Technology-Mediated Exposure to Police–Citizen Encounters: A Quasi-Experimental Assessment of Consequences for Citizen Perceptions

Abstract

Anecdotal evidence suggests that recent video-recorded police–citizen encounters have undermined police legitimacy and fueled civil unrest across the United States. Drawing from the process-based model of policing, social cognitive theory, and past research on media effects, we assess the influence of viewing cell phone videos of police–citizen encounters on perceptions of law enforcement. Using quasi-experimental methods and video footage of an actual police–citizen encounter captured on cell phones, the effects of viewing these videos are assessed using a series of repeated measure ANOVAs. Results indicate that viewing cell phone videos of police–citizen encounters significantly impacts perceptions of law enforcement, though little evidence of differing effects based on point-of-view, number of video exposures, or ordering of video exposures was found. The process-based model of policing should consider further incorporating the contributions of technology to provide a more holistic account of the factors influencing perceptions of police.

Keywords:

• police-citizen encounter
• police legitimacy
• camera footage
• procedural justice
• camera perspective bias

Acknowledgements

We thank Cody Telep, Scott Decker, Mike White, Scott Wolfe, Danielle Wallace, Bryanna Fox, and Rick Trinkner for their comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript. Previous versions of this paper were represented at the 2015 meeting of the American Society of Criminology and the 2016 Michigan State University Interdisciplinary Conference on Cybercrime.

Notes

¹ These demographics are comparable to the university from which the sample was drawn.

² The two videos can be viewed at the following two links: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PFKrArG8Zk and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDth5WzfMeo.

³ It should be noted that each video does not capture the encounter in its totality, as the deputy begins filming approximately 15 seconds after McKean and continues filming for approximately 30 seconds after McKean stops. Mr. McKean’s video length was 1:10 minutes and the deputy’s video was 1:18 in length.

⁴ Several studies include measures of “trust” in their operationalization of police legitimacy (e.g. Hinds & Murphy, 2007; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler & Fagan, 2008; Tyler & Huo, 2002). Tankebe (2013) suggests trust is a problematic dimension of legitimacy (see also Barbalet, 2009; Bottoms & Tankebe, 2012; Kaina, 2008). Because of this ongoing debate, we chose to exclude measures of trust in our assessment of the process-based model.

⁵ To assess whether random assignment was effective in equalizing group composition on variables of interest, ANOVA was performed on the baseline (i.e. pre-test) perception scales (see DeCoster, 2006; Weisburd & Britt, 2007) Significant imbalances in the pre-test measures were not detected for obligation to obey the law (F(3, 564) = 136, p = 25) or willingness to cooperate (F(3, 566) = 165, p = 18) There were nominal pre-test differences in procedural justice (F(3, 564) = 265, p = 05), and persisting differences in distributive fairness (F(3, 564) = 374, p = 01) between the four groups

⁶ All ANOVAs incorporate Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons. We thank the anonymous reviewers and the editor for suggestions on this modeling strategy.

⁷ A series of t-tests were also run to make post hoc comparisons between conditions. Only procedural justice was found to significantly differ for those who saw the Group 1 video, citizen’s point of view (t = 2.614, p < .0198). The video filmed from the officer’s point of view did not produce significant changes.

⁸ T-tests were used to make post hoc comparisons between conditions, based on the number of videos viewed. Three variables under five conditions were found to have significant differences in the pre- and post-test scores based on number of videos viewed. Significant differences (t = 4.6723, p < .000) in participants’ obligation to obey the law post-test scores compared their pre-test scores were found for those who viewed two videos (Groups 3 or 4) but not for those who viewed a single video (Groups 1 or 2). Significant differences (t = 2.6333, p < .0089) in procedural justice pre- and post-test scores were found for those who viewed a single video (Groups 1 or 2). Significant differences (t = 2.6965, p < .0074) were also found for respondents’ pre- and post- test procedural justice scores for those viewing two videos. Both groups had significant pre- and post-test cooperation scores (single video [Groups 1 or 2] (t = 2.5255, p < .0121); two videos [Groups 3 or 4] (t = 2.8614, p < .0045)).

⁹ Confirmatory t-tests indicate significant differences in three outcome variables over four conditions. Individuals who viewed the citizen’s video first, and then the officer’s (Group 3), were found to have significant changes when comparing their mean obligation to obey pre- and post-test scores (t = 4.0521, p < .000). Additionally, those individuals who viewed the officer’s video followed by the citizen’s video (Group 4) were also found to have significantly different obligation to obey pre- post-test scores (t = 2.5714, p < .011) and procedural justice pre- and post-test scores (t = 2.4512, p < .0154). Finally, individuals who viewed the Group 3 videos (citizen’s point of view followed by the officer’s) had significant differences in their pre- and post-test cooperation with the law scores (t = 2.5059, p < .0134).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Megan M. Parry

Megan M. Parry, PhD is an assistant professor in the Criminology and Criminal Justice Program at the University of Rhode Island. She earned her PhD in Criminology and Criminal Justice from Arizona State University, MS in Criminal Justice from North Carolina Central University and her BS in Criminal Justice from Weber State University. Her research interests focus on how technology and the media create and maintain perceptions of the criminal justice system. She is also interested in how gender and sexual minorities perceive and interact with the criminal justice system, particularly related to their interactions with the police. Her previous research has been published in Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law and Society.

Richard K. Moule

Richard K. Moule Jr., PhD is an assistant professor in the Department of Criminology at the University of South Florida. He earned his PhD and MS in Criminology and Criminal Justice from Arizona State University, and his BS in Criminology and Justice Studies from The College of New Jersey. His research interests involve criminological theory, the role of technology in crime and crime control, and micro-social elements of crime. His research has been published in Social Science Research, the British Journal of Criminology, and the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency.

Lisa M. Dario

Lisa M. Dario, PhD is an assistant professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida Atlantic University. She earned her PhD and MS in Criminology and Criminal Justice from Arizona State University, and her BA in Psychology from The College of New Jersey. Her research interests involve a variety of contemporary topics in policing, including problem-oriented strategies, police technology, and a current focus on police officer line of duty deaths. Her research has been published in Criminal Justice and Behavior, the Journal of Experimental Criminology, Crime and Delinquency, and Criminal Justice Studies.