Police Body-Worn Cameras

Stoughton, Seth W.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3094334

Cited by 13 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These expectations may be difficult to meet given that officers’ BWCs often fail to record critical moments because of technical issues, the limitations of the small camera (field of view, picture quality), or human error. Even when the police BWC records critical events, the audio quality and placement of the camera present obstacles to people’s understanding of what the footage actually shows (Stoughton, 2018). In this sense, people’s understanding and memory for recorded incidents may be skewed because of the technological limitations of BWCs, which may be further exacerbated by the fact that people assume footage to be a reliable form of evidence (Wasserman, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Objectivity is a myth for you but not for me or police: A bias blind spot for viewing and remembering criminal events.

Jones¹,

Crozier²,

Strange³

2018

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Now more than ever, people have access to police footage, yet people still disagree about what some footage depicts. This is not surprising given that research on attention, perception, and memory demonstrates that motivations, biases, and context shape what people see and remember. However, we do not know whether people are attuned to the fact that their understanding and memory of observed criminal encounters may be biased. Moreover, we do not know how people think about laypeople’s and police officers’ ability to view such events objectively. We examined these beliefs by asking participants to imagine that they themselves, an average American or an average police officer, viewed a criminal event live, with police body-worn camera (BWC) footage or with surveillance footage. Participants provided ratings for each observer’s susceptibility to bias. Importantly, we found a bias blind spot (Pronin, Lin, & Ross, 2002) for people’s ratings of themselves and—depending on participants’ attitudes toward police—police officers. People denied that biases would influence their own and officers’ inferences and memory for a criminal encounter, but they did not give the average American the same benefit. Moreover, participants rated officers as being the least biased after they watched their BWC footage, demonstrating that people perceive BWCs to be an extension of what officers see. We explore the implications our results have for policies concerning BWC footage and disagreements that may arise when people assume that they and police are more objective than others.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Objectivity is a myth for you but not for me or police: A bias blind spot for viewing and remembering criminal events.

Jones¹,

Crozier²,

Strange³

2018

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The paper proceeds in five sections. The first section provides a background on BWC policy, leading to contemporary academic and practitioner disagreements regarding the symbolic, behavioral, and informational consequences (Stoughton, 2017) of evolving BWC policy and use. The second section situates BWCs in the broader literature on electronic performance monitoring.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Police Body-Worn Cameras: Development of the Perceived Intensity of Monitoring Scale

Adams

Mastracci

2019

Criminal Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Body-worn cameras (BWCs) are the latest and perhaps most tangible answer to complex social questions regarding the use of force, state legitimacy, and the proper role of police in a liberal democracy. How do officers experience heightened monitoring? This article pursues two objectives via two studies. In the first study, we establish a valid and reliable scale to measure police officer perceptions of the risks posed to them by the recording and distribution of BWC footage, conceptualized as Perceived Intensity of Monitoring (PIM). Based on a survey of 617 police officers, we evaluate an 11-item questionnaire and assess internal consistency and construct validity, perform exploratory factor analysis, and derive a PIM Scale composed of three factors measuring officer perceptions of discretion, disapproval, and distribution effects. In the second study, we evaluate the PIM Scale’s ability to predict officer emotional exhaustion, discriminating between BWC and non-BWC equipped officers. This study contributes to evolving work in BWC research by developing a useful measure for police administrators and practitioners charged with making decisions related to BWC implementation and policy. Further, the PIM Scale is applicable across professions other than policing, as surveillant workplace monitoring and technologies of accountability continue to expand to other contexts.

show abstract

“…Our results comport with the forensic confirmation bias, which Kassin et al (2013) define as the “class of effects through which an individual's preexisting beliefs, expectations, motives, and situational context influence the collection, perception, and interpretation of evidence during the course of a criminal case.” Indeed, police recordings may be particularly vulnerable to confirmation bias as the videos are often ambiguous (Kunda, 1990; Stoughton, 2018). Kassin et al (2013) proposed a number of recommendations to help reduce the forensic confirmation bias in evaluations of evidence, and we believe that their suggestions can be extended to the review and evaluation of police footage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

More than meets the eye: Officer actions and civilian behavioral health shape appraisals of police footage.

Jones¹,

Todd²,

Strange³

et al. 2021

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines people's interpretations of a recorded police-civilian altercation when they receive a priori information about a civilian's behavioral health and information about how an officer responded. In two experiments, MTurk participants (N = 771) were randomly assigned to receive a label for the civilian (schizophrenia, substance use, or no label) and information about the officer's response (use of force, de-escalation tactics, or no further information). Participants then watched body-worn camera footage of a real police encounter, answered questions about the officer's and civilian's behavior, and made punishment decisions. Participants who learned that the officer used force, compared to de-escalation techniques, interpreted the officer's behavior more negatively and the civilian's behavior more positively. Furthermore, participants who learned that the civilian used substances agreed the most strongly that the civilian should be punished, whereas participants who learned that the civilian had schizophrenia agreed the least strongly that the civilian should be punished. Participants attributed the civilian's behavior to personal shortcomings (e.g., poor life decisions) when they learned he used substances and to genetic factors when they learned he had schizophrenia. The belief that the civilian's behavior was because of personal shortcomings was associated with increased punishment. These findings have implications for the common belief that viewing police footage will ensure objective, fair, and just outcomes. We conclude with policy recommendations to improve analysis of police footage.

show abstract

Police Body-Worn Cameras

Cited by 13 publications

References 2 publications

Objectivity is a myth for you but not for me or police: A bias blind spot for viewing and remembering criminal events.

Objectivity is a myth for you but not for me or police: A bias blind spot for viewing and remembering criminal events.

Police Body-Worn Cameras: Development of the Perceived Intensity of Monitoring Scale

More than meets the eye: Officer actions and civilian behavioral health shape appraisals of police footage.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About