Effects of police body‐worn cameras on citizen compliance and cooperation: Findings from a quasi‐randomized controlled trial

• Author: Anthony A. Braga,Mustafa Demir,Robert Apel
• Published date: 01 August 2020
• Date: 01 August 2020
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12505

DOI: ./- .

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH IN POLICE POLICY AND PRACTICE

Effects of police body-worn cameras on citizen

compliance and cooperation: Findings from a

quasi-randomized controlled trial

Mustafa Demir1Anthony A. Braga2Robert Apel3

State University of New Yorkat

Plattsburgh

Northeastern University

Rutgers, The State University of New

Jersey

Correspondence

MustafaDemir, Department of Criminal

Justice,State University of New York at

Plattsburgh, Broad St., Plattsburgh, NY

.

Email:mdemi@plattsburgh.edu

Research Summary: This study tests the effect of body-

worn cameras (BWCs) on stopped drivers’ perceptions

of complying with police directives, obeying traffic laws,

and cooperating with the police. A quasi-randomized

controlled trial was conducted with drivers stopped at

routine traffic checkpoints. Drivers in the treatment

group encountered police officers wearing BWCs, and

drivers in the control group encountered police offi-

cers without BWCs. Surveys wereadministered after the

stop. Findings suggest motorists exposed toBWC officers

reported significantly stronger agreement with compli-

ance with police directives, obedience toward traffic

laws, and assistance with police duties. Further analy-

sis indicates BWCs generate indirect impacts on specific

citizen compliance mediated through improvements

in procedural justice, as well as indirect impacts on

general compliance and cooperation mediated through

improvements in both police legitimacy and procedural

justice.

Policy Implications: The results suggest that BWCs

may be an effective means of improving drivers’ will-

ingness to comply with directives, follow traffic laws,

and assist police. Consistent with a process-based expla-

nation, their effectiveness stems almost entirely from

drivers’ experience of procedurally just and legitimacy-

enhancing treatment by police officers. The findings

indicate BWCs provide a form of officer accountability

Criminology & Public Policy. ;:–. ©  American Society of Criminology 855wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/capp

856 DEMIR  .

that mere training in procedural justice might be insuf-

ficient to achieve.

KEYWORDS

body-worn camera, compliance, cooperation,legitimacy, procedu-

ral justice, quasi-randomized controlled trial

Cooperative assistance and compliance with directives are chief objectives of police officers in

face-to-face encounters with civilians. A secondary objective, given the role of the police as the

most visible manifestation of a government’s monopoly on force, is compliance with the law in

general—outside the context of any specific encounter. As such, specific compliance refers to cit-

izens’ acquiescence to instructions during direct interactions with the police, whereas general

compliance refers to citizens’ overall obedience to existing laws and civil ordinances (Mastrofski,

Snipes, & Supina, ). When citizens are noncompliant during encounters with the police, con-

frontational situations tend to escalate, officer injuries can result, and police use of force becomes

more likely (International Association of Chiefs of Police [IACP], ; Mastrofski, Reisig, &

McCluskey,). Furthermore, when citizens do not comply with existing laws and ordinances,

police workloads increase and their capacity to manage crime and disorder problems is dimin-

ished (Tyler,, ). Citizen cooperation is also critical to police effectiveness in their day-to-

day work. Indeed, the police need civilians to report crime incidents, identify suspects, and assist

in the modification of criminogenic situations that cause persistent crime problems (Reisig, ;

Tyle r & Faga n, ).

Civilian demands for increased accountability and transparency in encounters with police offi-

cers have led to the rapid deployment of body-worn cameras (hereafter, BWCs) in police depart-

ments. The quick implementation of BWCs wasinitiated when a series of police deadly force inci-

dents involving unarmed African American males in several U.S. cities inflamed long-standing

tensions between the police and the minority communities they serve (Lum, Koper, Merola,

Scherer, & Reioux, ;White,). BWCs were suggested to be a possibly potent remedy to

a legitimacy crisis faced by many police departments (Stanley, ). By , nearly half (%)

of the , general-purpose law enforcement agencies in the United States had acquired BWCs

(Hyland, ).

The Turkish National Police (TNP) have been dealing with similar citizen demands for

improved accountability and better treatment during encounters with its traffic officers. Survey

research revealed that citizens wereconcerned about traffic officer corruption as well as about dis-

respectful and inappropriate behavior by officers during traffic stops (Aytac,; Cerrah, Çevik,

Göksu, & Balcıoglu, ; Dönmezer, ). In response, the TNP launched a pilot program to

outfit a limited number of traffic officers with BWCs in , followed by the adoption of a policy

that mandated the placement of BWCs on all traffic officers in  (Adana Emniyet Mudurlugu

[Adana Police Department], n.d.). Although a growing body of evidence suggests BWCsmay pro-

duce desirable impacts on the civility of police–citizen encounters (e.g., Ariel, Farrar, & Suther-

land, ; see Lum, Stoltz, Koper, & Scherer, ), there is much that the police and the public

need to know about the impacts of this technology on a range of issues including citizen compli-

ance and cooperation with the police during encounters.