Search results

De-escalation training for police has received widespread attention as a method for reducing unnecessary and excessive use of force. There is virtually no research on de-escalation, and as a result, there is little understanding about what it is, what it includes and whether it is effective. The current study compares attitudes about the importance and use of de-escalation among officers who were randomly assigned to participate (or not) in de-escalation training.

The current study draws from a larger randomized controlled trial of de-escalation training in the Tempe, Arizona Police Department (TPD). Approximately 100 officers completed a survey in June–July 2019 and again in June–July 2020. TPD delivered the de-escalation training to half the patrol force in February–March 2020. The authors compare treatment and control officers' attitudes about the importance of specific de-escalation tactics, how often they use those tactics and their sentiments de-escalation training. The authors employ an econometric random-effects model to examine between-group differences post-training while controlling for relevant officer attributes including age, race, sex, prior training and squad-level pretraining attitudes about de-escalation.

Treatment and control officers reported positive perceptions of de-escalation tactics, frequent use of those tactics and favorable attitudes toward de-escalation before and after the training. After receiving the training, treatment officers placed greater importance on compromise, and reported more frequent use of several important tactics including compromise, knowing when to walk away and maintaining officer safety.

Only a few prior studies have has examined whether de-escalation training changes officer attitudes. The results from the current study represent an initial piece of evidence suggesting de-escalation training may lead to greater use of those tactics by officers during encounters with citizens.

While police culture typically refers to the culture among sworn police personnel, there are internal cultural differences between subgroups. This has been documented among sworn personnel, such as the difference between street cops and management cops (Reuss-Ianni, 1983). The divide between professional and sworn staff in a law enforcement context has also been discussed at length (Maguire, 1997; Reiss, 1992), specifically the “us versus them” mentality that stems from feelings of isolation among professional and sworn staff. The relationship between dispatchers and officers is vital to public and officer safety; it is imperative that cultural barriers preventing effective collaboration between two of the most critical components of policing are identified, and recommendations to bridge the gap are provided.

The authors use semi-structured interview data from a sample of peer-nominated top dispatch de-escalators (TDDs) considered highly skilled at de-escalation with callers and officers. Reflexive coding techniques were used to identify key themes in an area largely unexamined by research.

The authors find that the police culture creates friction between sworn officers and dispatchers in a number of contexts. This diminishes organizational commitment and increases burnout and frustration.

There are several policy recommendations for both communications centers and sworn staff to foster understanding and increase collaboration, all of which may result in improved outcomes for community members, dispatchers and officers.

The authors use qualitative methods to explore the implications of the sworn-civilian divide for police practice, such as more effective de-escalation and incident resolution, as well as the conceptualization of police culture writ large.

Expert assessment of organized crime (OC) group capabilities is often the basis for national threat assessments; it is rare, however, for variations in collective expert opinions of OC success factors to be systematically evaluated. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences in how 150 criminal intelligence experts from a variety of national and organizational backgrounds sort and organize perceived attributes for OC group success.

The paper uses the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Sleipnir framework as a foundation for a Q-sort survey regarding the characteristics of OC group success. The survey was delivered to over 150 criminal intelligence specialists at a national conference in 2011. Descriptive statistics, seemingly unrelated regression, and biplots reveal different aspects of survey responses.

Results show that perceptions of the ingredients for OC group success both vary by nationality and by analysts’ level within the hierarchy of the law enforcement structure (local, state, national). These differences are marked; particular characteristics are viewed as differentially important for the perceived success of OC groups. Furthermore, the results suggest that there are shared and structured differences in perceptions of OC group success characteristics.

The survey has identified distinct differences between the characteristics for OC group's success perceived by analysts in the USA, Canada, and beyond. Furthermore, the organizational level of the analyst (local, state, national) shapes the perceptions of success factors. It is possible variations identified merely reflect differentials in training and experience, i.e. different organizational perceptions of the same problem. That aside, the patterning of results seem likely to be based to some degree on external factors linked to OC group operations, and not just on individual characteristics of the surveyed intelligence professionals.

The current research raises a number of questions regarding the confidence that should be placed in OC group assessments. The research has highlighted areas of professional dissonance that were not apparent from the RCMP Sleipnir research alone. Causes of the dissonance in assessments, and connections of these variations to both intelligence analysts’ experience, training, and organizational ethos; and to OC group capabilities, seem deserving of additional attention.

Expert intelligence analyst interpretation of OC group capability is central to most national risk and threat assessments, yet the assessment processes themselves are rarely examined. This is a unique survey of over 150 intelligence personnel that highlights significant differences in perceptions of OC groups, differences that raise questions about how the authors evaluate the OC threat.