Representations of Policing Problems and Body-Worn Cameras in Existing Research

IF 1.4 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY International Criminal Justice Review Pub Date : 2021-06-08 DOI:10.1177/10575677211020813
C. Backman, C. Löfstrand
{"title":"Representations of Policing Problems and Body-Worn Cameras in Existing Research","authors":"C. Backman, C. Löfstrand","doi":"10.1177/10575677211020813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we analyze scholarly publications on body-worn cameras (BWCs) to shed light on scholars’ grounding assumptions about BWC technology and the policing problems assumed to be amended by it. We conducted a systematic search and a double-blind review, including 90 peer-reviewed journal articles, and analyzed how scholars warrant their studies, their findings and their recommendations. We found that BWC research largely investigates the effectiveness of BWCs worn by police officers in the United States and build upon a set of dominant policing problem representations: the police crisis in the United States and the police use of force, lack of oversight and control of police officers, citizen dissatisfaction and lack of police legitimacy, and police officer resistance toward BWC use. Assumptions underlying all four problem representations is that BWC technology will amend these problems and is legitimate and useful if the public supports it. Taken together, this enhances the representation of BWC technology as a self-evident means of improving community relations and police legitimacy in the United States. Finally, we provide recommendations for future research on BWCs, particularly the need for research departing from altogether different problem representations.","PeriodicalId":51797,"journal":{"name":"International Criminal Justice Review","volume":"32 1","pages":"270 - 290"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10575677211020813","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Criminal Justice Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10575677211020813","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In this article, we analyze scholarly publications on body-worn cameras (BWCs) to shed light on scholars’ grounding assumptions about BWC technology and the policing problems assumed to be amended by it. We conducted a systematic search and a double-blind review, including 90 peer-reviewed journal articles, and analyzed how scholars warrant their studies, their findings and their recommendations. We found that BWC research largely investigates the effectiveness of BWCs worn by police officers in the United States and build upon a set of dominant policing problem representations: the police crisis in the United States and the police use of force, lack of oversight and control of police officers, citizen dissatisfaction and lack of police legitimacy, and police officer resistance toward BWC use. Assumptions underlying all four problem representations is that BWC technology will amend these problems and is legitimate and useful if the public supports it. Taken together, this enhances the representation of BWC technology as a self-evident means of improving community relations and police legitimacy in the United States. Finally, we provide recommendations for future research on BWCs, particularly the need for research departing from altogether different problem representations.
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
现有研究中警务问题和随身携带摄像头的表现
在这篇文章中,我们分析了关于随身携带相机(BWCs)的学术出版物,以阐明学者们对BWC技术的基本假设以及被认为会被修改的警务问题。我们进行了系统搜索和双盲审查,包括90篇同行评审的期刊文章,并分析了学者们如何保证他们的研究,他们的发现和建议。我们发现,《禁止生物武器公约》的研究主要调查了美国警察佩戴的禁止生物武器的有效性,并建立在一系列主要的警务问题表征之上:美国的警察危机和警察使用武力、对警察缺乏监督和控制、公民不满和缺乏警察合法性,以及警察对使用《生物武器公约》的抵制。所有四种问题表述的基本假设是,如果公众支持,《生物武器公约》技术将修正这些问题,并且是合法和有用的。总之,这增强了《生物武器条约》技术作为改善美国社区关系和警察合法性的自明手段的代表性。最后,我们为未来对生物武器公约的研究提出了建议,特别是需要从完全不同的问题表征出发进行研究。
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
International Criminal Justice Review
International Criminal Justice Review CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: International Criminal Justice Review is a scholarly journal dedicated to presenting system wide trends and problems on crime and justice throughout the world. Articles may focus on a single country or compare issues affecting two or more countries. Both qualitative and quantitative pieces are encouraged, providing they adhere to standards of quality scholarship. Manuscripts may emphasize either contemporary or historical topics. As a peer-reviewed journal, we encourage the submission of articles, research notes, and commentaries that focus on crime and broadly defined justice-related topics in an international and/or comparative context.
期刊最新文献
Examining the Boost Account for Repeat and Near Repeat Burglary in Canada Victims of Corrupt Practices: Does Crime Seriousness Affect Bribe Payers’ Decision to Report? Book Review: European perspectives on attrition in sexual crimes by Erbaş, R. Exploring Methods in Crime and Safety Analysis Book Review: Crime, Justice and COVID-19 by Kay, Christopher & Case, Stephen
×
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