module 5 - end of midterm 1

Question 1

de-policing

Answer 1

• officers becoming less likely to engage in proactive policing, search, engage with community members, or use force
• hesitate to be involved beyond what is necessary
• reluctance due to fear of becoming involved in criticism, face allegations, or become the subject of a viral video
• they will respond to calls for service but failing to go beyond what is necessary

Question 2

ferguson effect hypotheses

Answer 2

1. heightened scrutiny increases de-policing
2. a consequence of de-policing is increased crime rates
   - increased crime can occur because officers’ hesitancy may result in offenders becoming bolder and officers may not engage in community policing that deters crime

Question 3

scrutiny and policing

Answer 3

• studies examined policing activities after times of increased scrutiny, finding:
  
  1. reduction in traffic stops (often proactive)
  2. reduction in arrest rates, especially for minor crimes (involve discretion)

Question 4

scrutiny and hesitation

Answer 4

• studies have shown that scrutiny is linked to officers experiencing hesitation due to fears of:
  
  1. losing their jobs
  2. being accused of racial profiling
  3. being involved in civil litigation
  4. being unjustly disciplined

Question 5

common theme of scrutiny/hesitation/de-policing

Answer 5

proactive policing creates opportunities for unfair judgment or criticism

Question 6

risk factors: ferguson effect

Answer 6

1. negative publicity
2. fear of filming
3. job stress
4. education

Question 7

negative publicity as a risk factor for the ferguson effect

Answer 7

• strongest predictor of hesitation
• worried about the impact of publicity on their future interactions with members of the community
• suppresses their willingness to self initiate stops (pull back of discretionary efforts)
• there is control over this to a certain extent based on how the police service interacts with the media

Question 8

fear of filming as a risk factor for the ferguson effect

Answer 8

• moderate effect/predictor of the ferguson effect/hesitation
• worried about judgment from others
• impact of media exposure on the job
• control comes from perspective

Question 9

job stress as a risk factor for the ferguson effect

Answer 9

• stress is cumulative, so regular life stress and additional stress of negative publicity, scrutiny, etc increases the likelihood of the ferguson effect
• manage the accumulation of stress could prevent this

Question 10

protective factors: ferguson effect

Answer 10

1. organizational justice
   
   • fair treatment by the service and superior officers
   • officers often fear unjust punishment or firing
2. self-legitimacy
   
   • confidence in their authority

Question 11

organizational justice

Answer 11

1. distributive justice
2. procedural justice
3. international justice
   - all 3 can prevent the ferguson effect from occurring

Question 12

distributive justice

Answer 12

perceived fairness of outcomes

Question 13

procedural justice

Answer 13

perceived fairness of the process used to determine outcomes
- e.g. process of determining punishment or not, is the ASIRT process fair, etc
- note: members often reporter hesitation with the ASIRT process

Question 14

international justice

Answer 14

• perceived fairness of interactions that supervisors have with employees
• e.g. Are their supervisors fair to them? Are they blaming, critical or judgy? Are they supportive or checking on the officer’s well-being?

Question 15

ASIRT

Answer 15

• Alberta serious incident response team
• investigates events where serious injury or death may have been caused by police and serious or sensitive allegations of police misconduct

Question 16

police self-legitimacy

Answer 16

• police officers’ recognition, belief and confidence in their entitlement to power and authority
• need to believe their power and authority are rightfully held before making claims to them with community members
• secures cooperation from community members
• satisfies officers’ desire to perceive their authorities as entitled

Question 17

police self-legitimacy is positively associated with:

Answer 17

• the use of verbal warnings rather than threats of force
• organizational commitment
• organizational citizenship behaviour (above and beyond job description)
• commitment to using fair procedures when dealing with community members

Question 18

predictors of self-legitimacy

Answer 18

1. fair treatment
2. relations with colleagues
3. perceived audience legitimacy

Question 19

fair treatment as a predictor of self-legitimacy

Answer 19

• most influential/predictive
• improve confidence and abilities
• if supervisor are supportive and fair in the processes they use when determining outcomes, and reinforce authority in members, eliminates perceived audience legitimacy
• e.g. supervisors, service (organizational justice)

Question 20

negative publicity

Answer 20

negative publicity may be perceived as an indication of low audience legitimacy

Question 21

public scrutiny as a predictor of self-legitimacy in policing

Answer 21

public scrutiny → decrease in motivation → decrease in police-legitimacy

Question 22

how does public scrutiny reduce police self-legitimacy

Answer 22

1. begins with an interaction
2. officer receives feedback on the interaction (supervisor, community, media)
3. interpretation of feedback by the officer
4. adjustment to perceived self-legitimacy based on interpretation of feedback

Question 23

public scrutiny on officers’ self-perception

Answer 23

impact perceptions of usefulness and abilities