence considered by the officer, requests and responses to each other, and changes in actions during the encounter. Variables in Part 5 record the officer's orientation toward community policing, if the suspect was arrested or cited, if the offense was serious or drug-related, amount of evidence, if the victim requested that the suspect be arrested, if the victim was white, Black, and of low income, and if the suspect represented an organization. Information on the suspect includes gender, race, sobriety level, if of low income, if 19 years old or less, if actively resistant, if the officer knew the suspect adversarially, and if the suspect demonstrated conflict with others. Some items were recoded for the particular analyses for which the Arrest Data were constructed.

Response Rates View help for Response Rates

Not applicable.

Presence of Common Scales View help for Presence of Common Scales

None.

Hide

Original Release Date View help for Original Release Date

2002-03-01

Version History View help for Version History

Hide