Improving the Investigation, Clearance Rates, and Victim Restoration of Robberies: A Randomized Controlled Experiment, Seattle, Washington, Rochester, New York, 2021-2023 (ICPSR 39101)
Version Date: Jul 30, 2024 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Cynthia Lum, George Mason University;
Christopher S. Koper, George Mason University
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR39101.v1
Version V1
Summary View help for Summary
Clearance rates for most crimes have remained low and stable for decades (Braga et al., 2011), despite advances in police technologies (Koper et al., 2015). Many police agencies have developed triaging practices for criminal investigations using solvability factors to guess which cases are most likely to be solved and to allocate investigative resources to those crimes (Eck, 1983; 1992). This practice partially stems from a persistent belief that resolving crimes and the resulting clearance rates are due to circumstances of the crime and community context, and are beyond the control of police. However, a growing body of research has challenged this belief, demonstrating that enhanced investigative efforts can improve crime clearance rates beyond solvability factors (Braga and Dusseault, 2018; Lum and Wellford, 2023).
In this study, the research team sought to determine if investigative follow-ups could increase clearance rates for robbery and burglary cases (frequently occurring crime types with traditionally low clearance rates) and increase victim satisfaction with police services. Agencies selected for the study were the Seattle Police Department (SPD) in Seattle, Washington, and the Rochester Police Department (RPD) in Rochester, New York. Both agencies triaged a large proportion of robbery cases and would have a large enough sample size to successfully carry out an experiment.
The original study design was a randomized controlled trial. In both sites, robbery cases would be allocated to either the intervention condition--an investigative follow-up conducted by an officer during their daily patrol assignment--or the control condition with no follow-up. Challenges to personnel and agency funding from the COVID-19 pandemic, the murder of George Floyd, and other officer-involved deaths in 2020 led to difficulties implementing the study as initially designed. The experiment was not initiated in Rochester, and initiated but not completed in Seattle. Therefore, the team transitioned to a natural quasi-experiment design in Rochester and added a case analysis of robberies in Seattle.
This collection contains three datasets: victim satisfaction surveys from Seattle (DS1, n=39) and Rochester (DS2, n=37), and supplemental reports on follow-ups made during the Seattle experiment implementation (DS3, n=82).
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Funding View help for Funding
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
Smallest Geographic Unit View help for Smallest Geographic Unit
police beat
Restrictions View help for Restrictions
Access to these data is restricted. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement, specify the reason for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research.
Distributor(s) View help for Distributor(s)
Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)
Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection
Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes
-
The data collected for this project were limited due to problems with program implementation and obtaining survey responses. As such, the principal investigators of this project strongly caution against further analysis or use of this data.
Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether assigning a patrol follow-up to uninvestigated robbery and/or burglary cases would increase case clearance rates and victim satisfaction with police services.
Study Design View help for Study Design
The originally proposed study design consisted of a randomized controlled trial at two police agencies: Seattle Police Department (SPD) in Seattle, Washington and Rochester Police Department (RPD) in Rochester, New York. Uninvestigated robbery cases would be randomly allocated to receive a simple patrol follow-up (treatment) or receive no follow-up (control). Agencies were selected for having lower-than-average clearance rates for robberies and tending to triage robbery cases based on solvability (i.e., no investigative effort assigned beyond the initial patrol investigation). Victim surveys would be sent to all treatment and control cases on a rolling basis.
Due to challenges stemming in 2020 from the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as social-political fallout from the murder of George Floyd and other officer-involved deaths, both agencies lost significant personnel and financial resources. Along with other challenges, such as low victim survey response rates, officer reassignments, and low officer morale, these events necessitated a study design revision for both locations.
In both study sites, the research team took over the implementation of the victim survey. Team members received uninvestigated robbery case information and victim information from SPD and RPD. Surveys were mailed with a prepaid, self-addressed return envelope and instructions to complete the survey online if preferred. Upon transitioning to burglary cases, the survey questionnaire was modified for burglaries.
A case analysis of robbery victimization within Seattle was added during the project. All robberies that took place in Seattle in 2021 that were not still under active investigation (total n=742) were coded for information about the incident, people involved, and officer's decision-making process. The cases included robberies that did not receive investigative resources (n=356) and those that had been investigated or assigned to a detective (n=386). Coding began in July 2022 and completed in August 2023. The research team pair-coded the robbery reports and met to reconcile any differences.
Sample View help for Sample
For Seattle, 117 robbery victim surveys were distributed based on the case information received (n=58 treatment, n=59 control); 6 surveys were returned (5% response rate). 204 burglary surveys were distributed, with 39 surveys returned (19% response rate).
For Rochester, 251 robbery victim surveys were distributed based on the case information received (n=116 investigated, n=135 not investigated). 37 surveys were returned (15% response rate).
Time Method View help for Time Method
Universe View help for Universe
- Victims of robbery/burglary crimes.
- Uninvestigated and investigated robbery and burglary cases in Seattle.
Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation
Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)
Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection
Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables
Victim satisfaction surveys: Items asked respondents to rate their satisfaction with how the police handled their case, how they were treated by the police, their level of perceived safety (current and following the case), level of trust in the police, and if they would encourage others to call the police for help. Administrative variables include treatment group status; description of offense; precinct, sector, and beat where incident occurred; and month and date of incident. Age is the sole demographic variable. The Rochester-specific survey also includes mode of follow-up communication, investigation status, and date of case status.
Follow-up supplemental reports: Items include number of times victim was contacted, mode of contact with victim, if the officer spoke to the victim, if a follow-up was able to be carried out, whether new information/leads were gathered from a follow-up, and if a detective/investigator was contacted.
HideOriginal Release Date View help for Original Release Date
2024-07-30
Version History View help for Version History
2024-07-30 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:
- Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
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.
One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.