Exploring the Potential for Body-Worn Cameras to Reduce Violence in Police–Citizen Encounters

Abstract

One of the most compelling perceived benefits of body-worn cameras (BWCs) involves the potential for reductions in citizen complaints and police use of force. A handful of early studies reported significant reductions in both outcomes following BWC adoption, but several recent studies have failed to document such effects. The current study explores this question using data from a randomized controlled trial conducted in the Spokane (WA) Police Department. Approximately half of patrol officers (n = 82) were assigned BWCs in May 2015, while the other half (n = 67) received their BWCs 6 months later (November 2015). The study explores the effects of BWCs on use of force, complaints against officers, and officer injuries, using more than three years of official department data pre-and post-BWC deployment. The outcomes of interest are rare in Spokane, which limited both statistical power and the results from significance testing. However, the within-group trends are consistent with a positive effect, particularly for percent change. Following BWC deployment, the percentage of officers with a complaint in each group declined by 50% and 78% (Control and Treatment, respectively); the percentage of officers with a use of force declined notably (39%) for one group only. The reductions disappeared after 6 months for the Treatment group. There was no relationship between BWCs and officer injuries. The authors discuss the implications of the findings for the ongoing dialogue on BWCs.

Examining Body‐Worn Camera Integration and Acceptance Among Police Officers, Citizens, and External Stakeholders

“…An evaluation of BWCs in the Rialto (CA) Police Department documented a nearly 90% drop in citizen complaints against police and a 60% decline in use of force by officers (Ariel et al, 2015). Similarly positive results were reported in studies of BWCs in Mesa (AZ; Mesa Police Department, 2013), Phoenix (AZ; Hedberg, Katz, and Choate, 2017), Orlando (FL; Jennings et al, 2015), Spokane (WA; White et al, 2018), Tampa (FL; Jennings et al, 2017), Las Vegas (Braga, Sousa, Coldren, and Rodriguez, 2018), and the United Kingdom (Ellis, Jenkins, and Smith, 2015;Goodall, 2007). Maskaly, Donner, Jennings, Ariel, and Sutherland (2017: 685) conducted a meta-review of more than 20 studies aimed at examining the impact of BWCs on a range of citizen and officer outcomes (e.g., use of force, citizen complaints, and citizen and officer perceptions), and the authors concluded: "The evidence seems to suggest that the police are generally receptive to BWC adoption, and that BWCs can exert positive effects on both citizen and police behavior."…”

“…Since 2015, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has awarded nearly $60 million in grant funding to more than 250 law enforcement agencies to deploy BWCs (Bureau of Justice Assistance, ) . BWCs are widely supported across a diverse range of other key sectors including police leadership organizations (IACP, ), civil rights groups (e.g., the American Civil Liberties Union; Stanley, ), and citizens (Sousa, Miethe, and Sakiyama, ; White, Gaub, and Todak, ).…”

“…The rapid diffusion of BWCs in law enforcement has also been driven by findings from a handful of early research studies that have shown that cameras could lead to substantial reductions in citizen complaints and use of force by police (Ariel, Farrar, and Sutherland, ; Ariel et al., ; Jennings, Lynch, and Fridell, ; Katz, Choate, Ready, and Nuño, ; Mesa Police Department, ), enhanced court case processing times and outcomes (Morrow, Katz, and Choate, ; Owens, Mann, and McKenna, ), and higher levels of procedural justice (White et al., ). The results of more recent research, however, demonstrate that positive outcomes are not always guaranteed.…”

Where Is the Goal Line? A Critical Look at Police Body‐Worn Camera Programs

“…Even though the findings from studies demonstrate reductions (see, e.g., Maskaly et al., ), it is still not clear that a properly implemented BWC program will reduce the use of force or complaints. The issue with targeting these outcomes using a body‐worn camera program is perhaps best identified in the earlier work of White, Gaub, and Todak (: 7) who reminded us that “the outcomes of interest are rare.” In small‐to‐mid‐sized departments, reductions in these events may be difficult to determine as there are so few incidents to measure. As such, these outcomes, although important, are not ideal for a program goal, as not achieving them may not be because of a problem with the BWC program.…”

Cops and Cameras

“…Subsequently, there has been a host of high-quality, peer-reviewed scholarship that has further contributed to the BWC evaluation literature. Examples of this research include randomized controlled trials in Tempe, AZ (Gaub, Choate, Todak, Katz, and White, 2016), Spokane, WA (Gaub et al, 2016;White, Gaub, and Todak, 2017), and Las Vegas, NV (Braga, Sousa, Coldren, and Rodriguez, 2018); a host of randomized controlled trials in Europe (Ariel et al, 2016); rigorous quasi-experimental designs in Tampa, FL (Jennings, Fridell, Lynch, Jetelina, and Gonzalez, 2017), Mesa, AZ (Ready and Young, 2015), and Phoenix, AZ (Hedberg, Katz, and Choate, 2017); and several other methodologically sound studies in various jurisdictions (for a review, see Maskaly, Donner, Jennings, Ariel, and Sutherland, 2017).…”