Examining Body‐Worn Camera Integration and Acceptance Among Police Officers, Citizens, and External Stakeholders

• Author: Natalie Todak,Janne E. Gaub,Michael D. White
• Date: 01 August 2018
• Published date: 01 August 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12376

RESEARCH ARTICLE

POLICE BODY-WORN CAMERAS

Examining Body-Worn Camera Integration

and Acceptance Among Police Officers,

Citizens, and External Stakeholders

Michael D. White

Arizona State University

Natalie Todak

University of Alabama at Birmingham

Janne E. Gaub

East Carolina University

Research Summary

We explore integration and acceptance of body-worn cameras (BWCs) among police,

citizens, and stakeholders in one jurisdiction (Tempe, AZ) that adhered to the U.S.

Department of Justice’s (U.S. DOJ’s) BWC Implementation Guide. We assess integra-

tion and acceptance through (a) officer surveys pre- and postdeployment, (b) interviews

with citizens who had recent police encounters, and (c) interviews with external stake-

holders. We also analyze (d) officer self-initiated contacts, (e) misdemeanor court case

time to disposition, and (f) case outcomes. We found high levels of BWC acceptance

across all groups. Officer proactivity remained consistent. Time-to-case disposition and

the rate of guilty outcomes both trended in positive directions.

Policy Implications

Although the results of early research on BWCs showed positive impacts, the findings

from recent studies have been mixed. Implementation difficulties may explain the

This research was funded by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation (LJAF). The opinions expressed here are

those of the authors and are not necessarily those of LJAF. The authors would like to thank Assistant Chief

Brenda Buren, the Tempe Police Digital Evidence Working Group, and all members of the Tempe Police

Department. Direct correspondence to Michael D. White, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Arizona

State University, 411 N. Central Avenue, Suite 680, Phoenix, AZ 85004-2135 (e-mail: mdwhite1@asu.edu).

DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12376 C2018 American Society of Criminology 649

Criminology & Public Policy rVolume 17 rIssue 3

Research Article Police Body-Worn Cameras

mixed results. Planning, implementation, and management of a BWC program are

complex undertakings requiring significant resources. The technology also generates

controversy, so the risk of implementation failure is substantial. The findings from our

study demonstrate that adherence to the U.S. DOJ BWC Implementation Guide can

lead to high levels of integration and acceptance among key stakeholders.

Keywords

police, body-worn cameras, program implementation, police technology, police and

stakeholders

Since 2014, there has been increasing public disapproval over police use of force and

the degree to which officers are held accountable for their actions. The deaths of

citizens, including Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Walter Scott, Freddie

Gray, Samuel Dubose, and most recently Justine Damond (in Minneapolis, July 2017),

have sparked public outrage, civil disorder,and widespread demand for police reform. Police

body-worn cameras (BWCs) have emerged as a mechanism that many believe can alleviate

the current crisis, which is perhaps best demonstrated by strong support from the federal

government. Police BWCs were a central tenet of President Obama’s community policing

plan (Hudson, 2014), and their value was highlighted in the final report recommendations

of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing (2015). Since 2015, the U.S.

Department of Justice (DOJ) has awarded nearly $60 million in grant funding to more

than 250 law enforcement agencies to deploy BWCs (Bureauof Justice Assistance, 2016b).1

BWCs are widely supported across a diverse range of other key sectors including police

leadership organizations (IACP, 2016), civil rights groups (e.g., the American Civil Liberties

Union; Stanley, 2015), and citizens (Sousa, Miethe, and Sakiyama, 2018; White, Gaub,

and Todak, 2018).

The rapid diffusion of BWCs in law enforcement has also been driven by findings from

a handful of early research studies that have shown that cameras could lead to substantial

reductions in citizen complaints and use of force by police (Ariel, Farrar, and Sutherland,

2015; Ariel et al., 2017; Jennings, Lynch,and Fridell, 2015; Katz, Choate, Ready, and Nu˜

no,

2014; Mesa Police Department, 2013), enhanced court case processing times and outcomes

(Morrow,Katz, and Choate, 2016; Owens, Mann, and McKenna, 2014), and higher levels

of procedural justice (White et al., 2018). The results of more recent research, however,

demonstrate that positive outcomes are not always guaranteed. Several study findings have

documented no impact on use of force and citizen complaints (Edmonton Police Service,

2015; Grossmith et al., 2015; Yokum, Ravishankar, and Coppock, 2017). Ariel et al.

(2016b) found a troubling link between BWCs and increased rates of assaults on officers. In

1. In December 2014, President Obama pledged $75 million to deploy 50,000 BWCs across the United

States.

650 Criminology & Public Policy