Search results

Showing 1 – 28 of 28 results.
Curated

Assessing the Validity and Reliability of National Data on Citizen Complaints about Police Use of Force, 2003 and 2007 (ICPSR 36042)

Released/updated on: 2017-06-30
Geographic coverage: United States

These data are part of the 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 excepted as noted below. All direct identifiers have been removed and replaced with text enclosed in square brackets (e.g.[MASKED]). Due to the masking of select information, variables/content described in the data documentation may not actually be available as part of the collection. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This collection is one part of the Department of Justice's response to 42 USC 14142, a law which requires the U.S. Attorney General to 1) "acquire data about the use of excessive force by law enforcement officers" and 2) "publish an annual summary of the data." Researchers compared agency-level data reported in the 2003 (ICPSR 4411) and 2007 (ICPSR 31161) waves of the Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) surveys with available external sources including publicly available reports and direct contact with agency personnel. The purpose of this study was to assess validity and reliability of the available agency-level reported data on citizen complaints about police use of force.

Curated
Restricted

The Benefits of Body-Worn Cameras: New Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial at the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Nevada, 2014-2015 (ICPSR 37048)

Released/updated on: 2018-10-30
Geographic coverage: Las Vegas, Nevada
Time period: 2014-02-01--2015-09-01

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 reports the findings of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) involving more than 400 police officers and the use of body-worn cameras (BWC) in the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD). Officers were surveyed before and after the trial, and a random sample was interviewed to assess their level of comfort with technology, perceptions of self, civilians, other officers, and the use of BWCs. Information was gathered during ride-alongs with BWC officers and from a review of BWC videos.

The collection includes 2 SPSS data files, 4 Excel data files, and 2 files containing aggregated treatment groups and rank-and-treatment groups, in Stata, Excel, and CSV format:

  • SPSS: officer-survey---pretest.sav (n=422; 30 variables)
  • SPSS: officer-survey---posttest2.sav (n=95; 33 variables)
  • Excel: officer-interviews---form-a.xlsx (n=23; 52 variables)
  • Excel: officer-interviews---form-b.xlsx (n=27; 52 variables)
  • Excel: ride-along-observations.xlsx (n=72; 20 variables)
  • Excel: video-review-data.xlsx (n=53; 21 variables)
  • Stata: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-treatment-group.dta (n=4; 42 variables)
  • Excel: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-treatment-group.xls (n=4; 42 variables)
  • CSV: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-treatment-group.csv (n=4; 42 variables)
  • Stata: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-rank-and-treatment-group.dta (n=12; 43 variables)
  • Excel: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-rank-and-treatment-group.xls (n=12; 43 variables)
  • CSV: hours-and-compensation-rollup-to-rank-and-treatment-group.csv (n=12; 43 variables)
Curated
Partially restricted
Simple Crosstabs

Evaluation of Less-Lethal Technologies on Police Use-of-Force Outcomes in 13 Sites in the United States, 1992-2007 (ICPSR 27561)

Released/updated on: 2013-10-29
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1992-01-01--2007-01-01
The study examined how law enforcement agencies (LEAs) manage the use of force by officers. It was conducted to produce practical information that can help LEAs establish guidelines that assist in the effective design of Conducted Energy Device (CED) deployment programs that support increased safety for officers and citizens. The study used a quasi-experimental design to compare seven LEAs with CED deployment to a set of six matched LEAs that did not deploy CEDs on a variety of safety outcomes. From 2006-2008, data were collected on the details of every use of force incident during a specified time period (1992-2007), as well as demographic and crime statistics for each site. For the agencies that deployed CEDs, at least two years of data on use of force incidents were collected for the period before CED deployment and at least two years of data for the period after CED deployment. For the agencies that did not deploy CEDs, at least four years of data were collected over a similar period.
Curated

Fatal Encounters Database, United States, 2000-present (ICPSR 38118)

Released/updated on: 2021-06-24
Geographic coverage: United States
The Fatal Encounters database aims to document all deaths through police interaction in the United States since Jan. 1, 2000. The database includes any non-police deaths that occur when police are present or are precipitated by police action or presence.
Curated

Impact of Oleoresin Capsicum Spray on Respiratory Function in Human Subjects in the Sitting and Prone Maximal Restraint Positions in San Diego County, 1998 (ICPSR 2961)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: San Diego, United States, California
Oleoresin capsicum (OC), or pepper spray, has gained wide acceptance as standard police equipment in law enforcement as a swift and effective method to subdue violent, dangerous suspects in the field. As a use-of-force method, however, OC spray has been alleged in the media to have been associated with a number of in-custody deaths. The goal of this study was to assess the safety of a commercially available OC spray in use by law enforcement agencies nationwide. The study was conducted as a randomized, cross-over, controlled trial on volunteer human subjects recruited from the local law enforcement training academy in San Diego County, California. Subjects participated in four different experimental trials in random order over two separate days in a pulmonary function testing laboratory: (a) placebo spray exposure followed by sitting position, (b) placebo spray exposure followed by restraint position, (c) OC spray exposure followed by sitting position, and (d) OC spray exposure followed by restraint position. Prior to participation, subjects completed a short questionnaire regarding their health status, history of lung disease and asthma, smoking history, medication use, and respiratory inhaler medication use. Prior to exposure, subjects also underwent a brief screening spirometry in the sitting position by means of a portable spirometry device to determine baseline pulmonary function. Subjects then placed their heads in a 5' x 3' x 3' exposure box that allowed their faces to be exposed to the spray. A one-second spray was delivered into the box from the end opposite the subject (approximately five feet away). Subjects remained in the box for five seconds after the spray was delivered. During this time, subjects underwent impedance monitoring to assess whether inhalation of the OC or placebo spray had occurred. After this exposure period, subjects were placed in either the sitting or prone maximal restraint position. Subjects remained in these positions for ten minutes. Repeat spirometric measurements were performed, oxygen saturation, blood pressure, end-tidal carbon dioxide levels, and pulse rate were recorded, and an arterial blood sample was drawn. A total of 34 subjects completed the study, comprising 128 separate analyzable study trials. Variables provided in all three parts of this collection include subject's age, gender, ethnicity, height, weight, body mass index, past medical history, tobacco use history, and history of medication use, as well as OC spray or placebo exposure and sitting or restraint position during the trial. Part 1 also includes tidal volume, respiratory rate, and heart rate at baseline and at 1, 5, 7, and 9 minutes, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure at baseline and at 3, 6, and 9 minutes. Additional variables in Part 2 include predicted forced vital capacity and predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and the same measures at baseline, 1.5 minutes, and 10 minutes. Derived variables include percent predicted and mean percent predicted values involving the above variables. Part 3 also provides end-tidal carbon dioxide and oxygenation levels, oxygen saturation, oxygen consumption at baseline and at 1, 5, 7, and 9 minutes, blood pH, partial pressure of oxygen, and partial pressure of carbon dioxide at 8 minutes.
Curated
Restricted

LAPD's TEAMS II: The Impact of a Police Integrity Early Intervention System, Los Angeles, California, 2000-2015 (ICPSR 36574)

Released/updated on: 2018-09-17
Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California
Time period: 2000-01-01--2015-01-01

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 research was an evaluation of the Los Angeles Police Department's (LAPD) Training Evaluation and Management System II (TEAMS II) Early Intervention System conducted by Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. TEAMS II was designed to identify officers at-risk for engaging in future problematic behavior. This system was mandated as part of the Consent Decree (Section II) that was formally entered into on June 15, 2001 between the U.S. Department of Justice and the LAPD. Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. research staff worked with the Information Technology Bureau to obtain and analyze TEAMS II data, conducted informal interviews with officers, sergeants, civilians, command staff, and technologists involved with TEAMS II, and worked with the TEAMS II contractors to examine and provide recommendations.

The data collection includes 3 Stata data files. The concentration analysis dataset (TEAMS-Concentration-Analysis-FINAL-v2.dta) with 143 variables for 15,710 cases, the regression-discontinuity dataset (TEAMS-Regression-Discontinuity-FINAL.dta) with 98 variables for 297,779 cases, and the time series dataset (TEAMS-Time-Series-FINAL.dta) with 43 variables for 192 cases. Demographic variables included as part of this data collection include officer age, gender, ethnicity, education level, and total number of officers employed by demographics.

Curated

Multi-Method Evaluation of Police Use of Force Outcomes: Cities, Counties, and National, 1998-2007 [United States] (ICPSR 25781)

Released/updated on: 2011-04-28
Geographic coverage: Seattle, United States, Orlando, Texas, Austin, Florida, Washington, South Carolina
Time period: 2006-07-01--2006-10-01, 2005-01-01--2006-07-01, 2002-01-01--2006-05-01, 2005-12-01--2006-10-01, 1998-01-01--2007-12-01, 1998-01-01--2006-12-01, 2002-01-01--2006-12-01
The purpose of the study was to investigate how and why injuries occur to police and citizens during use of force events. The research team conducted a national survey (Part 1) of a stratified random sample of United States law enforcement agencies regarding the deployment of, policies for, and training with less lethal technologies. Finalized surveys were mailed in July 2006 to 950 law enforcement agencies, and a total of 518 law enforcement agencies provided information on less lethal force generally and on their deployment and policies regarding conducted energy devices (CEDs) in particular. A total of 292 variables are included in the National Use of Force Survey Data (Part 1) including items about weapons deployment, force policies, training, force reporting/review, force incidents and outcomes, and conducted energy devices (CEDs). Researchers also collected agency-supplied use of force data from law enforcement agencies in Richland County, South Carolina; Miami-Dade, Florida; and Seattle, Washington; to identify individual and situational predictors of injuries to officers and citizens during use of force events. The Richland County, South Carolina Data (Part 2) include 441 use-of-force reports from January 2005 through July 2006. Part 2 contains 17 variables including whether the officer or suspect was injured, 8 measures of officer force, 3 measures of suspect resistance, the number of witnesses and officers present at each incident, and the number of suspects that resisted or assaulted officers for each incident. The Miami-Dade County, Florida Data (Part 3) consist of 762 use-of-force incidents that occurred between January 2002 and May 2006. Part 3 contains 15 variables, including 4 measures of officer force, the most serious resistance on the part of the suspect, whether the officer or suspect was injured, whether the suspect was impaired by drugs or alcohol, the officer's length of service in years, and several demographic variables pertaining to the suspect and officer. The Seattle, Washington Data (Part 4) consist of 676 use-of-force incidents that occurred between December 1, 2005, as 15 variables, including 3 measures of officer force, whether the suspect or officer was injured, whether the suspect was impaired by drugs or alcohol, whether the suspect used, or threatened to use, physical force against the officer(s), and several demographic variables relating to the suspect and officer(s). The researchers obtained use of force survey data from several large departments representing different types of law enforcement agencies (municipal, county, sheriff's department) in different states. The research team combined use of force data from multiple agencies into a single dataset. This Multiagency Use of Force Data (Part 5) includes 24,928 use-of-force incidents obtained from 12 law enforcement agencies from 1998 through 2007. Part 5 consists a total of 21 variables, including the year the incident took place, demographic variables relating to the suspect, the type of force used by the officer, whether the suspect or officer was injured, and 5 measures of the department's policy regarding the use of CEDs and pepper spray. Lastly, longitudinal data were also collected for the Orlando, Florida and Austin, Texas police departments. The Orlando, Florida Longitudinal Data (Part 6) comprise 4,222 use-of-force incidents aggregated to 108 months -- a 9 year period from 1998 through 2006. Finally, the Austin, Texas Longitudinal Data (Part 7) include 6,596 force incidents aggregated over 60 months- a 5 year period from 2002 through 2006. Part 6 and Part 7 are comprised of seven variables documenting whether a Taser was implemented, the number of suspects and officers injured in a month, the number of force incidents per month, and the number of CEDs uses per month.
Curated

Multi-Method Study of Police Special Weapons and Tactics Teams in the United States, 1986-1998 (ICPSR 20351)

Released/updated on: 2007-12-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1986-01-01--1998-01-01
This research study was designed to pursue three specific goals to accomplish its objective of enhancing knowledge about Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams and the role they play in contemporary American policing. The first goal was to develop a better picture of the structure and nature of SWAT teams in American law enforcement. The second goal of the research project was to increase the amount of knowledge about how SWAT teams prepare for and execute operations. The project's third goal was to develop information about one specific aspect of SWAT operations: the use of force, especially deadly force, by both officers and suspects. To gather this information, the SWAT Operations Survey (SOS) was conducted. This was a nationwide survey of law enforcement agencies with 50 or more sworn officers. The survey sought information about the agencies' emergency response capabilities and structures. The SOS included two instruments: (1) the Operations Form, completed by a total of 341 agencies, and containing variables about the organization and functioning of SWAT teams, and (2) the Firearms Discharge Report, which includes a total of 273 shootings of interest, as well as items about incidents in which SWAT officers and suspects discharged firearms during SWAT operations.
Curated

Phoenix [Arizona] Use of Force Project, June 1994 (ICPSR 6626)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Phoenix, Arizona
Time period: 1994-06-13--1994-06-27
In 1994, the Phoenix Police Department, in conjunction with Rutgers University and Arizona State University, designed and implemented a study on the use of force by and against Phoenix police officers. This study was concerned with describing the amount of force used in different arrest situations and determining the extent to which officer, suspect, offense, and arrest situation characteristics can predict the amount of force used. Data were collected primarily through a one-page, two-sided survey instrument given to police officers. In addition, screening interviews regarding the use of force during the arrest were conducted with both officers and suspects to assess the reliability of the officer surveys. During the screening interviews, officers and suspects were asked brief questions about the use and extent of force by officers and suspects. In the officer survey form, six potential areas of force were identified: voice, motion, restraints, tactics, weapons, and injuries. Three dimensions of weapons use--possession, threatened use, and actual use--were also recorded. Basic demographic information on officers and suspects, descriptions of the arrest, and information regarding injuries were also collected.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 1999: [United States] (ICPSR 3151)

Released/updated on: 2001-06-18
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey was undertaken to learn more about how often and under what circumstances police-public contact becomes problematic. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) initiated surveys of the public on their interactions with police in 1996 with the first Police-Public Contact Survey, a pretest among a nationally representative sample of 6,421 persons aged 12 or older. That initial version of the questionnaire revealed that about 20 percent of the public had direct, face-to-face contact with a police officer at least once during the year preceding the survey. At that time, the principal investigator estimated that about 1 in 500 residents, or about a half million people, who had an encounter with a police officer also experienced either a threat of force or the actual use of force by the officer. The current survey, an improved version of the 1996 Police-Public Contact Survey, was fielded as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (ICPSR 6406) during the last six months of 1999. A national sample nearly 15 times as large as the pretest sample in 1996 was used. The 1999 survey yielded nearly identical estimates of the prevalence and nature of contacts between the public and the police. This survey, because of its much larger sample size, permits more extensive analysis of demographic differences in police contacts than the 1996 pretest. In addition, it added a new and more detailed set of questions about traffic stops by police, the most frequent reason given for contact with police. Variables in the dataset cover type of contact with police, including whether it was face-to-face, initiated by the police or the citizen, whether an injury to the officer or the citizen resulted from the contact, crimes reported, and police use of force. Demographic variables supplied for the citizens include gender, race, and Hispanic origin.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2002 [United States] (ICPSR 4273)

Released/updated on: 2005-08-18
Geographic coverage: United States
The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS), was designed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to document contacts between police and the public that culminated in police using force. The 2002 survey was conducted as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). To date, the PPCS has been conducted three times by BJS. The first survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data" (NCJ 165040) -- documented levels of contacts with police during 1996. The second survey -- described in "Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey" (NCJ 184957) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived in POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151). The third survey -- described here under the title "Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings From the 2002 National Survey" (NCJ 207845) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2002. The results of this survey are contained in this data collection.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2005 [United States] (ICPSR 20020)

Released/updated on: 2008-05-06
Geographic coverage: United States
The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS), was designed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to document contacts between police and the public that culminated in police using force. The 2005 survey was conducted as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). To date, the PPCS has been conducted four times by BJS. The first survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data" (NCJ 165040) -- documented levels of contacts with police during 1996. The second survey -- described in "Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey" (NCJ 184957) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived in POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999 (ICPSR 3151). The third survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Contacts Between Police and the Public, Findings from the 2002 National Survey" (NCJ 207845) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 2002. These data are archived in POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273). The fourth survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Contacts Between Police and the Public, 2005" (NCJ 215243) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2005. The results of this survey are contained in this data collection.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2008 (ICPSR 32022)

Released/updated on: 2011-10-05
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact. The PPCS interviews a nationally representative sample of United States residents aged 16 years or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted five times by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS):

  • The first survey -- described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040) -- documented levels of contacts with police during 1996.
  • The second survey -- described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).
  • The third survey -- described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2002. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).
  • The fourth survey -- described in the BJS publication, Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2005. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 20020).
  • The fifth survey -- described in the BJS publication, Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2008. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2011 (ICPSR 34276)

Released/updated on: 2014-03-18
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact. The PPCS interviews a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted six times by BJS:

The first survey - described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040) - documented levels of contacts with police during 1996.

The second survey - described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957) - recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

The third survey - described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845) - covered interactions between police and the public in 2002. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

The fourth survey - described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243) - covered interactions between police and the public in 2005. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 020020).

The fifth survey - described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599) - covered interactions between police and the public in 2008. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

The sixth survey (split sample design due to instrument changes) - new instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938) - covered interactions between police and publice and public perceptions of police in 2011. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2015 (ICPSR 36653)

Released/updated on: 2018-04-11
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted seven times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 020020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2018 (ICPSR 37916)

Released/updated on: 2021-12-13
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted eight times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 020020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

8. 2018.Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2018. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2018 (ICPSR 37916).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2020 (ICPSR 38320)

Released/updated on: 2022-11-17
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted nine times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 20020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

8. 2018. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2018. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2018 (ICPSR 37916).

9. 2020. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2020. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2020 (ICPSR 38320).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2022 (ICPSR 38872)

Released/updated on: 2024-10-03
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted ten times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 20020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

8. 2018. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2018. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2018 (ICPSR 37916).

9. 2020. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2020. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2020 (ICPSR 38320).

10. 2022. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2022. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2022 (ICPSR 38872).

Curated

Police Use of Force Data, 1996: [United States] (ICPSR 6999)

Released/updated on: 1998-01-13
Geographic coverage: United States
In 1996, the Bureau of Justice Statistics sponsored a pretest of a survey instrument designed to compile data on citizen contacts with police, including contacts in which police use force. The survey, which involved interviews (both face-to-face and by phone) carried out by the United States Census Bureau, was conducted as a special supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), an ongoing household survey of the American public that elicits information concerning recent crime victimization experiences. Questions asked in the supplement covered reasons for contact with police officer(s), characteristics of the officer, weapons used by the officer, whether there were any injuries involved in the confrontation between the household member and the officer, whether drugs were involved in the incident, type of offense the respondent was charged with, and whether any citizen action was taken. Demographic variables include race, sex, and age.
Curated

Police Use of Force in Metro-Dade, Florida, and Eugene and Springfield, Oregon, 1993-1995 (ICPSR 3152)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: Oregon, United States, Springfield, Eugene, Florida
Time period: 1993-01-01--1995-01-01
This study gathered data on police use of force in Metro-Dade, Florida, and Eugene and Springfield, Oregon. The study differed from previous research in that it addressed the level of force used by the police relative to the suspect's level of resistance. The data for Metro-Dade (Part 1) were collected from official Metro-Dade Police Department Control of Persons Reports from the last quarter of 1993 and all of 1994 and 1995. The Eugene and Springfield dataset (Part 2) was created from items in the Police Officers' Essential Physical Work Report Form, which was completed by members of the Eugene and Springfield, Oregon, Police Departments during April 1995. The dataset includes all police-citizen contacts, rather than being limited to the use-of-force situations captured by the Metro-Dade data. In Part 1 (Metro-Dade Data), information on the subject includes impairment (i.e., alcohol and drugs), behavior (i.e., calm, visibly upset, erratic, or highly agitated), level of resistance used by the subject, types of injuries to the subject, and types of force used by the subject. Information on the officer includes level of force used, medical treatment, and injuries. Other variables include ethnic match between officer and the subject and relative measures of force. Demographic variables include age, gender, race, and ethnicity of both the subject and the officer. In Part 2 (Oregon Data), information is provided on whether the officer was alone, how work was initiated, elapsed time until arrival, reasons for performance, perceived mental state and physical abilities of the suspect, amount and type of resistance by the suspect, if another officer assisted, perceived extent of effort used by the suspect, type of resistance used by the suspect, if the officer was knocked or wrestled to the ground, if the officer received an injury, level of effort used to control the suspect, types of control tactics used on the suspect, whether the officer was wearing tactical gear, how restraint devices were applied to inmate, time taken to get to, control, resolve, and remove the problem, how stressful the lead-up time or the period following the incident was, if the officer worked with a partner, types of firearm used, and if force was used. Demographic variables include age, gender, weight, and height of both the suspect and officer, and the officer's duty position.
Curated

Police Use of Force [United States]: Official Reports, Citizen Complaints, and Legal Consequences, 1991-1992 (ICPSR 6274)

Released/updated on: 1996-07-13
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1991-01-01--1992-01-01
This national survey was designed to collect information on police departmental policies and practices pertaining to the use of physical force--both deadly and less than lethal--by law enforcement officers. A further objective was to investigate the enforcement of these policies by examining the extent to which complaints of policy violations were reviewed and violations punished. Additionally, the survey sought to determine the extent to which departments kept records on the use of force, and to collect from those agencies that recorded this information data relating to how frequently officers used force, the characteristics of officers who did and did not have complaints filed against them, and the training of recruits on the appropriate use of force. The study also provides data on citizen complaints of excessive force, the disposition of those complaints, and litigation concerning allegations of excessive force. Additional variables provide agency size, demographic characteristics, and workload.
Curated

Role of Police Psychology in Controlling Excessive Force in 50 Large Cities in the United States, 1992 (ICPSR 6402)

Released/updated on: 1996-10-01
Geographic coverage: United States
As part of the development of an information base for subsequent policy initiatives, the National Institute of Justice sponsored a nationwide survey of police psychologists to learn more about the characteristics of officers who abuse force, the types of measures police psychologists recommend to control police violence and the role of police psychologists in preventing and identifying individual police officers at risk for use of excessive force. Police personnel divisions in 50 large cities were contacted for names and addresses of the police psychologists who provided services to their departments. Data were collected using a telephone interview protocol that included 61 questions. In this study, excessive force was defined as a violation of a police department's use-of-force policy by an incumbent officer that was serious enough to warrant a referral to the police psychologist. Background information collected on respondents included years with the department, years as a police psychologist, if the position was salaried or consultant, and how often the psychologist met with the police chief. A battery of questions pertaining to screening was asked, including whether the psychologist performed pre-employment psychological screening and what methods were used to identify job candidates with a propensity to use excessive force. Questions regarding monitoring procedures asked if and how police officer behavior was monitored and if incumbent officers were tested for propensity to use excessive force. Items concerning police training included which officers the psychologist trained, what types of training covering excessive force were conducted, and what modules should be included in training to reduce excessive force. Information about mental health services was elicited, with questions on whether the psychologist counseled officers charged with excessive force, what models were used, how the psychologist knew if the intervention had been successful, what factors limited the effectiveness of counseling police officers, characteristics of officers prone to use excessive force, how these officers are best identified, and who or what has the most influence on these officers. General opinion questions asked about factors that increase excessive force behavior and what services could be utilized to reduce excessive force.
Curated

Social Interaction Training to Reduce Police Use of Force, Fayetteville, NC and Tucson, AZ, 2016-2018 (ICPSR 37856)

Released/updated on: 2022-11-10
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Fayetteville, United States, Tucson, Arizona
Time period: 2016-01-01--2018-01-01
This study evaluated Polis Solution's Tact, Tactics, and Trust (T3) program using a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Survey data were collected from experimental and control group officers at two research sites prior to and after the implementation of the training program. Additionally, official use of force reports from both agencies were collected from roughly one year prior to the implementation of the training program to one year after the completion of the training program. The survey data are used to examine changes in officers' attitudes and priorities during hypothetical officer-citizen encounters to determine if the training program impacted the importance officers placed on specific social interaction concerns. The use of force reports were then used to determine whether the training program successfully reduced the number of use of force incidents among officers involved in the training program.
Curated
Restricted

Street Stops and Police Legitimacy: Accountability and Legal Socialization in Everyday Policing of Young Adults in New York City, 2011-2013 (ICPSR 35217)

Released/updated on: 2017-03-30
Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)
Time period: 2011-09-20--2013-10-14

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.

This study interviewed young men living in New York City about their experiences being stopped by the police on the street or in their cars. It examined how experience with the police as well as general evaluations of police policies, practices and behaviors in the respondent's neighborhood shaped views about police legitimacy, and law related behavior, such as compliance with the law and cooperation with legal authorities.

Curated

Survey of Campus Incidents as Interpreted by College Presidents, Faculty Chairmen and Student Body Presidents, 1970 (ICPSR 7327)

Released/updated on: 2011-11-16
Geographic coverage: United States
This study was conducted in the summer of 1970 following the invasion of Cambodia in May 1970. Presidents, faculty chairmen, and student body presidents of all accredited colleges and universities in the United States were queried about the types of incidents that occurred on their campuses. These included incidents in which the National Guard was called, off-campus police were used, one or more protestors were arrested, temporary restraining orders or injunctions were obtained, teach-ins, rallies, or discussion groups took the place of regular academic activities, and where Black demands or racism were raised as issues. Other incidents examined were those involving destructive acts by students that took place off-campus and incidents involving serious damage to or the destruction of property, personal injury, or death. The seriousness of the incidents was reported as well as the response of the faculty, administration, and outside government units. The respondents were asked what plans were prepared before May of 1970 to handle unrest, and the degree to which these were implemented, as well as their proposals to curb or limit future outbreaks. The data include information on the school, such as location, size, sex of students, presence of ROTC on campus, academic emphasis, acceptance standards, and dollars expended per student.
Curated

Testing and Evaluating Body Worn Video Technology in the Los Angeles Police Department, California, 2012-2018 (ICPSR 37467)

Released/updated on: 2021-04-28
Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California
Time period: 2015-08-01--2015-09-01, 2016-06-01--2016-08-01, 2012-01-01--2017-01-01

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 use 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.

Curated
Partially restricted

Understanding the Use of Force By and Against the Police in Six Jurisdictions in the United States, 1996-1997 (ICPSR 3172)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, San Diego, Charlotte, Mecklenburg, United States, Texas, Colorado, St. Petersburg, California, Florida, Dallas, Colorado Springs
Time period: 1996-08-01--1997-02-01
This study examined the amount of force used by and against law enforcement officers and more than 50 characteristics of officers, civilians, and arrest situations associated with the use of different levels of force. An important component of this multijurisdiction project was to employ a common measurement of elements of force and predictors of force. Data were gathered about suspects' and police officers' behaviors from adult custody arrests in six urban law enforcement agencies. The participating agencies were the Charlotte-Mecklenburg (North Carolina) Police Department, Colorado Springs (Colorado) Police Department, Dallas (Texas) Police Department, St. Petersburg (Florida) Police Department, San Diego (California) Police Department, and San Diego County (California) Sheriff's Department. Data collection began at different times in the participating departments, so the total sample included arrests during the summer, fall, and winter of 1996-1997. Forms were completed and coded for 7,512 adult custody arrests (Part 1). This form was used to record officer self-reports on the characteristics of the arrest situation, the suspects, and the officers, and the specific behavioral acts of officers, suspects, and bystanders in a particular arrest. Similar items were asked of 1,156 suspects interviewed in local jails at the time they were booked following arrest to obtain an independent assessment of officer and suspect use of force (Part 2). Officers were informed that some suspects would be interviewed, but they did not know which would be interviewed or when. Using the items included on the police survey, the research team constructed four measures of force used by police officers -- physical force, physical force plus threats, continuum of force, and maximum force. Four comparable measures of force used by arrested suspects were also developed. These measures are included in the data for Part 1. Each measure was derived by combining specific actions by law enforcement officers or by suspects in various ways. The first measure was a traditional conceptual dichotomy of arrests in which physical force was or was not used. For both the police and for suspects, the definition of physical force included any arrest in which a weapon or weaponless tactic was used. In addition, police arrests in which officers used a severe restraint were included. The second measure, physical force plus threats, was similar to physical force but added the use of threats and displays of weapons. To address the potential limitations of these two dichotomous measures, two other measures were developed. The continuum-of-force measure captured the levels of force commonly used in official policies by the participating law enforcement agencies. To construct the fourth measure, maximum force, 503 experienced officers in five of the six jurisdictions ranked a variety of hypothetical types of force by officers and by suspects on a scale from 1 (least forceful) to 100 (most forceful). Officers were asked to rank these items based on their own personal experience, not official policy. These rankings of police and suspect use of force, which appear in Part 3, were averaged for each jurisdiction and used in Part 1 to weight the behaviors that occurred in the sampled arrests. Variables for Parts 1 and 2 include nature of the arrest, features of the arrest location, mobilization of the police, and officer and suspect characteristics. Part 3 provides officer rankings on 54 items that suspects might do or say during an arrest. Separately, officers ranked a series of 44 items that a police officer might do or say during an arrest. These items include spitting, shouting or cursing, hitting, wrestling, pushing, resisting, fleeing, commanding, using conversational voice, and using pressure point holds, as well as possession, display, threat of use, or use of several weapons (e.g., knife, chemical agent, dog, blunt object, handgun, motor vehicle).
Curated

Use of Force by the Montgomery County, Maryland Police Department, 1993-1999 (ICPSR 3793)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Maryland
Time period: 1993-01-01--1999-12-01
This study was designed to describe the types and amount of force used by and against the police in Montgomery County, Maryland, for the seven years between January 1993 and December 1999. The researchers collected data from the Montgomery County Police Department's Use of Force Reports and arrest records for this time period. Part 1 contains data obtained from the Use of Force Reports, including information about the characteristics of the force used, injuries and medical treatment, characteristics of the officer and citizen involved, and the time and date of the incident. Part 2 contains data from the arrest records, including variables for location, time, and date of the arrest, the most serious charge, and demographic characteristics of the officer and arrestee. Part 3 contains aggregate data, including rate of force by different arrest characteristics, that were derived from the data in Parts 1 and 2.