Departmental and citizen complaints as predictors of police coercion

Abstract

Purpose

This paper seeks to examine a variety of measures of complaints and their relationship to police officers' use of coercion in encounters with suspects.

Design/methodology/approach

Data from the Project on Policing Neighborhoods, involving the systematic social observation of police, were combined with complaint data from the St Petersburg Police Department to examine the influence of complaints on use of coercion in everyday encounters. Hierarchical models, which included theoretically relevant control variables, were used to test multiple measures of departmental and citizen complaints as predictors of officers' use of coercion.

Findings

The analyses indicate that, net of other important predictors, officer complaint rate for force and verbal discourtesy is associated with higher levels of coercion in encounters with suspects. The analyses also indicate that officers' verbal discourtesy complaint rate is associated with higher levels of coercion, but complaint rates for physical force are not related to higher levels of coercion.

Research limitations/implications

The current results do not necessarily generalize to all police departments, since the department, at that time, was a leader in community policing.

Practical implications

The influence of complaints for force and discourtesy on coercion suggests that police departments could benefit from greater attention toward officers who generate complaints for discourtesy from the public.

Originality/value

This paper examines the utility of official complaint data as a determinant of officers' coercive behavior in encounters with suspects. The research would be of interest to police executives concerned with creating “early warning systems” as well as police scholars concerned with the determinants of officer coercion.

Citation

McCluskey, J.D. and Terrill, W. (2005), "Departmental and citizen complaints as predictors of police coercion", Policing: An International Journal, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 513-529. https://doi.org/10.1108/13639510510614582