Implicit bias training for police: Evaluating impacts on enforcement disparities.

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Law and Human Behavior Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI:10.1037/lhb0000568
Robert E Worden, Cynthia J Najdowski, Sarah J McLean, Kenan M Worden, Nicholas Corsaro, Hannah Cochran, Robin S Engel
{"title":"Implicit bias training for police: Evaluating impacts on enforcement disparities.","authors":"Robert E Worden, Cynthia J Najdowski, Sarah J McLean, Kenan M Worden, Nicholas Corsaro, Hannah Cochran, Robin S Engel","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to estimate the behavioral impacts of training police officers in implicit bias awareness and management.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>Training police in implicit bias reduces racial and ethnic disparities in stops, arrests, summonses, frisks, searches, and/or use of force.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A cluster randomized controlled trial using the stepped wedge design was applied to 14,471 officers in the New York City Police Department, with a 1-day training delivered to clusters of police commands between May 2018 and April 2019 and outcomes measured with police records of individual events from April 2018 to May 2019. Police records were supplemented with survey data on 1,973 officers matched to administrative data. For each type of enforcement action, the likelihood that the action involved or was taken against Black or Hispanic suspects, respectively, relative to White suspects was estimated, controlling for potential confounders. Additional analysis allowed for estimating training effects of different magnitudes for Black, Hispanic, and White officers and for officers with greater motivation to act without prejudice or greater concern about discrimination.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>None of the estimated training effects achieved statistical significance at the .05 level.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Isolated and weak evidence of behavioral impacts of the training was detected. Several explanations for the null findings are considered. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000568","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to estimate the behavioral impacts of training police officers in implicit bias awareness and management.

Hypotheses: Training police in implicit bias reduces racial and ethnic disparities in stops, arrests, summonses, frisks, searches, and/or use of force.

Method: A cluster randomized controlled trial using the stepped wedge design was applied to 14,471 officers in the New York City Police Department, with a 1-day training delivered to clusters of police commands between May 2018 and April 2019 and outcomes measured with police records of individual events from April 2018 to May 2019. Police records were supplemented with survey data on 1,973 officers matched to administrative data. For each type of enforcement action, the likelihood that the action involved or was taken against Black or Hispanic suspects, respectively, relative to White suspects was estimated, controlling for potential confounders. Additional analysis allowed for estimating training effects of different magnitudes for Black, Hispanic, and White officers and for officers with greater motivation to act without prejudice or greater concern about discrimination.

Results: None of the estimated training effects achieved statistical significance at the .05 level.

Conclusions: Isolated and weak evidence of behavioral impacts of the training was detected. Several explanations for the null findings are considered. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对警察进行隐性偏见培训:评估对执法差异的影响。
研究目的本研究的目的是估计对警察进行隐性偏见意识和管理培训对行为的影响:假设:对警察进行隐性偏见培训可减少拦截、逮捕、传唤、搜身、搜查和/或使用武力方面的种族和民族差异:在 2018 年 5 月至 2019 年 4 月期间,对纽约市警察局的 14471 名警察进行了为期 1 天的培训,并通过 2018 年 4 月至 2019 年 5 月期间警方对个别事件的记录来衡量培训结果。警方记录由与行政数据相匹配的 1,973 名警官的调查数据作为补充。对于每种类型的执法行动,在控制潜在混杂因素的情况下,分别估算了相对于白人嫌疑人,执法行动涉及或针对黑人或西班牙裔嫌疑人的可能性。通过附加分析,还可以估算出黑人、西班牙裔和白人警官的不同培训效果,以及对无偏见行动有更大积极性或对歧视有更大担忧的警官的不同培训效果:结果:估计的培训效果均未达到 0.05 的统计显著性水平:结论:发现了培训对行为产生影响的孤立而微弱的证据。结论:发现了培训对行为产生影响的孤立而微弱的证据,考虑了对无效结果的几种解释。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Law and Human Behavior, the official journal of the American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association, is a multidisciplinary forum for the publication of articles and discussions of issues arising out of the relationships between human behavior and the law, our legal system, and the legal process. This journal publishes original research, reviews of past research, and theoretical studies from professionals in criminal justice, law, psychology, sociology, psychiatry, political science, education, communication, and other areas germane to the field.
期刊最新文献
The state of open science in the field of psychology and law. The Miranda penalty: Inferring guilt from suspects' silence. Comparing predictive validity of Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory scores in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadian youth. Regional gender bias and year predict gender representation on civil trial teams. Lived experiences of bias in compensation and reintegration associated with false admissions of guilt.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1