Introduction
In today’s world, technology has already revolutionised interpersonal and professional relationships in a variety of ways. Millions of people cannot imagine a day without using digital devices for multiple purposes like sharing information, exchanging opinions, and conducting business affairs. In police, digitalisation plays an important role in observing and examining human behaviours, keeping public order, and managing volumes of information quickly. One of the latest technological innovations in police departments across the globe is the implementation of body-worn cameras (BWCs). They are used for law enforcement purposes and complete certain public accountability functions. However, attitudes towards these devices remain poorly investigated, and more attention is required to understand what people know and think about BWCs as obligatory equipment for police officers.
The reasons for carrying out this research are to learn the impact of BWCs on the relationships between the police and ordinary citizens and to clarify if some improvements can be offered at the moment. Although many UK police departments develop a positive image of this intervention, some individuals continue sharing their concerns and raise additional questions about BWC’s effectiveness. The following questions should be answered: “What do people know about the goals of BWC implementation?”, “What is the public opinion about BWCs”, and “What are the outcomes of BWCs in police practice?”. Cooperation between police officers and UK citizens has to be enhanced, and BWC application is characterised by positive changes.
Literature Review
When an ordinary person thinks about police, such concepts as justice, order, and force come to mind first. People want to believe that police officers work for the public’s good and apply their knowledge, skills, and equipment to protect citizens and follow the law. However, the power of law is ambiguous, and it is hard to understand if the law is safe for people (Yesberg et al., 2021). Walklate and Fitz-Gibbon (2019) investigate the law as the source of power and the capacity to respond to coercive control and prove the possibility of unintended consequences in some cases. Thus, the roles and responsibilities of police officers should be clearly identified and explained. In her report, Brown (2021) defines police officers as members of a police force that aims at organising and coordinating crime-fighting. It is expected to see every officer under the direction and management of a chief officer who takes responsibility for all operations and services (Brown, 2021). Prevention and detection of crimes and social misconduct are also the major tasks for UK police.
There are many regulations and statuses that define the quality of UK policing. The British policing model imposes many obligations on law enforcement representatives, including the protection of human life and property (Brown, 2021). Besides, police officers should cooperate during investigations and formal proceedings professionally (The police (conduct) regulations, 2020). There are many situations when people are not able to obtain enough evidence to make conclusions and understand the behaviours of police officers, criminals (suspected), and victims (Bradford et al., 2020; Miranda, 2022). Despite the already achieved results and improvements in different fields, new interventions are required in terms of resilience training, leadership, and occupational psychology (Hesketh, Cooper and Ivy, 2019). Technological progress cannot be ignored because it is the only way to unite administrative tasks, distant activities, and data storage and exchange and make sure all responsibilities and regulations are followed.
During the last several decades, people have been re-evaluating their attitudes towards police officers and the level of their power in society. For example, the American experience of the Black Lives Matter movement has a serious impact on Europeans, questioning the necessity of police defunding and reduction of violence on the streets (Fleetwood and Lea, 2022; Löfstrand and Backman, 2021). The use of body-worn cameras has become a solution for many police departments because this innovation helps to represent necessary information and evidence (College of policing, 2021). Police misconduct is reduced, domestic violence evidence is recorded (immediate aftermaths), accountability is improved (Blaskovits and Bennell, 2020; Lawshe et al., 2018). These benefits are not the only ones that may be associated with BWCs in law enforcement.
BWCs are small devices worn on a police officer’s chest or head to record their interactions with the public. This initiative has been enhanced by law enforcement to reduce the cases of police violence and improve accountability (Laming, 2018). It does not take much space and effort to wear on the camera because of recent technological options and minimising the device (College of policing, 2021). The first officially reported case of testing BWCs was mentioned by the Plymouth Police Department in 2005 (cited in Laming, 2018). Several Scotland departments followed this example, and, in 2010, most UK police officers accepted this technology to increase transparency (Laming, 2018). Admissions of guilt, previous convictions, and unbiased observations have been significantly facilitated with the help of BWCs and other surveillance technologies in cars and mobile phones (Barlow et al., 2019). The goal of BWCs is to show how it is possible to reduce the disproportionate number of racially-based arrests and controversies (Parmar, 2019; Taylor and Lee, 2019). When there is a chance to see how a police officer cooperates with civilians, it is easy to explain decisions and actions within a particular case.
It is enough to observe a situation from another perspective and understand why a particular outcome is achieved. Regarding the American examples and killings of innocent and unarmed individuals, many countries try to predict the same development of events and strengthen the relationships between the police and citizens (Lum et al., 2019). A microphone in BWCs allows capturing motion, sound, and other factors that could lead to a particular decision. Video and audio recordings may be stored within a specific time limit and managed by technicians as per the guidelines defined by a police department. Although the technological advancement of police officers is not cheap, many political leaders and government representatives offer laws and policies to fund the police. It is necessary to ensure that police officers who cooperate with citizens have access to working BWCs and can offer the recording if necessary. For example, in the United States, more than $500,000 has already been received to support BWC programs (Schneider, 2017). In the UK reports, there is no clear information about the costs of implementing BWCs by police officers, and attention is paid to people’s knowledge of this technology.
Methodological Approach
The problem of poor awareness that affected interpersonal relationships was addressed to answer the questions about BWC’s goals, people’s opinions, and the conditions under which cameras brought more benefits and helped overcome social discontent. A qualitative survey was implemented, and ten open-ended questions were offered to every participant. A questionnaire aimed at revealing people’s opinions about BWCs and their awareness of recent technological advances and regulations in the field of policing. Open-ended questions are highly implemented in qualitative studies to take a comprehensive look at the chosen topic (Bryman and Bell, 2019). According to Allen (2017), survey questions may cover some demographic information about the participants or occurring phenomena to assess people’s evaluations and knowledge. The open-ended format was chosen not to limit these answers to some specific aspects of the topic. Participants were given enough time to think over BWCs and re-examine their experiences with this device. There were no specifications if it was a direct experience or observations of other people. The goal was to learn what people knew about BWCs and their impact on police-population relationships.
In the current project, ten police officers and 15 citizens shared their agreement to participate. The researcher met every participant personally to explain the scope of the research and offered several forms to fill in for further data analysis. In total, the sample comprised 25 people older than 18 years. One participant withdrew cooperation because of personal reasons, but it was possible to find another candidate who met the necessary criteria (older than 18 years and with BWC experience). All participants got the same questionnaire forms with ten questions. First, it was necessary to identify the status of a person (a civilian or a police officer). Second, there were three questions about the general information about BWCs: purposes, implementation methods, and legal issues. The second group of questions was about personal opinions: experience, observation, and media coverage. The final three questions were to evaluate the worth of BWCs: benefits, shortages, and further implications. Finally, participation was voluntary, and citizens and police officers spent about 20-40 minutes answering all questions.
Data Collection
There were ten answers from 25 different people who preferred to stay anonymous in each survey. The only way to differentiate survey results is to address the first question about the status of a participant: it was necessary to choose either a police officer or not a police officer (citizen). Ten surveys were done by police officers, and 15 surveys were done by citizens (not police officers).
The first group of questions contained the answers to general questions about BWCs. Twenty people identified the possibility of improving the police work with the help of BWCs as the initial purpose. The same number of people (not the same individuals) chose video-recording of the events for evidence as another significant goal. Other answers (not more than ten) were officers’ management, effective leadership, safety, counselling, enhanced accountability, and transparency. All participants agreed that the best method to use a body cam is to implement it on the officer’s uniform. However, the opinions were divided between police officers (who preferred to have a BWC on a shoulder lapel) and citizens (who wanted to see it on a hat or even glasses). The legal aspects remain poorly covered by the UK public because there is no specific law that allows or prohibits the use of BWCs by police officers. Fifteen citizens believed that it was legal to film people without their permission in a public place, and ten police officers added that they could switch on/off cameras as per their discretion.
The second group of the questions focused on learning how BWCs could be used in real life. The surveys of police officers showed that this technology was not new, and such practices had been common since the 2010s at their department. It was not an obligation to wear BWCs, but the leadership decided to check its effectiveness. The experience of foreign colleagues (killing of Black Americans) made them wear body cameras to have evidence for their actions. In ten citizens’ replies, it was revealed that the presence of a BWC was associated with safety and justice, while other participants did not have a chance to cooperate with police officers who wore BWCs. Evaluating the role of media, all participants admitted that much attention had been recently paid to the implementation of BWC programs among police officers (8 individuals agreed that the current state of affairs was enough, and 17 individuals underlined the necessity to add more information about the pros and cons of BWCs).
In the last section of the survey, citizens and police officers shared their opinions about the benefits and challenges of BWCs in terms of police-public cooperation. Twenty-five people agreed that the police-citizen relationship could become more transparent with BWCs. This intervention became a unique opportunity to record all activities and use the material as evidence if necessary. At the same time, most citizens (10) and several police officers (3) were concerned about the costs of this technology and the inability of all police departments to buy BWCs for all officers. Besides, 20 out of 25 participants mentioned privacy invasion as the main challenge for people who wear body cameras. Not all citizens want to be recorded, and some of them could aggressively react to a police officer with a BWC, damaging law enforcement employees’ mental and psychological states. However, the survey proved that BWCs had to be implemented in future, and new policies should identify the conditions under which BWCs are not dangerous.
Data Analysis
The findings of this survey research confirmed much information obtained from the review of the literature. First, this research identified several factors to support the implementation of BWCs as a means to improve the relationships between police officers and UK citizens. Second, the answers of the participants proved the prevalence of positive attitudes towards cameras. Finally, most individuals agreed that it was necessary to analyse current privacy and psychological aspects and define the conditions under which video and audio recordings should be promoted.
Through the survey, the participants shared similar ideas about BWCs and the goals that police and the government had to achieve. They believed that the initial goal of police officers who wear cameras is to record their interactions with the general public and improve evidence. Laming (2018) and Barlow et al. (2019) support the same position and admit that using such devices creates a substantial evidentiary benefit for police agencies. All answers contained such words as “improve,” “control,” and “evidence,” meaning that people expect to use BWCs as a chance to stabilise police-citizen relationships and avoid unnecessary misunderstandings and ambiguous situations. Besides, the survey revealed that BWCs should not be associated with crime reduction. Wearing cameras does not mean people stop conducting crimes, but some police officers noticed the fear of scrutiny related to wearing cameras (Lum et al., 2019). Although Taylor and Lee (2019) and Lum et al. (2019) underlined increased safety for police and citizens, not many participants (only 3 out of 25) used this word in identifying the goals. The police force, word choice, and cooperation methods are expected to be improved with BWCs.
One of the main goals in this research project was to gather opinions about BWCs and understand if applying these devices to police practice was associated with positive results. The participants were mostly positive about the possibility of controlling police officers’ activities and avoiding unnecessary investigations. Thirteen citizens and six police officers supported the idea of acquiring BWCs as it promised more accountability and order. The same conclusions were made by Lum et al. (2019), Taylor and Lee (2019), and Parmar (2019): people felt more confident in the police. However, Miranda (2022) discussed contextual and ethical challenges, addressing privacy issues and technical capabilities. Sometimes, the coverage of interactions is not full, and it is hard to gather enough material about the situation. In this case, people questioned the worth of BWCs and the necessity to spend the state budget on this intervention. However, police officers and citizens generally believe that this idea deserves attention and further elaboration.
At this moment, the survey results prove that using BWCs by police officers is a necessity for establishing trustful and just relationships between law enforcement representatives and citizens (victims, criminals, and witnesses). The participants demonstrated their support for understanding police activities through the information obtained from video and audio recordings. Police officers, in their turn, did not demonstrate their concerns about wearing cameras as they believed this step was a good contribution to explaining their decisions. Besides, increased transparency and accountability are usually associated with positive attitudes (Löfstrand and Backman, 2021). To avoid conflicts, improved media coverage and policy-making are the steps that can inform and prepare the public and reduce misinformation (Lawshe et al., 2019; Schneider, 2017). The idea of BWCs should not be rejected but enhanced to keep order, safety, and justice on the British streets.
Conclusions and Recommendations
This research revealed that many police officers commonly used WBCs in different countries. The goals for acquiring this technology are related to recording activities and making police-public cooperation transparent and definite. There is no need to involve many individuals to observe a situation but rely on the material offered. People believe that technological progress may penetrate as many spheres as possible and result in improvements, safety, and convenience. Positive attitudes towards BWCs are frequently noticed, and it seems to be a good idea to strengthen evidence and store information. The survey results lacked contradictions, and most participants shared the same opinions about the necessity of wearing cameras to minimise problems and misunderstandings in police-citizen interactions. Although such issues as privacy, constant monitoring, and visibility raise some concerns and questions, the number of benefits prevails. BWCs are small and convenient, and the recorded information is huge and significant. Police officers and ordinary citizens do not demonstrate their unwillingness to cooperate under working BWCs, but some recommendations and suggestions may be given to support this intervention.
The development of recommendations for using BWCs and the information obtained from these devices turns out to be a topic for many studies. Within the frames of this project, the first idea is to improve public awareness of why police officers need to wear cameras, and what expectations are defined. Some individuals are unsure if it is normal to interrupt their privacy when a police officer records their communication. Thus, people should understand that all material is properly stored and used when necessary for a particular case. Recordings are never shared online or for personal purposes. Police leaders may examine cooperation and give their professional recommendations on how to initiate a talk, what questions to ask, and what techniques to apply. Second, several policies should be applied to clarify the conditions under which police officers turn on or turn off their cameras. Although there is no law to restrict videotaping in public places, ordinary citizens must be aware of BWCs in police practice.
In general, survey research with police officers and ordinary citizens provided several good opportunities to understand that BWCs have mostly a positive effect on interpersonal relationships. Police officers are able to reduce the number of misunderstandings and use evidence to explain their behaviours or improve their work with time. Citizens consider BWCs a normal intervention to increase transparency in police work and reduce violence. Racial and social biases exist in modern society, and despite the intention to minimise conflicts and strive for justice, police actions are not always properly understood. BWCs make it possible to record the interactions between police officers and the community and clarify if all responsibilities and purposes are pursued. The adoption of BWCs is not permanent, but it contributes to the responsive and legitimate organisation of police activities. People obtain guarantees that the law protects them, and control is not imposed but promised as a positive outcome. Further studies about the costs of BWC implementation, police officer training, and public awareness are necessary to limit disagreements and promote positive attitudes.
Reference List
Allen, M. (ed.) (2017) The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods (vol. 1). London: SAGE.
Barlow, C. et al. (2019) ‘Putting coercive control into practice: problems and possibilities’, The British Journal of Criminology, 1-20.
Blaskovits, B. and Bennell, C. (2020) ‘Exploring the potential impact of body worn cameras on memory in officer-involved critical incidents: a literature review’, Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 35(3): 251-262.
Bradford, B., et al. (2020) ‘Live facial recognition: trust and legitimacy as predictors of public support for police use of new technology’, The British Journal of Criminology.
Brown, J. (2021) Policing in the UK. Web.
Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2019) Social research methods. Ontario: Oxford University Press.
College of policing (2021) Spotlight on the evidence: body-worn cameras (BWCs). Web.
Fleetwood, J. and Lea, J. (2022) ‘Defunding the police in the UK: critical questions and practical suggestions’, The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice, 1-18.
Hesketh, I., Cooper, C. and Ivy, J. (2019) ‘Leading the asset: resilience training efficacy in UK policing’, The Police Journal, 92(1): 56-71.
Laming, E. (2019) ‘Police use of body worn cameras’, Police Practice and Research, 20(2): 201-216.
Lawshe, N. L. et al. (2018) ‘Behind the lens: police attitudes toward body-worn cameras and organizational justice’, Journal of Crime and Justice, 42(1): 78–97.
Löfstrand, H. C. and Backman, C. (2021) ‘Control or protection? work environment implications of police body‐worn cameras’, New Technology, Work and Employment, 36(3): 327-347.
Lum, C. et al. (2019) ‘Research on body-worn cameras: what we know, what we need to know’, Criminology & Public Policy, 18: 93-118.
Miranda, D. (2022) ‘Body-worn cameras ‘on the move’: exploring the contextual, technical and ethical challenges in policing practice’, Policing and Society, 32(1): 18-34.
Parmar, A. (2019) ‘Policing migration and racial technologies’, The British Journal of Criminology, 1-20.
The police (conduct) regulations 2020 (2020). Web.
Schneider, C. J. (2017) ‘Body worn cameras and police image work: news media coverage of the Rialto police department’s body worn camera experiment’, Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal.
Taylor, E. and Lee, M. (2019) ‘Points of view: arrestees’ perspectives on police body-worn cameras and their perceived impact on police–citizen interactions’, The British Journal of Criminology.
Walklate, S. and Fitz-Gibbon, K. (2019) ‘The criminalisation of coercive control: the power of law?’, International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 8(4): 94-108.
Yesberg, J. A. et al. (2021) ‘Race and support for police use of force: findings from the UK’, Policing and Society.