Search Results

Evidence-based policing (EBP) by its original definition is “the use of the best available research on the outcomes of police work to implement guidelines and evaluate agencies, units, and officers.” Since then, the definition of EBP has been evolving, with academics adjusting the definition to better fit how police and researchers apply research in the field. EBP is best described as an approach to law enforcement and public safety. It involves the application of empirical research, scientific methods, and data-driven decision-making to policing practices, strategies, and policies. The term “evidence-based” is borrowed from the field of medicine and has been adapted to various disciplines, including education, social work, and, in this case, policing. An EBP approach emphasizes the following: 1. Use of research and data: Implementing strategies and practices shown to be effective through rigorous research. 2. Evaluation and adaptation: Continuously assessing the effectiveness of policing methods and making adjustments based on empirical evidence. 3. Scientific methodology: Applying the principles of scientific inquiry to test the effectiveness of different policing strategies. EBP is a practical approach that integrates scientific research into police work to improve outcomes, decision-making, and policy development in law enforcement. This approach has slowly begun to create a shift in both academics’ and practitioners’ points of view. When a paradigm shift occurs in a scientific discipline, there is always a period before the shift occurs where the definitions and parameters of the discipline are ambiguous. A paradigm shift refers to a fundamental change in the underlying assumptions or dominant methodologies within a given scientific discipline or more broadly in any intellectual field or approach. This concept was popularized by philosopher and historian of science Thomas Kuhn in his 1962 book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Paradigm shifts can initially face resistance until the new paradigm becomes widely accepted and mainstream. In essence, a paradigm shift is not just a small modification or improvement, but a complete overhaul of the foundational principles and methods in a particular field, leading to a new way of thinking and understanding. As EBP developed from evidence-based medicine, it has followed the same developmental trajectory of changes in definition and application, resistance to adoption, advocates and critics of the approach, and the development of societies to assist with incorporation of practices by police departments. EBP is different from other disciplines such as criminology or crime science, as the core of EBP is to use rigorous research methodologies to test policing practices in the field. The reason for this approach is to determine whether policing practices “work” under real-life circumstances rather than just theoretically. Additionally, EBP advocates argue that rigorous testing is a better approach to serving the public than having officers use anecdotes to drive practices. EBP is an approach that not all academics or practitioners agree with, but it is one way of determining the causal effects of a policing practice.

Experimental methods have been a hallmark of the scientific enterprise since its inception. Over time, experiments have become much more sophisticated, complex, and nuanced. Experiments have also become much more diverse, and their use within research settings has expanded from the physical sciences to the social sciences, including criminology. Within criminology, experimental methods can manifest in the form of laboratory experiments, field experiments, and quasi-experiments, each of which present their own strengths and weaknesses. Experimental methods can also be applied in the context of between-subject and within-subject paradigms, both of which exhibit unique characteristics and implications. Experimental methods—as a research method—are unique in their ability to help establish causal relationships among variables. This article introduces the topic of experimental methods in criminology, with a specific focus on the subfield of policing.

Raising the educational standards for police officers represents a perennial police reform theme in the United States. Among other benefits, proponents herald college degree requirements as key to improving the quality and fairness of policing outcomes, including the chief formal response to crime: arresting suspected lawbreakers. However, the evidence base regarding college education requirements’ consequences for agency arrest behaviors is formative for various reasons, namely, the absence of studies examining whether these policies contribute to racially equitable arrest outcomes. The presented data show steeper decreases in the racial gap in Black and White people arrested for degree-requiring agencies compared to nondegree-requiring agencies between 2000 and 2016. Albeit encouraging news, the disparity rate for agencies with a college standard remains relatively higher. While what is implied is that college degree requirements alone will not resolve racial disparities in police arrests, it is premature to draw concrete conclusions about this often taken-for-granted association until more rigorous research is conducted.

When police officers end a human life, the social ramifications can be immense. Recent high-profile instances of homicide by police in the United States have served as a reminder of their potential impacts. Beyond the tragic loss of life and their acute effect on the people directly involved, these incidents have become a source of broad social conflict. At many points throughout American history, homicides by police have sparked protest and civil unrest, as well as catalyzed major social movements and countermovements that have profoundly altered the direction of the nation’s politics. Social scientists have long recognized the importance of studying homicides by police to understand their causes and consequences. Efforts to do so have historically been hampered by the poor quality of data on the phenomenon. Traditional methods of measuring homicides by police that rely on voluntary reporting by law enforcement agencies or information from death certificates have been shown to be inadequate for most empirical research applications. New and improved methods of measurement began emerging around 2010. They involve compiling information on homicides by police reported by news media and/or combining multiple sources of information to measure the phenomenon, and represent a tremendous improvement. These new methods have led to the production of data that have deepened people’s knowledge of homicide by police. Even so, these data are not perfect. Researchers should be aware of the various measurement issues that may arise when employing them. Finally, as measurement of homicide by police has improved, the ability to measure nonfatal police violence has not done so correspondingly. Poor measurement of nonfatal police violence continues to limit scientific understanding of homicide by police and police violence more generally.

The evidence-based approach uses scientific evidence to influence decision-making. Evidence-based practices (EBPs) are practices, programs, or interventions found to be effective through scientific evaluation. Community supervision as a field is shifting toward an increased use of EBPs when working with clients. Implementing EBPs is no simple task, and supervision departments must navigate a host of potential barriers in order to be successful. Taking a macro-level approach, supervision organizations are open systems capable of self-maintenance through reaction to their environment. Considering the connection between society and criminal justice approaches, understanding the changes in supervision is best done through a sociohistorical approach. Throughout the history of the United States, there have been philosophic shifts between rehabilitative and punishment approaches to crime control. Community supervision was developed as a rehabilitative institution popular in part due to its alignment with the rehabilitative ideal. During the 1960s and 1970s, the rehabilitative ideal fell out of favor, being replaced with retributive, incapacitation, and deterrence models. Supervision, even with its rehabilitative origins, was able to withstand this shift by adjusting its purpose to surveillance, monitoring, and risk management. During the past 30 years, supervision has been experiencing another shift in philosophy. With the empirical foundation being rebuilt through the development of EBPs and evidence-based supervision models (e.g., the risk–need–responsivity model), rehabilitation is being established as the most effective way to reduce recidivism. In order to properly implement these new rehabilitation-focused practices and models, supervision organizations must structure themselves in particular ways. Specifically, it is important that supervision organizations develop sound dissemination strategies to introduce and support their staff in order to transfer scientific technology into the field. Furthermore, organizations need to develop processes that effectively connect new practices to old processes in a way that displays the ease and utility of the new practices to ensure fidelity. When done correctly, these processes and support strategies can create an organizational climate that supports the change and makes it permanent. On the other hand, when done incorrectly, the scientific technology will not be transferred correctly, which has been shown to increase the chances of recidivism for clients. Supervision officers are justice actors who have a great deal of discretion in their work and who need to navigate a host of institutional barriers to do their job as directed. These barriers come in the form of conflicting or ambiguous job duties and working in an environment lacking resources. In the event that officers do not believe they are being supported or their prescribed duties are unachievable, they will reject the formal prescription and create their own standard. This is evidenced through the variety of reasons officers reject use of EBPs. Considering specifically the use of risk assessments, officers are known to not trust the risk assessment, not use the assessment results in case planning, manipulate the results of the assessment to overclassify their client’s risk, and reject using the assessment due to conflict with their occupational philosophy.

Social networks in gangs refers to both a theoretical and methodological framework. Research within this perspective challenges the idea of gangs as organized hierarchies, suggesting instead that gangs are semi-structured or loosely knit networks and that actions are more accurately related to network subgroupings than to gangs as a whole. The situated location of individuals within a network creates social capital and the fluidity for members to move beyond the boundaries of the group, cooperating and positively interacting with members of rival gangs. Before the millennium, the use of social network analysis as a method to study gangs was rare, but it has since increased in popularity, becoming a regular part of the gang research canon. Gang networks can be studied at the group level and the individual level and can be used for intervention strategies. The concept of gangs as social networks is sometimes confused with social networking sites or social media, which encompasses its own rich and evolving array of gang research. Gang members use social networking sites for instrumental, expressive, and consumer purposes. While the use of network media allows for gang cultural dissemination, it simultaneously allows law enforcement to track gang activity.