Introduction
The role of the police in the society is central when it comes to ensuring law and order. How police behave in enforcing law and order is a major area of research that has a lot of interest. The policing task is the most prominent manifestation of the government and is easily recognizable by members of the society (Terrill & Reisig, 2003). Further, the police officers under the law are allowed to use force to enforce laws and order separates their functions from other roles of the government. The research on police behavior highlights important factors and determinants of such behavior (Wilson, 1978). Further, such research raises important issues on police discretion relating to the actions that should be undertaken by officers when faced with a policing situation in the course of duty. Existing research has identified various key determinants of police behavior.
Firstly, organizational factors are important determinants of police behavior. These organizational factors include administrative rules and regulations, policies, and styles of police behavior (Terrill & Reisig, 2003). Administrative rules and regulations indicate the guidelines that police officers follow in order to deliver their services to the general population. Further, it indicates the leadership and supervisory approaches that are provided by seniors on police officers. Availability of resources for police officers is also an important administrative issue that has a bearing on the behavior exhibited by the police offers. The policing organizational context in the United States is highly fragmented. The structure is made up of numerous local and cross state police units in charge of general and specific policing activities (Smith & Visher, 1981). Examples of the task forces include those that are directed on the fight against terrorism or drug trafficking and so on. These fragmented units of police influence how police officers behave in the process of delivering their roles.
Secondly, policies that are in place are important in guiding the behavior of officers. In this case, if policies are in place to enforce and ensure accountability, the police behavior may be different from the behavior that would be evident when there are no accountability demands (Smith & Petrocelli, 2001). In addition, policies on issues such as corruption among police officers are also important determinants of police behavior.
The next important factors that influence police behavior are individual determinants. Such determinants include legal factors and extra-legal factors. In legal factors, the strength of evidence is an important determinant of how police officers behave when confronted with a policing issue (Worden, 1990). Further, the seriousness of a crime is a factor that is likely to influence police behavior. The presence of witnesses is also a factor that has been found to influence how police officers behave. Extra legal factors such as race, sex, socio-economic status, neighborhood context, and demeanor are also important influences on police behavior.
The role and police officers cannot be looked down upon since it brings law and order. However, how the police officers act or deliver their duties is of great importance since a narrow distinction is apparent concerning the use of legal force and abuse of power that is bestowed on police officers. Concisely, many factors influence the behavior exhibited by the police officers as will be discussed in this paper (Smith & Visher, 1981). Understanding such influences and determinants of police behaviors is very important in informing the police practice and interventions that may guide the police behavior to guarantee good outcomes for the society while at the same time ensuring law and order and justice for all people.
Organizational Determinants
Research has ventured into situational and environmental influences of police decision making. While most of the studies have focused on the race of suspects, demeanor, victim requests, the seriousness of offense among other factors, organizational factors are increasingly being recognized as equally important in the police decision-making process. According to the available research, organizational culture and constraints among other factors have a significant influence on the decision-making process of the officers. The key factors that influence police decision-making processes include administrative rules and regulations, policies, and styles of police behavior.
Styles of police behavior
According to Smith (1984), no police station or department is identical to another. In this case, police officers often respond to similar issues differently. The response is determined by the organizational culture, demands on police work, and other constraints. Further, organizational values also have a significant influence on a police officer in terms of what they view as the norm or acceptable when making arrests or other decisions at work. Research by Sherman (1980) confirms that police behavior is a function of departmental goal, which are determined by the political climate in a given community. Consequently, the defining concept for different police departments is based on their level of professionalism and administrative complexity. Wilson (1978) reveals three categories that define different departments and agencies of police and thus informing the behavior of police officers. These categories are the legalistic style, the service style, and the security guard style.
In the security guard style, the police departments’ operation concept is focused on the maintenance of order. In these departments, police officers are required to ignore certain types of criminal behavior such as juvenile indiscretions or minor traffic offenses. Instead, they are required to focus on laws considered important by local politicians and citizens (Wilson, 1978). Accordingly, since the officers deal with high-profile issues, they are more aggressive and likely to use more force when responding to criminal behavior. There kind of work does not emphasize professionalism and hence the individuals in such police departments are often locally recruited and low paid. The police officers are also poorly trained and rarely do they seek to advance their education (Wilson, 1978). Flat bureaucracies in the policing structures, low budgets, and minimal specialization characterize the departments that use the security guard style.
In the legalistic and service-style agencies, there are high levels of professionalism. However, the agencies differ in terms of administrative complexity. For instance, in the legalistic-style agencies, detectives may detain many youthful lawbreakers, issue several traffic certifications, and/or act robustly against prohibited businesses and other ventures (Wilson, 1978). These departments are focused on ensuring that laws are followed at all times. In these departments of police, all members of the community are treated equally and impersonally. Further, the police officers serve separately from the community that they serve. Sectors in legalistic-style groups are highly technical with fundamental managerial influence and sophisticated conventions and measures. Discretion among police officers in the legalistic departments is an opportunity for corruption. Thus, it is not encouraged. What matters is the right or wrong of an action in the eyes of the law. Further, a high rate of arrest is viewed as an indicator of performance among police officers. Joining the organizations that follow legalistic style requires high qualifications (Wilson, 1978). In addition, there are high incentives for continuing education and training among police officers in the departments. Police officers are also expected to compete for opportunities of promotion and advancements within the ranks of the organization. The roles and tasks are specialized and hence there are many units dealing with specific issues identified in the society. Lastly, the legalistic departments are also characterized by strict evaluation process relating to the performance of the police officers in their roles and tasks.
In the service style agencies, professionalism is of high level, despite the less hierarchical structure and control as compared to the legalistic service agencies. Service agencies are also decentralized in terms of command structure. They are characterized by many station houses that ensure diversity and decentralization of power and activities. Further, they are well focused, proficient, and dignified. Their employees are civilians and diverse. Officer preparation and assessments highlight society affairs. According to Wilson (1978), the central aim of service style sectors is to defend the community system. The units in this category prevail primarily in more prosperous and similar societies whose key agenda is on crisis management, society dealings, and deferrals to collective desires. Due to the high professional requirements for officials in these departments, there is more emphasis on training, education, record keeping among other professional qualifications. Further, police officers in the service style agencies earn more relative to their counterparts in other agencies (Worden, 1989). Competition for promotions and educational advancement in these departments is pronounced. In these departments, policing decisions are guided by the wish to uphold tranquility and order and the projected behavior of a lawbreaker. Arrest decisions are therefore considered when there are serious crimes that threaten peace and order.
Administrative rules/regulations
The influence of administrative rules, approaches, and regulations on police behavior is a fact that has been considered to influence police behavior. According to Black (1971), organizational and departmental factors such as hiring, training, and operations have enormous influence on the behavior of police officers. Existing research on policing behavior suggests that higher education and training promotes effective policing. Wilson (1978) reveals three categorizations of police departments that determine the administrative regulations and rules that are applied in a given policing setting. This categorization comprises the legalistic style, service oriented, and the security guard style police departments. Research shows that each category of policing approach has unique administrative regulations and rules that have a profound influence on the behavior of police officers. For instance, the study that looked at the weight of official and casual governmental properties of law enforcement units on officers’ judgment in detaining in case of driving under the pressure of illegal substances had important findings. The research found that legalistic style department made fewer DUI arrests as compared to the security guard style and service style departments.
Another important research by Smith and Petrocelli (2001) realized that casual features of law enforcement units such as peer traditions and the surroundings had a significant weight on the actual officer’s performance during enforcement. In these cases, peer background and atmosphere are superior indicators of officers’ manners in bigger units. The research found that smaller departments have higher congruence between written policy and actual behavior as opposed to larger departments where there was less correlation between written policy and police behavior. A clarification for this disparity in the performance between smaller units and the bigger ones is that the superior units are associated with more job and hence inadequate room for officers to embark on the lengthy unrestricted deeds (Skogan & Frydl, 2004). Further, another research found that small-scale departments are often service-oriented and thus less aggressive since most of them are located in affluent and homogeneous areas where crime is less, hence requiring minimal aggression. However, smaller departments located in high-crime and violent neighborhoods exhibit a higher aggression in response to the demands of their work in the regions.
Other researchers have also found a correlation between organizational context and arrest decision of police officers. For instance, Engel and Calnon (2004) found that police officers in legalistic had three times more likelihood of arresting juveniles as compared to officers in other departments. Further, more disagreement apprehensions were expected to be made by detectives from legalistic units than service group detectives do. In this case, it is evident that the police decisions and behaviors are greatly influenced by the administrative approaches and regulations that are in place.
However, not all researchers find a correlation between administrative regulations and police behavior. For instance, some research suggests that education has an influence on police officers’ behavior as opposed to the administrative policies in place. Black (1971) observes that college educated police officers receive fewer criticism and complaints regarding their behavior from citizens. However, the assertion of the influence of college education on police behavior has been challenged by other studies that have found no correlation between the two concepts. A study by Lundman, (1996) found no correlation between higher levels of education and victimization or increased satisfaction on the police force in the neighborhoods.
The role of administrative specialization on the behavior of police officers has also been researched extensively. However, such research has been inconclusive. Research has linked lower arrest rates to the presence of collecting bargaining structures in large police departments (Mastrofski, Riti, & Hoffmaster, 1987). Other researchers show little correlation between police departments and the behavior exhibited by police officers. Concisely, while there is increasing research showing a correlation between police behavior and administrative approaches, the issue is still controversial with an equally large number of researchers finding no correlation between the two.
Research has also supported the role of organizational goals on the police behavior. Research by Riksheim and Chermak (1993) sought to study the possible explanations of how organizations affect the individual behavior of police officers. The research came up with three models, which are the rational model, constrained rational model, and loosely coupled model. In rational model, organizations emphasize setting goals, formal policies, and monitoring of the implementation of the policies and rules in the community or society. In this model, it is argued that bureaucratic structures of police organizations have a significant impact on the behavior of the police officers. Such impact is evident when the officers enforce of law and order. In constrained rational model, the argument is that police officers in higher management have a very low influence on the behavior of police officers at the street level (Riksheim & Chermak, 1993). In this case, the main argument is that administrators have little influence and impacts on the application of administration rules and regulations at the street level. In the loosely coupled model, the argument is that culture, peer influence, and the environment determine police behavior. Concisely, they influence police administrational rules and regulations as guided by the above-discussed models, which confirm that different proponents view police behavior from diverse angles.
Policies
Policies form an important part of policing role since they are put forward to guide police behavior and/or ensure the best outcomes for the community. The existing and most popular guiding principles in the law enforcement emphasize imprudent rejoinders to misdemeanor, precautionary management, and speedy rejoinder times. However, these policies have been criticized and their effectiveness in controlling crime questioned. It is for this reason that new policies focus on adoption of proactive community-oriented policing as problem-oriented policing (POP) as opposed to reactive policing. According to Lum (2011), the behavior exhibited by police officers in reactive policing departments different from the behavior of police officers that use community and problem-solving methods.
In the public and investigative techniques, law enforcement units allow organizations to discharge their detectives from stern technical power. Instead, they grant them an extended mandate other than the constricted immediate approach to policing and enforcement of regulations and peace. Police officers are encouraged to build partnerships with communities, preventive crime, and solving problems that may lead to criminal events in the community (Lum, 2011). The new approaches to community and problem-solving approaches have led to the monumental shift in how policing is carried. However, very few researches have been carried to show the correlation between the new policies and police behavior. In other words, research has not focused on the influence of community policing on the behavior of police officers (Sherman, 1980). Overwhelming research has focused on how police officers engaged in community policing spend their time. The studies have focused on the assessment of micro-level relationships between police officers and the society.
Individual Determinants
Police behavior is influenced by many factors. Apart from organizational factors that have been discussed above, situational factors play an important role in guiding how police officers act. In situational factors, the focus is on the unique conditions that vary from one event to another and consequently require different tactical levels of decision making among police officers. The situational influences that have received considerable interest and research include social class, gender, race, demeanor, sobriety, evidence, the presence of witnesses, and seriousness of offense among others. According to Skogan and Frydl (2004), police behavior is influenced by a citizen’s “sanctioning capacity.” The sanctioning capacity is a function of the status of an individual and includes gender, social class, and race among others. From this perspective, it can be argued that the situational factors are important determinants of how police choose to handle a case. Lum (2011) asserts that the differences in terms of how police officers handle issues can be elaborately understood and explained through understanding the situational factors. These situational factors can be divided into legal and extra-legal factors. Legal factors such as the seriousness of crime, strength of evidence, and cooperation of complainants are justifiable reasons that inform the official’s decision-making. On the other hand, extra-legal factors such as race, gender, and social class should not have an influence on police officers’ decision-making processes, yet there is support to show that they considerably control how the officers behave.
Legal factors
Strength of Evidence and Seriousness of Crime
The most prominent legal factors that have received increased research are the strength of evidence and crime seriousness. The presence of witnesses is also an important factor that has been acknowledged for influencing policing behavior. According to Klinger (1994), evidence suggests that the use of coercive force or not, among police officers is determined by the presence of legal factors. Police officers are more likely to use force or verbal controls during encounters with suspects when the evidence of wrongdoing is very high (Mastrofski, Worden, & Snipes, 1995). In addition, when the misdemeanor is serious, the likelihood of using force also increases drastically. For example, there is evidence suggesting that the likelihood of using force among police officers in crimes such as felony is higher as compared to when the crime is lesser.
However, not all studies support the assertion that evidence and seriousness of crime lead to increased likelihood of use of force. For instance, Lundman (1996) asserts that observational factors are also important in determining the use of force. For instance, the police officer may fail to act forcefully even when the alleged crime is serious, or even when the evidence is overwhelming. In this case, police are less likely to make arrests or use force in situations where they did not observe the offense themselves or when they are relying on evidence from witnesses. Further, the research shows that even when the evidence was present, not all suspects were arrested (Lundman, 1996). Accordingly, the research found that police arrested slight more than half of the felony cases where there was evidence and thus showing that a significant number of cases did not always lead to arrests or use of force even with the availability of evidence.
Presence of Witnesses
The influence of witnesses has been researched considerably to reveal important findings. However, these findings offer mixed results. This situation has led to more interest in the role of witnesses in the decision-making process and behavior of police officers. Some studies hold that the use of force increased drastically as the number of police officers or witnesses increased (Alpert, MacDonald, & Dunham, 2005). Other researchers reported that the use of force was negatively correlated with the use of force among police officers. Some researchers suggest that there is no relationship between the use of force and the presence of other officers or witnesses.
The research by Black (1971) confirms the influence of witnesses on the behavior of police officers when handling cases in the society. For instance, the complaints, who may also be the witnesses, often have differing preferences on the course of action. In this case, if a crime is not serious, there is the likelihood for witnesses and complainants to express leniency towards the suspects. In such situations, while many witnesses and complainants express preference for or against legal actions, it has been found that police officers tend to comply. According to a study by Black (1971), police officers were more likely to make an arrest when a complaint or a witness expressed a desire to have a suspect arrested. Indeed, the research found that police made arrests 46.6% of the times that they were requested to make an arrest by a complaint. However, arrest rate dropped to only 18.8% when there was no preference for arrest or not from the complainant. In situations where the witnesses or complainants made requests for suspects not to be arrested, only 6.6% arrests were made (Worden, 1990). The observation by this research on the influence of complainants and witnesses on police behavior shows that police officers have a tendency to behave democratically. Further, it is evident that the standard of justice that police officers apply is not consistent and is partly influenced by the complainant’s views on the crime that has been committed against them. The influence of witnesses and complainants on police behavior is higher in situations where they request police actions lower than arrest. In this case, if police officers are requested to provide a warning, advice or persuade, or banish a suspect, they are more likely to comply (Worden, 1989). However, another important influence on the police compliance to requests by witnesses and complainants is the availability of evidence and the serious of the crime. In this case, when there is more evidence, police officers are likely to comply to arrest requests by complainants as compared to when the evidence is weak or non-existent.
Extra-legal Factors
Extra-legal factors constitute suspect characteristics that have received considerable research relating to their influence on police behavior. These extra-legal factors include suspect demographics such as race/ethnicity, gender, and age. Other factors include demeanor, social class, and neighborhood. These factors are discussed in detail below.
Race
Race/Ethnicity has received considerable attention in research on factors that influence police behavior. Ethnicity has been fuelled specifically by the contentious issue of the relationship between minority groups and police officers as evident in the United States. However, the research on the issue has led to mixed results and findings. For instance, Wilson (1978) argues that there is no correlation between ethnicity and the police behavior. Different models have been used to investigate the contentious issue. Smith and Visher (1981) use three models of research and conclude that there is no correlation between the likelihood of using force among police officers and the ethnicity/race of a suspect. Another research by Smith and Petrocelli (2001) examined the behavior sequences between suspects and police officers and did not find any evidence that the ethnicity of a suspect influenced the behavior of a police officer.
Although facts show that the background of a victim has no impact on the manners of an individual law enforcement staff, other works reveal different conclusions. For instance, Terrill and Reisig (2003) realized that whites stood minimal chances of being exposed to force as compared to blacks. Of great importance in the findings was the fact that black suspects were more likely to be subjected to force during periods of compliance as compared to other suspects of other ethnic groups. However, the research found that when a suspect showed some form of resistance, the reaction of the police officer was not determined by the ethnicity of the individual. In some other works, the findings suggest that minority suspects are likely to have force used against them. However, when neighborhood contextual factors are put in place, ethnicity/race no longer has significant influence (Smith, 1984). Concisely, the influence of race/ethnicity on the behavior of police officers is not acknowledged across the board. Hence, there is the need for more research to be undertaken on the issue.
Age
Age is the second demographic element that has received considerable research on the influence of police behavior. According to Terrill and Reisig (2003), several works that have confirmed a connection between age and the application of force suggest that detectives stood minimal chances of applying force on aged victims. Another research by Alpert et al. (2005) confirms that while male detectives had reduced chances of applying spoken and corporeal pressure on mature victims, being aged only condensed the probability of corporeal pressure when the detectives were women. Another study by Engel and Calnon (2004) found that police officers were less likely to use physical force against younger citizens. However, the likelihood of use of non-lethal force on juveniles increased drastically. Further, the research suggested that the age of the victim had no impact on the detective’s application of oral authority or weapon. However, other research by Smith and Petrocelli (2001) found that the age of the suspects did not determine the use of force among police officers. The findings show mixed results and understanding of the use of force on suspects depending on their age.
Sex/Gender
There is considerable research that has focused on the influence of gender on the behavior of police officers. For instance, there exists considerable research suggesting that male victims stand a high chance of facing pressure from detectives as compared to female victims. Research by Terrill and Reisig (2003) shows that while the likelihood of force is not influenced by gender, male suspects are more likely to face a higher force as compared to female suspects. However, other studies find no correlation between gender and police behavior (Engel & Calnon, 2004).
Demeanor
The concept of demeanor has received a substantial research attention. Demeanor indicates the outward behavior or attitude that a person displays when interacting with another. Considerable research supports that the demeanor of a suspect has an influence on the police behavior. For instance, research by Smith (1984) found that disrespectful suspects were more likely to be arrested or to be subjected to force as compared to those who shown respectful demeanor. Another research by Skogan and Frydl (2004) also arrived on the same findings by showing that respectful suspects were less likely to face force from police officers as compared to their disrespectful counterparts. Further, Lum, (2011) asserts that police officers are more likely to deal coercively in disputes where a suspect is disrespectful.
However, other studies show inconsistent results. For example, research by Riksheim and Chermak (1993) did not find any correlation between poor demeanor and the use of verbal commands directed to suspects by police officers. Further, the demeanor did not influence the use of firearms against suspects. However, suspects who were angry or aggressive were more likely to be sprayed with a chemical spray or to be subjected to other forms of nonlethal force or weapon. Smith and Petrocelli (2001) revealed the same research findings concerning the use of force by police officers on disrespectful officers. In this case, officers were unlikely to increase or reduce the amount of force used on a suspect when confronted with disrespectful suspects as compared to respectful ones.
The application of demeanor is a controversial issue since it indicates a judgment by an individual over another’s behavior. Further, the research on the concept is problematic since it involves studying the behavior of police officers by a third party on their interpretation of demeanor on a suspect. In this case, researchers may wrongly interpret a police officer’s interpretation of a suspect’s demeanor, which consequently may have an impact on the outcomes of the studies. Despite these concerns, it is worth noting that demeanor will continue to attract research in the process of understanding police behavior.
Socio-economic status
Socio-economic status is another important theme of studying police behavior. Further, socio-economic status is a major approach and topic that has attracted considerable attention in the discussion of equal treatment for all citizens. However, since it is difficult to ascertain the social class of all individuals that police officer’s encounter, the judgment is majorly subjective and determined by other factors such as neighborhood or ethnicity. However, while the majority of studies have been inconclusive, some have shown a correlation between the social class and the police behavior. The studies confirm that a detective’s tendency to apply pressure was a function of the social class of the captured civilian (Smith, 1984; Sherman, 1980). In this case, suspects of the lower social class were more likely to be exposed to the increased police force as compared to those who were perceived to be of a higher social class. However, critics of these researchers claim that it is difficult to separate social class from ethnicity and race. Hence, such studies are faulty. Further, many of the studies rely on the observer’s perception of the suspect, which may not reflect the police officer’s assessment.
Neighborhood context
The research on the influence of neighborhoods on police behavior has received attention, although the findings are sparse and majorly inconclusive. Many researchers such as (Smith, 1984) have argued that no link in theory or evidence proves any relationship between police behavior and the neighborhood. However, although the existing research does not provide prepositions or variables that may explain or predict the use of force among police officers and the neighborhoods where such force is used, existing literature provides guidelines into this issue. For example, research by Skogan and Frydl (2004) reveals that police officers often associate neighborhoods with the likelihood of encountering suspicious persons during patrols. In addition to using some cues such as previous arrests, running from police, or appearing to conceal contraband or a weapon, police officers often classify various neighborhoods as suspicious places.
Another research by Sherman (1980) confirms that the classification of neighborhood into either suspicious or secure leads to what is referred to as “ecological contamination” where all individuals encountered in “suspicious neighborhoods” are regarded as suspicious. In this case, the neighborhood where an individual is found may lead to one being branded a suspect regardless of the personal characteristics or behavior depicted by the individual. Further, Riksheim and Chermak (1993) found that police officers were often more aggressive and punitive in the lower class and high-crime neighborhoods. This study suggests that being in a bad neighborhood drastically increases one’s possibility of experiencing police aggression.
However, the study by Lundman (1996) found that the black population was more likely to be a suspect to police aggression. However, when the neighborhood context was put in place, the ethnicity of an individual dwindled to a non-factor of arrest or police aggression. The research argues the racial composition of a given area influences the likelihood of police aggression as opposed to the individual race of a suspect (Mastrofski et al., 1987). In this case, neighborhoods where blacks are predominant, the likelihood of arrest for all individuals, regardless of their race, in that neighborhood increases drastically. The study also found that people in the lower-status neighborhood were three times more like to face police aggression.
A study by Lum (2011) focused on the ecological theory upon which the study on the influence of neighborhood and police behavior is based. In this study, the focus was on the analysis of disparities in the energy with which detectives apply prescribed power. In this case, the amount of vigor indicates the level of authority police apply by making arrests, conducting investigations, taking reports, and other policing activities in a given area. The research found that in areas where there are high levels of deviance, police officers, and department were less inclined to enforce formal authority activities (Engel & Calnon, 2004). The research argues that extent of crime influences the job volume and capital for handling misdemeanor. Further, due to the high levels of crime, the perception of what normalcy entails becomes blurred, hence affecting the decision on the efforts that police departments should undertake to respond. In this case, it is evident that the neighborhood that police officers operate should be considered when defining the use of police force to ensure contextual relevance.
However, difficulties are experienced in understanding the determination of police of force, which makes it complicated to establish the direction of influence is the context of neighborhoods. For instance, the use of police force entails not just arrests, and hence the likelihood of using less force in disadvantaged, high crime areas can be a hypothesis that can guide research (Lum, 2011). For instance, frequent patrols and police aggression without arrest may be construed as less force. Such hypotheses can complicate researchers who view all kinds of police aggression as a police force.
Other studies that are against the notion that police use higher force in high-crime and low-status areas have been disregarded by the argument that in such areas, police do not often take official reports even after arrests in serious assault cases. In a secure neighborhood, such cases would warrant official report. Additional studies by Klinger (1994) found that while police officers may act aggressively in some low class, high crime neighborhoods, they might fail to intervene in others of equal status. In this case, the studies show that the use of police force is determined by other factors beyond the narrow scope of neighborhood such as resource availability, workload, the regularity of a crime, and cynicism in addition to other factors unless the crime is of serious nature such as a homicide incident.
The variations on the research on the influence of neighborhood and police behavior show that it is difficult to arrive at a conclusive determination on whether neighborhood affects police behavior. The variations can be linked to the methodological approaches that different studies use. Further, definitions of some variables such as police aggressiveness, police force, or vigor are important aspects that affect how various researchers and readers interpret findings on the issue. Succinctly, whether police behavior is influenced by neighborhood or not is a controversial issue, which requires more research.
Types of Police Behavior
Police officers exhibit various behaviors that are important in determining and guiding how they deliver their roles. The main behaviors of police officers are discretion, use of force, arrest, and community policing. These behaviors are discussed in detail below.
Discretion
Discretion is concerned about police officers’ perspective or opinion as to how much effort, time, or resources should be dedicated towards the enforcement of law and order in a given situation. In another definition, individuals or police administrators have diplomacy when the restrictions of their supremacy accord them the liberty to decide from diverse potential accomplishments at their disposal (Worden, 1990). Further, discretion involves the decision of an officer to act in a given manner concerning relevant facts and laws that relate to such a situation. Discretionary authority is one of the most researched and difficult roles of power for law enforcement. Very many questions have been raised on the process of applying discretion and its centrality to police decision-making. While it is difficult to eliminate discretion from the police force, there have been several studies supporting or criticizing the application of the concept. While discretion is required to facilitate the maintenance of law and order, it is a highly controversial topic, which raises many questions (Terrill & Reisig, 2003). For instance, it is difficult to guarantee that the legal system confines to legal duties while limiting discretion in the application of authority. Further questions relate to whether the amount of training a police officer has limits or affects the effectiveness of discretion. Modern research has focused on the identification of factors that influence discretion among police officers.
Firstly, it is worth noting that the nature of police is very complex and that it often obscures the issues that the officers face in the process of applying discretion. In this case, the situational factors that police officers face in their work are important determinants of how discretion and consequently decision making is undertaken. These complex situations that police officers face on the ground determine whether proper or improper decision-making procedures will be applied. Police work involves more than just dealing with criminals. Indeed, these other activities carry the bulk of the roles that police officers undertake in their daily activities (Smith & Visher, 1981). For instance, police officers are involved in many activities that relate to addressing citizen’s concerns such as lost children, automobile accidents, despites between consumers and retailers, and neighborhood complaints, among other roles. All these activities pose dilemmas to police officers since they require an immediate answer and hence complicating the role of police. The situational factors are indeed more important determinants of police officers’ decision than other factors such as organizational and officer characteristics and attitudes. Situational factors explain why police officers make more arrests when the suspect is violent, rude, has a weapon, or is drunk. The same situational factors also explain why police officers decision is influenced by the seriousness of the crime. For instance, more arrests are made when the crime is a felony as opposed to minor crimes.
Research also shows a strong relationship between a suspect’s demeanor and the officers’ decisions. In this case, hostile suspects or citizens are more likely to be arrested as compared to those who are not violent. Another important finding is that when citizens resist police officer’s demands, the likelihood of arrest increases drastically. Further, the use of force in equally increased in situations where citizens are hostile or resistant to police officer’s demands.
Other studies show the demographic characteristics of the citizen or suspect as another impact on an officer’s course of action. Demographics relates to age, gender, and race. According to Worden (1989), males are more likely to be arrested and/or face increased police force as compared to female suspects. Studies indicate that the reason for this disparity on the decision-making process when faced by different genders shows that police officers perceive males to be more dangerous than females, thus justifying the use of force.
The race of an individual is an important determinant of the police decision-making in an officer-citizen encounter. For instance, according to Smith and Visher (1981), police officers are more likely to stop, search, arrest, or use force when interacting with a black citizen. Smith and Petrocelli (2001) assert that police officers are more likely to use force towards minority groups, and most importantly, towards blacks. However, blacks are more disrespectful towards police officers and hence the reason they are subject to more arrests and police force as compared to whites. However, when the seriousness of the crime is considered the race does not affect discretion or police officers’ decision-making.
According to Klinger (1994), the relationship between the victim and suspect influences the decision to arrest. In situations where there is no relationship between the offender and the victim, the likelihood of arrest increases drastically. However, when a relationship between the victim and the suspect is apparent, for instance, friends or relatives, the arrest decision is minimized and in its place warning, restraint, or conflict resolution applied. In a case where the victim and suspect are married, the arrest decision is also reduced.
The community characteristics are a major determinant on the discretion that police officers apply in handling situations. According to Black (1971), police officers often tailor behavior models into what is acceptable in a given society where policing is applied. Klinger (1994) asserts that the police behavior is guided by the location or neighborhood where the police-citizen encounter occurs or where the citizen lives. For instance, Lundman (1996) argues that police officers are likely to make more arrest decision when they perceive a neighborhood to be low class or insecure as compared to arrest decision in areas that are perceived to be affluent and secure. Concisely, the way police officers respond to a specific neighborhood is largely a factor of the perceptions of the police on the acceptable behavior or responses that should be applied in the given area.
The crime rate in a community is a major factor for consideration in the discretion of police officers. According to Worden (1990), communities with high levels of crime are more likely to lead to more arrest decisions as compared to communities with lower crime rates. Further, police officers are more likely to be aggressive or use force in communities where insecurity is high. More deployments sanctioned by police departments are also likely to be directed towards communities that are perceived to have higher crime rates.
Lastly, the gender of police officers is also a determinant of the application of discretion. In this case, Terrill and Reisig (2003) assert that female police officers have a different set of values and goals as compared to male officers. For instance, female police officers are more likely to resolve to reconcile conflicts as opposed to arresting the offenders. Gender is consequently an indicator of the discretion that police officers use and hence a determinant of police behavior in police-citizen encounters.
The Use of Force
One of the major characteristics of police officers is their ability to use force legally. Indeed, the application of force by police officers is a vital tool that ensures their legitimacy and authority in the society. There has been considerable research on the use of force among police officers, with such studies focusing on the determinants of the application of police officers. While not all situations warrant the use of force, determining where and when to use force has received considerable research. Firstly, the most important factors that guide the use of force in police-citizen encounters include the gravity of the crime and its evidence. In this case, police officers are more inclined to use force when the crime is serious such as robbery with violence or felony. In such situations, the suspects are deemed more dangerous, more likely to be aggressive towards police officers and hence justifying the use of force. The availability of evidence relating to a given crime is also a major determinant of the use of force by police officers. According to Worden (1990), when a crime is committed in the presence of police officers or when the suspect is found in possession of the evidence, the likelihood of force increases.
Secondly, the situation of the police-citizen encounter also determines the kind of force that police officers use. For instance, when suspects are drunk, aggressive, or are disrespectful to police officers, the likelihood of physical force increases. Such offenders may be perceived as dangerous and hence a risk to the police officers and the lives of other people and hence leading to use of force by police officers. This situation is as opposed to encounters where the offenders are respectful, sober, or non-aggressive where the use of force reduces drastically.
Thirdly, the environmental or ecological situation where the police officers operate is a major determinant of the police use of force. Environmental or ecological situations relate to factors such as the crime rate, social status, or racial/ethnic composition in a given area. According Terrill and Reisig (2003), areas where there is high crime are likely to experience more cases of police use of force as compared to areas where the crime rate is low. Further, since affluent areas have fewer crime occurrences, the application of police force is less prominent. On the contrary, areas with higher crime rates are also major low-class areas. Thus, they are likely to experience cases of increased use of police force. On the other hand, the racial composition of a given area also influences the likelihood of the use of police force. In this case, areas, which are predominantly black, are likely to experience higher incidences where police officers use force.
Lastly, organizational factor are major determinants of the use of police force in policing. For example, as noted by Wilson (1978), legalistic and security guard style departments are more likely to have higher arrest cases, which are also indicative of the likelihood of the use of police force. These police departments majorly focus on the number of arrests as an indicator of performance and thus, even minor crimes are likely to be met with higher force from police officers.
Arrest
Several factors influence the arrest behavior of police officers in the course of delivering their roles to the society. It is worth noting that not all situations warrant an arrest. Further, not all situations that warrant an arresting attract such courses of action by police officers. In this process, discretion is an important factor that determines whether police officers are going to make an arrest or not. Firstly, the situational factors play an important role in determining the possibility of an arrest by police officers. According to Wilson (1978), situational factors may relate to the demeanor or behavior of a suspect, race, history of a suspect’s interaction with police officers, and other factors. For instance, the behavior or demeanor of a suspect during the police-citizen interaction is a major determinant of where an arrest decision will be made. For example, the likelihood of arrest increases sharply when a suspect flees from the police. Further, when the suspect is aggressive or disrespectful, police officers are more likely to make an arrest as compared to when cooperation and respect prevail (Terrill & Reisig, 2003). When a suspect is drunk, the likelihood of arrest is also increased. Another important situational factor is the race if an individual. In this case, minority groups are more likely to face higher arrest rates as compared to whites.
The second important determinant of police arrest decision is the neighborhood or environment where the police-citizen interaction takes place. In this case, neighborhoods, which are perceived to be secure and affluent, are less likely to experience police aggression through arrests. On the other hand, neighborhood perceived to be low class and insecure are likely to record higher cases of police arrests. Another important dimension in the neighborhood factor is the racial composition of the residents. In this case, neighborhoods that have a higher black population are likely to experience higher arrest cases across all the racial groups in the area.
The seriousness of crime or availability of evidence is also a major determinant of police arrest decision (Smith & Visher, 1981). Crimes such as felony, murder, or rape, which are considered serious, are likely to lead to arrests as compared to minor offenses. On the other hand, the availability of evidence also increases the likelihood of arrest for suspects.
Lastly, the relationship between the victim and suspect also has an influence on the arrest decision of police officers. In this case, in situations where the suspects and victim have a close relationship through blood ties, marriage, or friendship, the arrest decision is reduced greatly (Smith & Petrocelli, 2001). However, when the suspects and victims are unrelated, police officers are more likely to arrest.
Community policing
In the recent past, policing as a separate activity from the society has shifted to a more proactive role where communities are more engaged in policing activities and decisions (Black, 1971). Previously, the focus of policing was making arrests, undertaking preventive patrols, and responding to crime in a timely manner. In this approach, police approach was major reactive, where police departments would wait for unlawful activities to occur before taking necessary measures to address the specifically committed crime. However, the shortcoming of the approach was evident due to the increased crime rates or lack of tangible results in terms of security in areas where police officers were engaged. In this case, there was the need for police reforms, which led to the introduction of community and problem-oriented policing.
In community and problem-oriented policing, the role of police goes beyond the maintenance of law and order and instead focuses on the development of partnerships with citizens where policing activities are targeted. Further, the focus is on preventing crimes, and providing solutions to underlying problems that may escalate into criminal behavior (Worden, 1989). In this case, policing becomes a friendly activity where the community and police departments are no longer enemies or suspicious of each other, but partners in developing long-term solutions to the community. The application of community policing is characterized by allocation of police officer into given location to ensure that they familiarize with the local inhabitants and hence create a level of mutual respect and trust between police officers and local populations (Wilson, 1978). The move leads to better outcomes for all people. Through community policing, police officers can access information on potential crimes, access information on the identities and whereabouts of criminal elements in the community.
Community policing involves not only members of the society but also their representatives through various organizations that work in the communities. Such organizations are important in advancing the rights and interests of the local communities and hence provide an avenue through which police officers can support or advance the interests of such communities (Black, 1971). For example, some of these organizations advance and protect the rights of the victims of violence and rape, among other activities. Further, they also support the rights of minority or disadvantaged groups in the society whose interest may be oven overlooked even by the police officers. Therefore, community policing is important in ensuring an outstanding and non-discriminative delivery of police roles in the society.
Conclusions
Police officers’ behavior is a subject of great interest to scholars, as well as champions of community interests. The role of police officers in maintaining law and order is very critical to any society. However, how police officers behave in delivering their roles is a highly controversial issue. In this case, the main areas of discussion relate to how, when, and the modes of application of police authority in delivering their roles. Organizational determinants such as administrative rules/regulations, policies, and styles of behavior are important factors that influence the behavior of police officers. In addition, as discussed in the paper, individual factors, including legal or extralegal elements, have a central influence on how police officers behave. Lastly, police officers exhibit many behaviors such as arrest, the use of force, discretion, and community policing. Such behaviors are all important in understanding the role of police. However, the level of application of the behavior is influenced by many factors as discussed in the paper.
Reference List
Alpert, G., MacDonald, J., & Dunham, R. (2005). Police suspicion and discretionary decision making during citizen stops. Criminology, 43(1), 407-434.
Black, D. (1971). The social organization of arrest. Stanford Law Review, 23(1), 1087–111.
Engel, R., & Calnon, J. (2004). Examining the influence of drivers’ characteristics during traffic stops with police: Results from a national survey. Justice Quarterly, 21(1), 49–90.
Klinger, D. (1994). Demeanor or crime? Why hostile citizens are more likely to be arrested. Criminology, 32(3), 475–94.
Lum, C. (2011). The influence of places on police decision pathways: From call for service to arrest. Justice Quarterly, 28(4), 631-665.
Lundman, R. (1996). Demeanor and arrest: Additional evidence from previously unpublished data. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 33(3), 306–23.
Mastrofski, S., Ritti, R., &Hoffmaster, D. (1987). Organizational determinants of police discretion: The case of drinking and driving. Journal of Criminal Justice, 15(5), 387-402.
Mastrofski, S., Worden, R., & Snipes, J. (1995). Law enforcement in a time of community policing. Criminology, 33(4), 539–63.
Riksheim, E., & Chermak, S. (1993). Causes of police behavior revisited. Journal of Criminal Justice, 21(4), 353-382.
Sherman, L. (1980). Causes of police behavior: The current state of quantitative research. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 17(1), 69-100.
Skogan, W., & Frydl, K. (2004). Chapters 4 & 5.Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Smith, D. (1984). The organizational context of legal control. Criminology, 22(1), 19-38.
Smith, D., & Visher, C. (1981). Street-level justice: Situational determinants of police arrest decisions. Social Problems, 29(2), 167-177.
Smith, M., & Petrocelli, M. (2001). Racial Profiling? A multivariate analysis of police traffic stop data. Police Quarterly, 4(1), 4-27.
Terrill, W., & Reisig, M. (2003). Neighborhood context and police use of force. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40(3), 291–321.
Wilson, J. (1978). Varieties of police behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Worden, R. (1989). Situational and attitudinal explanations of police behavior: A theoretical reappraisal and empirical assessment. Law & Society Review, 23(4), 667-711.
Worden, R. (1990). A badge and a baccalaureate: Policies, hypotheses, and further evidence. Justice Quarterly, 7(3), 565-592.