Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police [1 ed.] 9781593327071, 9781593325152

Lai extends the current knowledge of public attitudes toward the police (ATP) by examining two distinct dimensions: gene

184 100 2MB

English Pages 185 Year 2013

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police [1 ed.]
 9781593327071, 9781593325152

Citation preview

Criminal Justice Recent Scholarship

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Edited by Nicholas P. Lovrich

A Series from LFB Scholarly

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Policing Diversity Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Yung-Lien Lai

LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC El Paso 2013

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013 by LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC All rights reserved. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Lai, Yung-Lien, 1972Policing diversity : determinants of white, Black, and Hispanic attitudes toward police / Yung-Lien Lai. pages cm. -- (Criminal justice : recent scholarship) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-59332-515-2 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Police-community relations--United States. 2. Community policing--United States. 3. Police--United States--Attitudes. 4. Multiculturalism--United States. 5. Discrimination in law enforcement-United States. I. Title. HV7936.P8L35 2013 363.2'3080973--dc23 2013000050

ISBN 978-1-59332-515-2 Printed on acid-free 250-year-life paper. Manufactured in the United States of America.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Table of Contents

List of Tables

vii 

List of Figures

ix 

Acknowledgements

xi 

Chapter I:

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Chapter II:

Public Attitudes toward the Police in a Democratic Society A Historical Review of Research on Public ATP

1  17 

Chapter III: A Review of Measure on Public ATP

29 

Chapter IV: Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

47 

Chapter V: Methodology

65 

Chapter VI: Determinants of Public ATP Across Races/Ethnics

77 

Chapter VII: Discussion and Conclusion

135 

References

153 

Index

170 

v

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

List of Tables

Table 3-1: Partially Summarized Scope of Attitudes toward the Police

36 

Table 4-1: Connection between Policing Development, the Multidimensional Construct, and Three Theoretical Models of ATP

64 

Table 5-1: Summary of the Expected Relationships among Exploratory and Dependent Variables

68 

Table 5-2: Fit Indices for Structural Equation Models

76 

Table 6-1: Descriptive Statistics of All Variables

80 

Table 6-2: Public Attitudes toward the Police by All Respondents

84 

Table 6-3: Public Attitudes toward the Police by Race/Ethnicity

87 

Table 6-4: Goodness-of-Fit Summary for Model Assessment of Factorial Validity of Public ATP

93 

Table 6-5: SEM Estimates for Final Model of Multidimensional Public ATP

95 

Table 6-6: Summary of Goodness-of-Fit Statistics for Test of Invariance of Public ATP across Racial/Ethnical Groups

96 

Table 6-7: SEM Estimates for Covariances and Variances Structure of Two-Factor Model of Public ATP for Race/Ethnicity

97 

Table 6-8: Selected AMOS Output for Original Model Presented in Figure 6-6 vii

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

100 

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

viii

List of Tables

Table 6-9: Selected AMOS Output for Revised Model Presented in Figure 6-7

101 

Table 6-10: The Standardized Direct, Indirect, and Total Effects on Collective Efficacy, Rating of Police, Violent Crime Incident, and ATP among All Respondents

105 

Table 6-11: SEM Estimates for Determinants on Public ATP among All Respondents

107 

Table 6-12: Selected AMOS Output for Final Model among White Respondents

111 

Table 6-13: The Standardized Direct, Indirect, and Total Effects on Collective Efficacy, Rating of Police, Violent Crime Incident, and ATP among White Respondents

113 

Table 6-14: SEM Estimates for Determinants on Whites’ ATP

115 

Table 6-15: Selected AMOS Output for Final Model among African American Respondents

119 

Table 6-16: The Standardized Direct, Indirect, and Total Effects on Collective Efficacy, Rating of Police, Violent Crime Incident, and ATP among African American Respondents

120 

Table 6-17: SEM Estimates for Determinants on African Americans’ ATP

122 

Table 6-18: Selected AMOS Output for Final Model among Hispanic Respondents

124 

Table 6-19: The Standardized Direct, Indirect, and Total Effects on Collective Efficacy, Rating of Police, Violent Crime Incident, and ATP among Hispanic Respondents

126 

Table 6-20: SEM Estimates for Determinants on Hispanics’ ATP

128 

Table 6-21: Summary of Significant Factors in Explaining Public ATP

132 

Table 7-1: Summary of the Relationship between Expected Hypotheses and Final Findings

145 

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

List of Figures

Figure 1-1: Citizens' expectation of treatment by police in five nations



Figure 1-2: Public confidence in the police in U.S., World Values Surveys 1981-2005



Figure 1-3: A funneled research framework of this study



Figure 6-1: The means of GATP and SATP for all respondents and three racial/ethnical groups.

78 

Figure 6-2: General attitudes toward the police by racial groups

89 

Figure 6-3: Specific attitudes

90 

Figure 6-4: Hypothesized CFA models for public ATP.

92 

Figure 6-5: Final model of multidimensional public ATP

94 

Figure 6-6: Conceptual model of path analysis - All Respondents

99 

Figure 6-7: Revised model of path analysis.

102 

Figure 6-8: Path model of public ATP for all respondents.

104 

Figure 6-9: Final model of path analysis for three racial/ethnical groups.

110 

Figure 6-10: Path model of public ATP for White respondents.

112 

Figure 6-11: Path model of public ATP for African American respondents.

118 

Figure 6-12: Path model of public ATP for Hispanic respondents.

125 

ix

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Acknowledgements

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

This work was not an individual effort. First and foremost, I give deepest thanks to my mentor, Dr. Jihong Solomon Zhao. He played an integral role in the conceptualization and completion of this work. I am grateful for his brilliant insights and all his patience. I am also indebted to Dr. Ling Ren, her mentorship has been priceless. Sincere gratitude is also extended to Drs. Ligun Cao, Phillip Lyons, and Michael Vaughn for their advice and inspirations. I am also especially grateful for the invaluable comments and great encouragement from Dr. Nicholas Lovrich. Without him, this work would not be what it is now. Finally, I would like to thank my family for all the emotional support and being so proud of me.

xi

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Chapter I

Public Attitudes toward the Police in a Democratic Society

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

DEMOCRACY, POLITICAL CULTURE, AND POLICE In their 1963 classical work, The Civic Culture, Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba ─ two noted political scientists ─ observed that there was a close relationship between a country’s level of democracy and its political culture. In this context, democracy is understood as the rights of people to participate meaningfully in the political process, including the right to vote and compete for public office and for elected representatives to influence public policies. The process of democratization is also a never-ending institutional struggle toward a more perfect realization of the three key democratic ideals: (a) liberty; (b) equality; and, (c) fraternity (Sung, 2006). Almond and Verba referred to the concept of political culture to describe one’s overall political orientation, including public attitudes toward the political system and toward government agencies (e.g., courts and police). The level of democracy attained is measured by the extent to which the public participates actively in politics, specifically with respect to governmental affairs and public policy formation. In a democratic society, government offers the ordinary person ample opportunity to participate in the political decision-making process as a genuine influential. Almond and Verba (1963) further pointed out: Theorists of democracy from Aristotle to Bryce have stressed that democracies are maintained by active citizen participation in civic affairs, by a high level of information about public affairs, and by a widespread sense of civic responsibility. These doctrines tell us what a democratic citizen ought to be like if he is to behave according to the requirements of the system. (p.9) 1

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

2

Policing Diversity

Following Parsons and Shils’ (1951) classification, Almond and Verba (1963) argued that political orientation can be classified into three distinct categories: (1) “cognitive orientation,” that is, knowledge of and belief about the political system, its roles and the incumbents of these roles, its inputs, and its outputs; (2) “affective orientation,” or feelings about the political system, its roles, personnel, and performance, and (3) “evaluational orientation,” the judgments and opinions about political objects that typically involve the combination of value standards and criteria with information and feelings. (p.14)

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Among the three dimensions of political orientation, citizens’ general attitudes toward government agencies (affective orientation) have usually been used to measure the levels of public confidence in government. This is because people’s feelings toward authorities may reflect the extent of public support for their respective political polities (Fukuyama, 1992; Huntington, 1968). More specifically, public perceptions of the police are central in assessing citizens’ general attitudes toward government agencies because the police are nearly universally the most visible agency representing government (Bell, 1979). Theoretically, the police in a democratic society are empowered to maintain a satisfactory environment comprised of three common indicators of effective policing: order, security, and public trust (Sung, 2006). Accordingly, public participation and consent are identified as features required from the police. In description of police work, Sherman (2001) noted: ... No other branch of government has more face-to-face contacts with citizens. No other branch of government has such intrusive powers. No other branch of government can deprive citizens of life and liberty in the blink of an eye. (p. 19) In practice, however, the nature of police work falls into various stages along a continuum ranging from social control to supportive functions (Johnson, 1978), suggesting that their roles involve multiple tasks that are sometimes well acceptable and sometimes controversial. For example, citizens enjoy the exercise of freedom and are sometimes

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Public Attitudes toward the Police

3

less satisfied with the police when they use coercion to maintain order in some situations, limiting some citizens’ freedom in the process. Almond and Verba (1963) found that when citizens call for more freedom, they also expect fair treatment by the police. For example, after examining the levels of democracy in five nations ─ Great Britain, the United States, Germany, Italy, and Mexico ─ Almond and Verba noted a positive association between public expectations of police treatment and the levels of democracy in Great Britain and the United States. In particular, “the police were often viewed with as much favor as … the general authority” (p. 71). Conversely, trust and confidence in the police were significantly lower in Mexico where the history of democracy was much shorter (see Figure 1-1). Figure 1-1: Citizens' expectation of treatment by police in five nations1 100 80 60

Britain U.S. Germany

40 20

Italy Mexico

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

0 Almond and Verba concluded that with its distinctive civic culture, the United States has a political system emphasizing public participation. In other words, citizens were relatively and highly attached to and satisfied with their political system, including its governmental authorities and the police. Their findings also suggested that public attachment to the political system in the United States is 1

Actual texts of the questions: “If you had some trouble with the police—a traffic violation maybe, or were accused of a minor offense—do you think you would be given equal treatment? That is, would you be treated as well as anyone else?” See Almond and Verba (1963, p.70).

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

4

Policing Diversity

relatively strong and stable over time. In a recent study, Cao, Stack, and Sun (1998) have likewise noted that public attitudes toward the police (ATP) really matter in a democratic society in as much as the police are the most visible and most frequently experienced aspect of public governmental authority. Figure 1-2: Public confidence in the police in U.S., World Values Surveys 1981-20052 4 3.5 3 2.5 USA

2

All nations

1.5 1 0.5 0 1981

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

2

1990

1995

2000

2005

World Values Surveys (WVS) was designed in 1981 to facilitate crossnational comparison of basic values in a wide range of concerns and carried out through face-to-face interviews. The wording of the questions, answers, categories and sequencing were substantially identical in all languages. Among a scale of confidence in organizations, respondents were asked “How much confidence do you have in the police?” Respondents could choose from 1= none at all, 2=not very much, 3= quite a lot, to 4= a great deal. The higher score indicated, the higher the level of confidence in the police. For more information regarding World Values Surveys, please see Inglehart, Relf, and Melich (2000). In this figure, the number of nations which participated in the WVS varied. For example, the number participating in the 1981 WVS included 10 nations with 8,747 respondents. In terms of the 2005 WVS, the nations were 57 with 75,379 survey respondents.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Public Attitudes toward the Police

5

In fact, most Americans would appear to hold favorable views of the police. For example, in an opinion poll conducted in 1997 related to the level of trust that people have of their local police department, 46% indicated that they trusted in the local police department “a lot,” followed by “some” (32%), “only a little” (12%), and “not at all” (8%) (Pew Research Center, 1997). Similarly, approximately 60% of Americans reported that they have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in the police according to the most recent data available for this study (Pastore & Maguire, 2010). Using data obtained from the World Values Surveys (WVS), collected over the period 1981 to 2005 (see Figure 1-2), it is clear that the American public consistently rates their police very high compared to citizens elsewhere (Cao & Stack, 2005; Cao & Zhao, 2005; Cao, Lai, & Zhao, 2012). These survey results would appear to reflect basic approval of the police as a social institution in a democratic society (Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). POLICE COMMUNITY RELATIONS, COMMUNITY POLICING, AND ATP The findings on public attitudes toward the police in the United States reveal only half of the story, however. It is also important to discuss the nature of police practices in a free society when studying public ratings of the police. According to Goldstein (1977), the police are an “anomaly” in a democratic society. In his classic book, he described their role in a free society as follows:

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The specific form of their authority—to arrest, to search, to detain, and to use force—is awesome in the degree to which it can be disruptive of freedom, invasive of privacy, and sudden and direct in its impact upon the individual. And this awesome authority, of necessity, is delegated to individuals at the lowest level of bureaucracy, to be exercised, in most instances without prior review and control. (p.1) Despite its anomalous role, a democratic society is heavily dependent upon its police to maintain peace and public order, and ensure the holding of free elections, the exercise of freedom of speech, and the exercise of the right of free assembly. The strength of a democracy and the quality of life enjoyed by its citizens are heavily

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

6

Policing Diversity

dependent upon the ability of the police to perform their multiple duties (Goldstein, 1990). Historically, police-community relations (PCR) has played a central role in U.S. policing (Cromwell & Keefer, 1978), though the importance of this role was largely overlooked until the 1960s (Goldstein, 1990). In reality, the professional-bureaucratic model sought to keep police in presumed neutrality and somewhat apart from the community, and efficiency was extremely popular from the 1920s to the 1970s as a principal goal to be pursued (Marx, 2001).3 Within the professional model of policing, officers delivered service objectively through a single standard of service (Fogelson, 1977). For the most part, professional model of policing excluded citizen involvement and led to poor satisfaction with police service, especially in minority communities (Dukes, Portillos, & Miles, 2009; Kelling & Moore, 1988). Urban riots occurring in the late 1960s, however, made local law enforcement administrators realize the significant tension between police and minority communities as well as the limitations of the professional model of policing (Goldstein, 1977). Previously, the police assumed that their main task was fighting crime, and like other professionals they could successfully carry out their duties with little help and preferably with little public interference (Bellman, 1935). Kelling and Moore (1988) pointed out that “[d]uring the 1950s and 1960s, police thought they were law enforcement agencies primarily fighting crime” (p. 4). Subsequent to the riotous summers of 1960s,4 numerous police agencies and citizens apparently began to realize that more genuine

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

3

During this “professional model” era, all levels of police agencies emphasized operating efficiency to be achieved by centralized control, clean-cut lines of organization, fuller and more effective use of police personnel, greater mobility, improved training, and increased use of equipment and technology (Goldstein, 1977). Bellman (1935) noted in their regard that “it is the responsibility of police bodies to do the job entrusted to them to the best of their ability, regardless of public attitude” (p. 75). 4 The Watts riot in the summer of 1965 signaled the beginning of large-scale disorders that were to occur in cities throughout the country over the next several years. While not a new phenomenon, urban rioting was new for this generation of police agencies. Generally speaking, urban riots and social

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Public Attitudes toward the Police

7

dialogue and efforts at collaboration were needed if conflicting values and behaviors were ever to be ameliorated. This shared understanding marked the beginning of a period that emphasized improvement in police-community relations (Cohn & Viano, 1976). Of particular note, four presidential commissions were appointed over the period 1965 to 1970 to identify the causes of police-citizen problems: (a) the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, sometimes referred to as the President’s Crime Commission (1965); (b) the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (1967); (c) the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence (1968); and, (d) the President’s Commission on Campus Unrest (1970). For example, in the publication Task Force Report: Police, the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1967a) highlighted the necessity for policecommunity relations:

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The need for strengthening police relationships with the communities they serve is critical today in the Nation’s large cities and in many small cities and towns as well…Even if fairer treatment of minority groups were the sole consideration, police departments would have an obligation to attempt to achieve and maintain good police-community relations…At the same time, the police department’s capacity to deal with crime depends on a large extent upon its relationship with the citizenry. (p.144) The purpose of police-community relations (PCR) was to bring together law enforcement and the community in an effort to understand the concerns of citizens and identify ways in which the quality of life in a community could be improved (Zhao, 1994). As an interactive process and a meaningful interaction, PCR became the cornerstone for police and communities to work together (Cohn & Viano, 1976). The aforementioned changes facilitated the birth of community oriented policing in the early 1980s (Skolnick & Bayley, 1986). For example, the “community policing model” or “community-based policing” was easily recognizable as an “ideal type” or “new paradigm” in American policing (Goldstein, 1987; 1990; Mastrofski, 1989;

unrest lead to concern about police-community relations by the government, police agencies, and citizens (Cohn & Viano, 1976; Goldstein, 1977).

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

8

Policing Diversity

Wilson, 2006). Community policing (COP) was “based on the concept that police officers and private citizens working together in creative ways can help solve contemporary community problems related to crime, fear of crime, social and physical disorder, and neighborhood conditions” (Trojanowicz, Kappeler, Gaines, & Bucqueroux, 1998, p. 3). In addition, Skogan (2006a) noted the following about community policing:

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

…requires that police engage with the public as they set priorities and develop their tactics. Effective community policing requires responsiveness to citizen input concerning both the needs of the community and the best ways by which the police can help meet those needs. (p. 28) Further, community policing emphasized neighborhood-focused, decentralized, and generalized policing that involved increased contacts between first-line officers and residents (O’Connor, 2008; Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005; Zhao, Lovrich, & Thurman, 1999). The strategy also suggested how the police could deal with crime, public order, and fear that was heavily dependent upon the levels of partnership developed with the community (Goldstein, 1990). Accordingly, the community policing model called upon the police to encourage participation from residents in the “coproduction” of public safety. Most important was the public’s willingness to cooperate with local police agencies that depended upon their attitudes toward the police responses (Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005). Understanding the nature of public attitudes toward the police is one of the keys to strengthening police-community relations (Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012). Of particular note, public attitudes toward the police (ATP) is a dynamic phenomenon that changes over time; consequently, police agencies should frequently conduct surveys designed to understand public expectations and collect citizen evaluations of their work. Without public support, the police are essentially very limited in their ability to build crime prevention partnerships, maintain order, alleviate neighborhood problems, and gain the support of the public for budget any requests (Rosenbaum, Schuck, Costello, Hawkins, & Ring, 2005). Unfortunately, public sentiment toward the police has fluctuated considerably in recent years due to wide media coverage and government officials’ renewed interest in police misconduct and brutality, use of excessive force, racial profiling, and other undesirable behaviors. Specifically, the area of police-community relations (PCR)

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Public Attitudes toward the Police

9

has focused almost exclusively on racial and ethnic minority communities given the diversity of American society (Rosenbaum et al., 2005). In 1991, for example, the highly televised beatings of Rodney King, an African American, dramatically showed police brutality involving the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). This incident reflected a significant drop of public approval related to the manner in which police performed their work. A poll conducted by the Los Angeles Times indicated that only two weeks after the beatings, confidence in the LAPD by African Americans and Hispanics dropped by an enormous amount, 50 percentage points dropped from a high of 80% to a low of 31% among Hispanics; for African Americans the figures dropped from a high of 64% to a low of 14% (Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). The Rodney King incident led to a series of urban riots in various parts of Los Angeles (Jesilow, Meyer, & Namazzi, 1995), and similar public disorder problems aimed at police practices occurred in Miami and New York (Schafer, Huebner, & Bynum, 2003). These riots highlighted the reality that police can only maintain order and provide effective service when they benefit from the public’s support and cooperation (Schafer et al., 2003). From these events it is clear that public attitudes toward the police (ATP) are among the primary foundations of American policing in multiple respects. Given the importance of the connections between democracy and the maturation of policing, Figure 1-3 provides a graphic display of the connections between ATP, community policing, police-community relations, and democratic society. Figure 1-3: A funneled research framework of this study Democracy, Political System, and Police

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Police-Community Relations Community Policing ATP

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

10

Policing Diversity

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

PREVIOUS RESEARCH ADDRESSING ATP According to Whitehouse (1978), public cooperation takes place when the police and the public are able to enjoy positive contacts with one another. As early as the 1970s, a rich body of research accumulated pertaining to this issue (Schafer et al., 2003; Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012). Overall, the American public expressed favorable attitudes toward the police (Apple & O’Brien, 1983; Black, 1970; Cao, Frank, & Cullen, 1996; Dean, 1980; Garcia & Cao, 2005; Huang & Vaughn, 1996; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Sullivan, Dunham, & Alpert, 1987; Thomas & Hyman, 1977). Accordingly, three main areas are primarily emphasized in the present research. First, in almost all studies there was a global measure of public perceptions such as an index of police performance (Brandl, Frank, Worden, & Bynum, 1994; Jesilow et al., 1995; Reisig & Correia, 1997; Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006; Wu, Sun, & Triplett, 2009). After assessing the state of global attitudes toward the police, numerous researchers explored further dimensions such as the quality of police service (Reisig & Parks, 2000), perceptions of racially biased policing (Engel, 2005; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006), the quality of police/citizen interactions (Bartsch & Cheurprakobkit, 2004), perceptions of police abuse (Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005), and an evaluation of citizen confidence in their police (Cao et al., 1996; Ren, Cao, Lovrich, & Gaffney, 2005; Schuck, Rosenbaum, & Hawkins, 2008). In recent years, researchers have suggested that public attitudes toward the police should be understood as a multidimensional construct rather than a matter of a unidimensional continuum (Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005; Worrall, 1999). For example, using data obtained from 2,058 structured telephone interviews with 2,058 residents in a Midwestern community, Schafer et al.’s (2003) findings demonstrated the need for a multidimensional construct of public attitudes toward police work in neighborhoods by examining community policing services. Second, the unit of analysis covered a wide array of samples ranging from national (O’Conner, 2008; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006), to state (Correia, Reisig, & Lovrich, 1996; Wu et al., 2009), to individual samples (Dunham & Alpert, 1988; Frank, Brandl, Cullen, & Stichman, 1996; Ren et al., 2005). In addition, several researchers extended the scope of investigation by comparing public attitudes toward the police between America and other nations (Cao et al., 1998; Cao & Stack, 2005; Cao & Zhao, 2005). Findings of these studies provided important

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Public Attitudes toward the Police

11

feedback related to how police agencies could improve the quality of police performance and maintain high levels of public trust and confidence (Brandl et al., 1994; Frank et al., 1996; Ren et al., 2005; Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005). Third, considerable evidence supported the conclusion that underlying demographic factors and interactions among social structure and community policing correlates had a significant influence on levels of public satisfaction with police service (Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012). In earlier research, residents’ demographic traits were found to be significantly correlated with citizens’ attitudes toward the police (Cao et al., 1996; Davis, 1990; Webb & Marshall, 1995). In Decker’s (1981) review of research on public attitudes toward the police, for example, four highly significant factors were identified: (a) race; (b) age; (c) gender; and, (d) socioeconomic status. Subsequent studies were conducted while serve to expand the scope of research by incorporating non-demographic factors such as neighborhood characteristics and the nature of citizen interactions with the police. For example, Cao et al. (1996) was one of the first researchers to move beyond mere demographics to explain attitudes toward the police. By examining interactions between city composition and race, a respondent’s city of residence was found to be the strongest predictor of public attitudes toward the police. Earlier researchers included crime experience and victimization (Apple & O’Brien, 1983; Homant, Kennndy, & Fleming, 1984), community disorder (Covington & Taylor, 1991; Lewis & Salem, 1986), and prior contact with police (Mastrofski, 1981; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Webb & Marshall, 1995; Zevitz & Rettammel, 1990) to explain public ratings of police performance. More recently, research pertaining to this topic continues to expand, both in its methodological sophistication and analytical scope. As a result, a considerable body of research has shown that neighborhood structural composition (e.g., crime and disorder) and collective efficacy have a substantial impact on public attitudes toward the police (Huebner, Schafer, & Bynum, 2004; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Ren et al., 2005; Schafer et al., 2003; Schuck et al., 2008; Skogan, 2009; Wu et al., 2009). STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Although a number of researchers have attempted to elaborate on the nature and dimensions of public attitudes toward the police, they have

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

12

Policing Diversity

found that the public generally displays principally positive ratings. In addition, the dynamics underlying the relationship between public ratings and dimensions of police evaluations are relatively limited in the following four ways. First, most researchers who highlight the importance of race/ethnicity in shaping police-community relations in the U.S. fail to separately examine the different racial and ethnic groups involved (Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). This is especially true regarding Hispanics (Alpert & Dunhan, 1988; Correia, 2010; Reitzel, Rice, & Piquero, 2004). While police-community relations (PCR) play a significant role in the development of police strategies, minority groups’ attitudes toward the police remain sensitive issues of concern to many scholars and practitioners alike (Cromwell & Keefer, 1978; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). As the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1967a) noted:

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

… Minority groups are taking action to acquire rights and services which have been historically denied them. As the most visible representative of the society from which these groups are demanding fair treatment and equal opportunity, law enforcement agencies are faced with unprecedented situations on the street which require that they develop policies and practices governing their actions when dealing with minority groups and other citizens. (p.144) As a result, this issue has been addressed in most police departments since the 1960s, specifically with African American communities, and major efforts have been made to understand the attitudes toward and experiences with the police in multiracial societies (Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). Consequently, a majority of researchers have found that African Americans tend to view the police less favorably than Whites (Bayley & Mendelsohn, 1969; Brandl et al., 1994; Correia et al.,1996; Engel, 2005; Frank, Smith, & Novak, 2005; Gabbidon & Higgins, 2009; Hagan & Albonetti, 1982; Huebner et al., 2004; Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Sampson & Jeglum Bartusch, 1998; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Schuck et al., 2008; Sims & Hooper, & Peterson, 2002; Smith & Hawkins, 1973; Webb & Marshall, 1995; Weitzer & Tuch, 2005, 2006; Wu et al., 2009). For example, in a recent study, 62% of Whites reported “a great deal” or “quite a lot “of confidence in the police, whereas only 35% of African Americans

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Public Attitudes toward the Police

13

shared the same view according to the most recent data available (Pastore & Maguire, 2010). Unfortunately, even though Hispanics represent the fastest growing ethnic population in the United States they have been largely overlooked in criminal justice research (Correia, 2010; Schuck, Lersch, & Verrill, 2004). Weitzer and Tuch (2006) argued that “the lack of information on Hispanics is particularly acute in light of their growing presence in many American cities, and they make up the majority in some cities” (p. 6). Although some studies have been done on largely anecdotal evidence and resulted in unsubstantiated assertions (Escobar, 1999; Mirande, 1987), others have tended to be limited by focusing solely on Hispanics and hence providing little comparative perspective (Carter, 1985; Mirande, 1981). In a few studies, ratings of the police by Hispanics were likely to fall somewhat between those of African Americans and Whites (Schuck et al., 2008); however, a comprehensive and systematic investigation related to factors that are likely to influence the ratings of Hispanic respondents were largely lacking in these studies. For example, Reitzel et al. (2004) suggested that Hispanic experiences with the police “may be different in important ways from the experience of other racial and ethnic groups” (p. 610). While minority-group members now account for a far greater proportion of the population across U.S. cities (Frank et al., 1996), few studies have been conducted that systematically compare Whites, African Americans, and Hispanics experiencing the same police services (e.g., Reitzel et al., 2004; Webb & Marshall, 1995). Therefore, much remains to be known pertaining to the attitudes toward the police among the three principal U.S. racial groups. As Weitzer and Tuch (2006) pointed out, “we know that race matters, but much less is known about the factors that shape each racial group’s outlook on the police” (p. 6). Second, although most of the literature related to public attitudes toward the police is likely to treat ATP as a one-dimensional construct, contemporary policing researchers have suggested strongly that a multidimensional concept is a better way to capture how citizens view their police (Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005; Schuck et al., 2008; Worrall, 1999). Specifically, community policing has emphasized a number of innovative strategies to improve police-community relations (e.g., control neighborhood disorder, increase police-citizen interactions, etc.). Incorporating these strategies into the measurement of public police ratings seems highly warranted (Zhao et al., 1999). For example,

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

14

Policing Diversity

using data obtained from a Midwestern community with a population of 2,058, Schafer and his colleagues (2003) argued that there was a clear need for multidimensional constructs pertaining to citizen perceptions of police services and found police-citizen interactions to be an important indicator in their regard. Unfortunately, there has been very limited research associated with multidimensionality of public ATP despite the importance of this type of analysis (Brandl et al., 1994). Third, although a large body of literature explores the relationship between local crime rates and public attitudes toward the police (Grank & Giacomazzi, 2007; Huebner et al., 2004; Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Renauer, 2007; Schuck et al., 2008; Sims et al., 2002; Weitzer & Tuch, 2005; Wu et al., 2009), the measure of level of crime experienced needs to be improved. For example, a crime proxy concerning the evaluation of local police agencies is often assessed exclusively by residents’ perceptions of crime (e.g., Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998; Weitzer & Tuch, 2002; Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012; Yun, Kercher, & Swindell, 2010) at either the individual or actual crime type level (i.e., UCR categories) or at the community or police beat level (e.g., Reisig & Parks, 2000; Renauer, 2007). However, these particular approaches used to measure crime can present two problems. First, some researchers have found that surveyed residents’ perceptions of crime are likely to also be influenced by the news media or by high profile serious criminal events occurring elsewhere. Consequently, residents’ subjective police evaluations may be distorted in some surveys (Eschholz, 1997; Wyant, 2008). Second, the measure of actual crime rates at the neighborhood/aggregate level has an assumption that all crime incidents have an equal impact on neighborhood residents. However, research conducted on hot spot literature has shown that crime incidents are often limited to very small geographic locations (i.e., one or two block areas) and may vary significantly across different locations at a neighborhood level. That is, crime incidents distributed unequally varied significantly at the neighborhood levels (Sherman, Rogan, Edwards, Whipple, & Shreve, 1995). Unfortunately, prior to this study there had been no study conducted to examine the relationship between actual crime incidents occurring at block levels and residents’ perceptions of police performance. Finally, Houston, the fourth largest city in the United States, is truly a “melting pot” area, particularly since the 1990s, in which there has been a steady increase of Hispanic immigrants (McCluskey,

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Public Attitudes toward the Police

15

McCluskey, & Enriquez, 2008). Of due note, only a few social scientists have used samples collected from large cities, namely Schuck et al. (2008) in Chicago; Parker, Onyekwuluje, and Murty (1995) in Washington, D.C.; Tyler (2005) in New York; and Frank et al. (1996) in Detroit. Regrettably, Houston, a major multiracial city located in the southern part of the United States, has been largely overlooked. The data used for this study were collected from a random telephone interview survey involving 1,314 residents living in the racial and ethnic melting pot city of Houston, Texas in 2010.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY This monograph is organized into seven chapters. Following an introduction to the study, Chapter II begins with an historical review of the research literature since the1960s related to public attitudes toward the police, focusing on the development of American policing (e.g., police-community relations and community policing) and its relationship to residents, specifically minority groups. Next, an account of the development of the methods used to study public attitudes toward the police and how they have evolved from internal, single-item police evaluations to an index measure featuring multidimensional constructs is provided in Chapter III. Also, three theoretical models pertaining to the influence that public attitudes have toward the police are discussed at length in Chapter IV. In Chapter V theoretical hypotheses are presented derived from the available literature associated with public ATP. In addition, the research setting, data sources, measurements, and statistical analyses undertaken are fully introduced. Chapter VI gives a report of the major results and findings based on the outcomes of descriptive statistics and structural equation modeling (SEM) used to examine the hypotheses identified in Chapter V. In Chapter VII, the most significant findings and their policy implications with respect to police agencies are summarized. In addition, noteworthy five limitations to the study are addressed and suggestions are made on how these shortcomings might be overcome in future research.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Chapter II

A Historical Review of Research on Public ATP

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

THE IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC ATP Generally, public attitudes toward the police (ATP) refers to the subjective judgment made by citizens of police behaviors such as police work, service, effectiveness, practices, and performance (Huebner et al., 2004; Nation, 2011; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Ren et al., 2005; Schuck et al., 2008; Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012). For example, Schafer et al. (2003) defined ATP as “citizens’ global views of police services” (p. 443). Public attitudes toward the police are also considered to be the cornerstone of American policing and matters in a democratic society since public support and trust can enhance police effectiveness and the legitimacy of police actions (Goldsmith, 2005). The notion that there is a nexus between public attitudes toward the police and their ability to achieve goals and objectives is reflected in the British idea of “policing by consent” (Carter, 2002). Simply stated, this argument holds that the police can achieve their missions and objectives only when they have the public’s support and cooperation (Goldsmith, 2005). Although this notion dates back to the establishment of modern policing systems in England in 1829, only in the past four decades has America turned a high level of attention to this nexus (Kautt, 2011; Schafer et al., 2003). Payne and Gainey (2007) suggested that research pertaining to an “attitudes-effectiveness” link is important for at least five reasons. First and foremost, having a better understanding of how citizens perceive the police will permit the provision of more accurate information for agencies to improve police performance and build police-community relationships that will lead to relocating police deployment, specifically 17

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

18

Policing Diversity

when a lower level of satisfaction is reported by officers who serve particular neighborhoods, beats, and jurisdictions. Similarly, Schuck et al. (2008) argued that understanding the willingness of residents to participate in community initiatives, their willingness to obey the law and issue favorable judgments of policing legitimacy, and measuring police agency performance have all motivated research on public attitudes toward the police to be a popular topic, especially in the contact of the movement to promote more collaborative policecommunity relations (Mastrofski, 1999; Rosenbaum, 1994; Skogan & Hartnett, 1997; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003). In other words, police work is reactive and depends heavily on public sentiment for mobilization to prevent public safety. As noted by Decker (1981), citizens who are dissatisfied with the police tend to be less likely to contact officers and provide them with information concerning criminal activities. That is important given that some researchers also found that public distrust of the police likely reduces the ability of police to control crime (Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998). Second, the process-oriented rationale holds that understanding how citizen perceive the police can be used to better prepare the police on who might best work with different kinds of crime victims. For example, research has shown that police demeanor is linked to the trust that victims have in the criminal justice system (Stephens & Sinden, 2000). Theoretically, increasing victims’ trust in the system will also increase their level of participation in the system (Payne & Gainey, 2007). Some researchers have indicated that police brutality and the beating of minority males lead victims and their family members to question police integrity and develop hostile views toward the police in their neighborhoods (Tuch & Weitzer, 1997). The failure to gain integrity and legitimacy has serious consequence in that residents may not be willing to abide by the law and, consequently, will be more likely to challenge police authority (Tyler, 2003). Third, understanding citizens’ perceptions of police services can shed light on the nature of a neighborhood’s subculture, values, and norms. For example, Huebner et al. (2004) argued that mutual trust and confidence that are deemed to be collective beliefs within a neighborhood can be a powerful force in shaping and supporting public satisfaction with the police. Schafer et al. (2003) found that despite racial divergence, residents’ perceptions of their community’s culture (e.g., being willing to work with the police in solving neighborhood issues) and neighborhood assessment (e.g., being a good place to live)

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Historical Review on Public ATP

19

were the most powerful predictors used to explain general/specific perceptions of police service. In contrast, Sampson and Jeglum Bartusch (1998) found that Americans residing in disadvantaged neighborhoods reported higher levels of estrangement from legal norms and agencies. Consequently, they reported lower levels of satisfaction with the police (See also, Van Craen, 2012). Sampson and Jeglum Bartusch (1998) concluded that African Americans living in “inner-city ‘ghetto’ areas displayed elevated levels of legal cynicism, dissatisfaction with the police, and tolerance of deviance generally defined” (p. 800). Fourth, understanding attitudes toward the police is warranted on moral grounds. On the one hand, satisfaction with the police is tied to quality of life, suggesting that the police must pay closer attention to improving socio-economically disadvantaged neighborhoods (Reisig & Parks, 2000). On the other hand, if certain groups, namely African Americans, display negative perceptions related to the police, researchers have a moral obligation to provide them with the sources of those attitudes in order that they will have access to equitable justice at the hands of police officers. Fifth and finally, understanding one’s attitudes toward the police can identify why some people report negative perceptions. For example, Weitzer and Tuch (2006) found that public perceptions relating to police corruption had a negative impact on satisfaction with police service. Borrero (2001) also found that numerous juvenile delinquents justified their own acts because they had witnessed negative police demeanors. Hence, if demeanor is truly a source of negative citizen perceptions, then police interactions with residents have the potential to breed crime rather than prevention. Considerable evidence indicates that after the 1960s public attitudes toward the police were highly related to the development of American policing (Schafer et al., 2003). The challenge of social unrest in the 1960s fully documented that a strong police-community relationship network did not exist, particularly in minority communities. Hence, taking an historical overview of public attitudes toward the police is warranted due to onset of the movements of policecommunity relations, community policing, and coproduction of order that resulted in governments, police agencies, and citizens paying direct and persistent attention to public evaluations of the police.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

20

Policing Diversity

SOCIAL UNREST, URBAN RIOTS, AND PCR According to Goldstein (1990), crises stimulate the progress of policing reform. For example, the Watts riot in the summer of 1965 signaled the beginning of large-scale disorders that were to occur in cities throughout the country over the next several years (Goldstein, 1977). In the meantime, the civil rights and anti-Vietnam war movements highlighted the strained relationships between the police and public in many urban communities (Schafer et al., 2003). Specifically, minority groups made two major complaints pertaining to law enforcement: (a) inadequate police protection in the ghetto and, (b) discriminatory law enforcement, including police brutality and disrespectful treatment (Harlow, 1976). As the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1967b) reported, it had “evidence from its own studies and from police officials themselves, that in some cities a significant percentage of policemen assigned to high-crime areas do treat citizens with disrespect and sometimes abuse them physically” (p. 99). Shortly after the release of the report, the Kerner Commission (1968) pointed out serious tensions between the police and racial groups across the US:

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

In Newark, Detroit, Watts, and Harlem, in practically every city that has experienced racial disruption since the summer 1964, abrasive relationships between police and … [minority] groups have been a majority source of grievance, tension and ultimately disorder. (p.157) Each of those reported incidents that the police were struggling to control immediately challenged their authority. “They fought battles on the streets and on campuses, with helmets and occasionally with bayonets, frequently acting in ways that did little to reduce their images as the enemy” (Cohn & Viano, 1976, p. 2). A total of four presidential commissions were created in order to explore the causes of these poor police-community relations: (a) the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1965) [also referred to as the President’s Crime Commission]; (b) the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (1967); (c) the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence (1968); and, (d) the President’s Commission on Campus Unrest (1970). Each commission underscored the importance of the police role,

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

A Historical Review on Public ATP

21

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

documented the revolution for police agencies, and provided specific agendas for improving police functions. The specific recommendations from the President’s Crime Commission and the National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals highlighted the importance of communication between the police and residents living in the areas they patrolled. Specifically responding to the racial turmoil, the commissions recommended that the police should develop more humanitarian responses to the problems they were called upon to handle. They also advocated programs that would serve three specific purposes: (a) to facilitate communication between individual officers and residents in served communities; (b) to recruit more minority group members into policing services; and, (c) to provide greater help to citizens requesting police assistance. The commissions also urged the police to review their functions in broader terms, to acknowledge and subject the discretion they exercised to control by a system of policymaking, and to develop training and oversight processes to handle the most sensitive aspects of the policing affecting the public image of police officers (Goldstein, 1977). Apparently, many police departments and citizen groups alike began to realize that more serious dialogue and efforts were needed between the police and the public in order to construct a more mutually beneficial relationship (Cohn & Viano, 1976). Wasserman, Gardner, and Cohen (1973) summarized the progress made between the police and community relations during the late 1960s to the early 1970s as follows: Within ten years, these units (and police departments in general) were obliged to cope with an unprecedented challenge. Social unrest became a fact of American life in the 1960’s fueled by racial concerns, an unwanted war, and the affluence that permitted young people to engage in civil protest almost as a career. By 1968, the police response had become a matter of broad police concern…As a result of…pressure, U.S. police departments began to adopt community-relations programs on a wholesale basis. They established the appropriate bureaucracies, opened storefront offices to reach the public, trained their people in community relations, and generally tried to accommodate their cities. (p. 1)

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

22

Policing Diversity

According to Cohn and Viano (1976), the emergence of policecommunity relations (PCR) as a crucial goal of American police organizations was a milestone in police reform given that traditional notions of police organization were grounded in a closed-model perspective that emphasized organizational autonomy of the police from the community (Wilson, 2006; Zhao, 1994). Today, policecommunity relations seek to bring together law enforcement and the community in an effort to understand and address mutual problems and concerns. Whisenand (1974) defined PCR as “the development and retention of attitudes and behaviors on the part of the police that create mutually supportive relationships between their agency and the community” (p. ii). In addition, PCR is characterized in several ways. First, PCR represents an attitude that concerns the delivery of police services to the public in an efficient and humane manner. In addition, police who practice PCR recognize that many people expect them to maintain public order as well as control crime. The police are also expected to provide some social services that had long been provided through welfare, health, and charitable groups. For example, numerous communities and residents now rely on the police for emergency medical care, settling family disputes, and the provision of youth activities and recreation programs for at risk youth (Cohn & Viano, 1976). As stated by Wilson and McLaren (1972), “[p]olice service today extends beyond more routine investigation and disposition of complaints; it also has as its objective the welfare of the individual and of society” (p. 26). Second, PCR highlights the importance of fairness in regard to police services. In other words, police officers should act in such a way that people in need of assistance (a service), protection (another service), and/or control (yet one more service) are provided with the service impartially and humanely. In the 1960s, for example, the community relations division in Washington, D.C. functioned as part of a special services division that also had responsibilities related to civil defense, court liaison, communications and records, and the police reserve corps. Officers were assigned to each precinct or special squads and delivered services directly to their clients (The President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, 1967a). This community relations division represented an approach in which police agencies took into direct consideration the concerns of residents (Whisenand, 1974). As a consequence, public perceptions of police performance were often viewed as a necessary ingredient to

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Historical Review on Public ATP

23

“good policing” in terms of the relationships that occurred as a result of every encounter. On the other hand, PCR should not be viewed as an administrative unit or as an aspect of police work; it must be accepted as an outcome of good police work (Cohn & Viano, 1976). Brown (1974) pointed out that the nation’s first police-community relations division was established in 1957 by the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. Since that time, nearly every major city has initiated some form of police-community relations program. More importantly, a police department may adjust its specialized program into one of four general approaches: (a) externally-oriented; (b) youthoriented; (c) service-oriented; or, (d) internally-oriented. The externally-oriented approach refers to departments that place heavy emphasis on implementing a wide variety of programs which are operated under the police-community relations unit or are directed towards general public or at various enclaves within a community. The youth-oriented approach was developed by the police-community relations unit aimed primarily at youth in which the majority of an officer’s time was spent working with youth. The service-oriented approach focused on alleviating social community problems with the purpose of locating residents in need and directing them to appropriate agencies or community resource centers. Finally, the internally-oriented approach centered on general awareness wherein officers were encouraged to become cognizant of police-community relations when on their beats and actively promote the program with local residents. During the 1970s many municipal governments as well as police agencies administered performance evaluations designed in part to improve police-community services (Cohn & Viano, 1976). The 1967 President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice helped to direct the focus of research on the issue of police-community relations, including public attitudes toward the police (Bayley & Mendelsohn, 1969; Brandl et al., 1994; Campbell & Schuman, 1972). For example, Reiss (1967) found that 70% of respondents in both Boston and Chicago thought the police were doing either a “very good” or “fairly good” job. Although numerous police departments operated some form of police-community relations programs, there existed a wide variation of public opinion toward the police during that period. For example, Hindelang (1974) reported that 67% of Whites held favorable views of the police, whereas only 43% of African Americans felt the same (see also, Campbell & Schuman, 1972; Hahn, 1971; Jacob, 1971; Zeit, 1965). Empirical evidence during

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

24

Policing Diversity

the 1970s consistently revealed that Whites held more favorable police ratings than did minority groups. Simultaneously, survey research became a popular means of improving police-community relations in order to gauge public perceptions and to develop policies and practices designed to induce public support and build trust (Bordua & Tifft, 1971; Klyman & Kruckenberg, 1974).

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

COMMUNITY POLICING (COP) MOVEMENT In the early 1980s several municipal police departments simultaneously contributed to the emergence of community oriented policing programs, better known as COP (Skolnick & Bayley, 1986). Although COP represented a natural extension of police-community relations, the reform became much broader in scope. For example, police-community relation programs were established to respond to racial riots and social unrest in large cities during the 1960s, whereas community oriented policing programs became involved with changing decision-making processes and creating innovative organizational cultures within many police agencies. In initial organizational strategy was to increase the quality and quantity of contacts between citizens and police officers in order to address community concerns effectively (Skogan, 2006a; Wilson, 2006). First, community policing was “based on the concept that police officers and private citizens working together in creative ways can help solve contemporary community problems related to crime, fear of crime, social and physical disorder, and neighborhood conditions” (Trojanowicz et al., 1998, p. 3). Its underlying philosophy was to increase the quality and quantity of contacts between citizens and police in order to resolve concerns in ways that would enhance community life. Thus, the police were required to react quickly to urgent public demands, engage and empower local communities to deal with their own problems, and collaborate with communities in addressing their concerns (Trojanowicz & Bucqueroux, 1998). In a comprehensive review of the literature, Cordner (2010) identified the following four core dimensions of COP: (a) philosophical; (b) strategic; (c) tactical; and, (d) organizational. Because community policing represented a new philosophy that shifted away from the professional model of policing, the three most frequently cited elements included: (a) citizen input; (b) broader function; and, (c) personalized service. For example, citizen input required the police to

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Historical Review on Public ATP

25

engage with the public in setting operational priorities. As Skogan (2006a) pointed out, “[e]ffective community policing requires responsiveness to citizen input concerning both the needs of the community and the best ways by which the police can help meet those needs” (p. 28). Specifically, listening to the community could produce new policing priorities whereby officers involved in neighborhood policing were able to quickly learn that many residents were deeply concerned about problems that previously did not attract police attention (Skogan, 2006a). Because mechanisms for achieving citizen input vary, many police agencies have increasingly used systematic and periodic community surveys to elicit citizen input while others have relied on open forums, town meetings, radio and television call-in programs, and similar methods. Some police officials also meet regularly with citizen advisory boards, ministry alliances, minority group representatives, business leaders, and other formal groups (Cordner, 2010). Since 1995, for example, the Chicago Police Department has held regularly scheduled community meetings in addition to establishing advisory committees and storefront stations. Similarly, the department conducts surveys in order to build public police support for the police among local residents (Skogan, Steiner, Benitez, et al., 2004). Second, advocates assumed that agency policies, priorities, and resource allocations would be consistent with a community-oriented philosophy. Thus, the strategic dimension of community policing includes three key operational concepts that translate philosophy into practical action: (a) reoriented operations; (b) geographic focus; and, (c) crime prevention. With respect to reoriented operations, less reliance on the patrol car and more emphasis on face-to-face interactions are recommended in community oriented policing programs. Skolnick and Bayley (1988) found that the reorientation of patrol activities typically emphasize the recurring themes of community policing: nonemergency services, an increase in police accountability, and decentralization of command. For example, Neighborhood Watch, citizen and foot patrols, community newsletters, and sponsorship of recreational programs are a few strategies used in community policing programs (Brown & Wycoff, 1987; Cordner & Trojanowicz, 1992; Zhao, 1994) which reflect a police role that is broad in objectives and functions and requires active, ongoing collaboration with the community (Wilson, 2006).

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

26

Policing Diversity

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

In terms of crime prevention, community policing officers strive to pay more attention to minor offenses and “incivilities,” create a greater sense of “felt presence,” and establish more police-citizen contact (Cordner, 2010). Traditionally, police officers focused on reactive crime patrols and investigations. In later years, however, police realized through survey research and personal contacts that residents were concerned with graffiti, public intoxication, drug use, noisy neighbors, vandalism, littering, and the deterioration of nearby buildings (Skogan, 1990). Interestingly, these minor disorders or incivilities mattered a great deal to the public perceptions of quality of life and public attitudes toward the police when compared to crime incidents (Sprott & Doob, 2009). From a community policing perspective, officers therefore take into consideration “minor disorders.” Third, the tactical dimension ultimately translates ideas, philosophies, and strategies into concrete programs, practices, and behaviors. Accordingly, three of the most important tactical elements of community policing include positive public interactions, collaborative problem solving, and partnerships. Problem solving involves an approach that focuses on training officers in methods of identifying and analyzing neighborhood problems. Specifically, the tactical dimension highlights the discovery of situations associated with frequent calls for police assistance and identifies the underlying causes (Skogan, 2006a).5 The problem solving process consists of four steps (SARA): (a) scanning: careful identification of the problem; (b) analysis: careful analysis of the problem; (c) response: a search for alternative solutions to the problem; and, (d) assessment: implementation and assessment of a response to the problem (Cordner, 2010). More importantly, the police department administrators stress civic engagement in identifying, analyzing, and assessing a broad range of neighborhood problems from multiple sources. In other words, problem solving relies heavily on citizen participation in dealing with community problems. In regard to partnerships, problem solving

5

Skogan (2006a) pointed out that a key difference between problem-oriented and community policing is that the latter emphasizes public engagement in identifying and prioritizing a broad range of neighborhood problems collected through surveys, direct contacts, and interviews, while the former frequently stresses a pattern of traditionally defined crimes that are identified by the use of police data systems.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Historical Review on Public ATP

27

further refers to the need for police to encourage residents to engage in addressing neighborhood problems and cooperate with them in the implementation of crime prevention programs (Cordner, 2010). Finally, it is important to recognize the organizational dimension that surrounds community policing and greatly affects its effectiveness. Although its elements are not necessarily a part of community policing, they are always crucial to COP’ successful implementation. Three important organizational elements include structure, management, and information. Of these, structure is highly related to public attitudes toward the police. For example, advocates of COP suggest that decentralization is a good way to restructure police agencies in order to facilitate and support implementation of the philosophical, strategic, and tactical elements. Decentralization refers to authority and responsibility that can be more widely delegated in order that commanders, supervisors, and officers are able to act more independently and be more responsive community dynamics (Cordner, 2010). Specifically, more responsibility for identifying and responding to community problems should be delegated to first-line patrol officers who are expected to work quite independently when investigating crimes, resolving problems, and educating the public. As a result, these officers are also expected to receive more intelligence and information from other divisions of the police agency (Skogan, 2006a). Basically, COP requires active public participation and support (Skogan, 2006a). More than thirty years ago, Verba and Nie (1972) noted that citizen participation is “at the heart of democratic theory and at the heart of the democratic political formula in the United States” (p. 3). Similarly, Bell (1979) suggested that “the police cannot function without the cooperation of the citizens” (p. 196). Further, numerous scholars have pointed out that one significant component of community policing over the past three decades includes the “coproduction of social order” between police and residents (Brandl et al., 1994; Renauer, 2007; Scott, 2002; Skolnick & Bayley, 1988; Thurman, 1995). The emphasis upon police-resident coproduction and partnerships might perhaps be a major contribution to the widespread popularity of community policing (Cordner, 2010; Reisig & Parks, 2004). In addition, Skolnick and Bayley (1988) suggested that working together with the public as “coproducers of safety and order” should be the central premise of community policing wherever it is attached (see also, Sung, 2002).

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

28

Policing Diversity

The term “coproducers of safety and order” refers to the willingness of neighborhood residents to engage actively in behaviors aimed at cooperating with the police in preventing criminal acts and/or deviant behavior. Accordingly, crime prevention education, block watches, storefronts, substations, and foot patrol are popular features of COP (Scott, 2002). For example, Chicago’s police-sponsored “beat meetings” and “Neighborhood Watch programs” offered area residents an opportunity to participate in problem-solving and express their views related to police priorities (Mastrofski, 2006). In their classic Chicago study, Sampson, Raudenbush, and Earls (1997) introduced the concept of “collective efficacy,” a term defined as neighborhood residents who are willing to take overt actions to maintain public order and reduce criminal activities and deviant behaviors on public streets, sidewalks, and parks (e.g., complaining to police, organizing Neighborhood Watch programs, etc.). Sampson et al. also argued that residents take action only when “cohesion and mutual trust” are linked to “shared expectations” for intervening in support of neighborhood social control. In order to build collective efficacy, various departments over the past ten years have used programs that mobilize and organize local residents (Mastrofski, 2006). For example, in Skogan et al.’s (2004) evaluation of COP programs used in Chicago, they reported that a large number of residents attended beat meetings in order to discuss neighborhood problems with beat police. Based on their survey, Skogan et al. also found that police actively provided solutions and shared valuable intelligence information with the meeting participants. In addition, the police were more likely to work with residents who resided in neighborhoods featuring higher rather than lower levels of collective efficacy. In accordance with these findings, public attitudes toward the police (ATP) actually do matter a great deal in sustaining COP coproduction of safety and order. For example, Renauer (2007) found that the reason why community policing fails to motivate coproduction in disadvantaged neighborhoods is because those residents often hold deep negative attitudes by viewing the police as apathetic, hostile, and/or indifferent to their sufferings. As a result, informal social control decreases in concentrated disadvantage communities that, in turn, leads to lower levels of public satisfaction with police (Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005).

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Chapter III

A Review of Measure on Public ATP

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

1930S TO1960S: INTERNAL POLICE EVALUATIONS Traditionally, most research pertaining to public ATP consistently emphasized its determinants, but little attention was directed toward the dynamics of attitudes per se (Webb & Marshall, 1995; Worrall, 1999). Decker’s article (1981), “Citizen attitudes toward the police: A review of past findings and suggestions for future policy,” became one of the best known works in the field (Brown & Benedict, 2002; Webb & Marshall, 1995) in which a rather comprehensive analysis pertaining to the effect of both individual and contextual variables on public police ratings was provided. For example, Decker argued that race, socioeconomic status, age, and sex were the predominant predictors of individual-level attributes toward police. Although extensive literature related to public attitudes and perceptions toward the police has emerged since the 1960, it can be argued that this line of research has been largely descriptive and relatively unsophisticated since the mid1990s (Webb & Marshall, 1995). The origin of research addressing public police ratings can be traced back to the work of Bellman’s “police service rating scale” created in 1935. Brown and Benedict (2002) claimed that Bellman developed the scale as a method of evaluating “a police organization according to certain standards” with assistance from August Vollmer (1876-1955) ─ a noted police scholar. Bellman (1935) pointed out that “it is the responsibility of police bodies to do the job entrusted to them to the best of their ability, regardless of public attitudes” (p. 75). He further suggested that police administrators should develop a service rating scale based upon certain standards by which police agencies 29

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

30

Policing Diversity

could judge their performance and toward which they could strive to improve their services. Subsequently, a police service rating scale was developed to serve as a basis for judging the internal operation of local organizations and to facilitate objective comparisons between cities consisting of similar population groups. This rating scale included the following subscales: Selection of Chief (four items); Retention of Chief (two items); Selection of Personnel (nine items); Training of Personnel (three items); Personnel, Retention, and Promotion (seven items); Records Division (five items); Identification Division (four items); and Communication (six items). More important, two divisions were highly related to rating police-citizen interactions. For example, among items consisting of policing “beat construction,” Bellman designed the following question: Are beats constructed with reference to: (a) known crime hazards; (b) known delinquency areas; (c) vice contributions; (d) number of complaints received from a given area; (e) property loss from crime; (f) value of property within a given area; (g) known crime conditions; (h) number of arrests experienced in a given area; (i) vehicular traffic; (j) pedestrian traffic; (k) character of buildings; (l) character of people to be found on the beat; (m) topographical conditions of the city ─ hills, rivers, harbors etc.; (n) population; and, (o) criminal residences. In addition, Bellman (1935) created a “patrol duties” subscale to evaluate whether a “beat officer” was familiar with the public’s residences, personal characteristics, and range of occupations. Police officers were asked to rate their performance and services among assigned communities and beats. Although Bellman’s police service rating scale efforts were considered to be very professional at the time, scholars subsequently criticized the measure for being subjective and internal in nature (e.g., Brown & Benedict, 2002). For example, Bellman’s survey was primarily designed for police departments to conduct a self-assessment rather than serve as an objective evaluation with participation from local residents. Few years later, Parratt (1938) developed an additional subscale IV to measure public-press relations and crime prevention, areas of operation that were not included in Bellman’s (1935) original scales. For example, Parratt’s scale consisted of four statements related to: (a) standards of courtesy; (b) response to criticism; (c) efforts to educate the public; and, (d) press relations. In terms of tact and courtesy, police officers were asked to rate the following four items: “Lost temper

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

A Review of Measure on Public ATP

31

easily when dealing with public;” “Habitually tactful in dealing with public;” “Civil in dealing with public;” and “Courteous in regulating traffic” (p. 749). By the same token, the following five items were designed for police officers to rate their efforts in educating the public on crime prevention: (a) seldom conduct campaigns on dangers of traffic violations; (b) make an effort to gain confidence in boys and girls; (c) make a consistent effort to publicly reduce how best to protect property, (d) seldom try to educate the public by means of crime prevention; and, (e) watchful in preventing of child delinquency. Parratt noted that although an internal evaluation of police effectiveness was useful, the police also needed a method of determining “what is desired or approved by an effective sector of citizen opinion” (p. 739). In sum, the literature review pertaining to public ATP research during the 1930s to the 1960s showed that internal evaluation and documentation were the primary focus of police department activities. In this regard, Bellman’s (1935) scale was centered on internal and self-assessment evaluations, whereas Parratt’s (1938) work was the first to take into consideration neighborhood characteristics of police work. 1960S TO PRESENT: GENERAL/GLOBAL EVALUATION

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

As a result of urban riots and racial tensions, public attitudes toward the police became an important area of research for policing scholars during the 1960s and early 1970s (Bayley & Mendelson, 1969; Brandl et al., 1994; Brown & Benedict, 2002; Cohn & Viano, 1976; Goldstein, 1977; Sullivan et al., 1987). The President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice (1967a) noted that citizen attitudes toward the police were extremely important and had a great impact on police work and behavior: Poor police-community relations adversely affect the ability of the police to prevent crime and apprehend criminals. People hostile to the police are not so likely to report violations of the law, even when they are the victims. They are even less likely to report suspicious persons or incidents, to testify as witness voluntarily, or to come forward and provide information…Yet citizen assistance is crucial to law enforcement agencies if the police are to solve an appreciable portion of the crime that are committed….(p.144)

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

32

Policing Diversity

The Kerner Commission (1968) carried out one of the earliest large scale empirical investigations used to document public police perceptions at a national level. Specifically, data were gathered from 15 major cities across the country suggesting that there was a “deep hostility between police and ghetto communities” in American urban centers (as cited by Sullivan et al., 1987, p. 178). In addition, the Kerner Commission identified this tension as a primary source of the urban disorders of the period. Researchers who explored public attitudes toward the police inherited a one-dimensional construct (Schafer et al., 2003; Webb & Marshall, 1995; Worrall, 1999). For example, in a study pertaining to neighborhood crime and law enforcement in Boston and Chicago, Reiss’ (1967) used the following global dimension to measure public attitudes toward the police: “Would you say that in general the police in this neighborhood are doing a very good job, a fairly good job, or not too good a job?” (Appendix A, p. 24; see also, Davis, 1990). Similarly, respondents to a Gallup survey were asked, “How much confidence do you, yourself, have in the police?” (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1995, p. 133). Using data collected from a Washington State sample, Correia et al. (1996) developed the following police measure rating used as the dependent variable to identify significant predictors of individual and contextual level. “Overall, the Washington State Patrol does a good job at performing their mission” (p. 20). Although the single global item had its limitations in gauging detailed subcomponents of public attitudes toward the police, the results reported were fairly stable over time (Brandl et al., 1994; Lai, Cao, & Zhao, 2010). While most researchers used a single item to tap into the global/general attitudes toward the police (e.g., Cao & Zhao, 2005; Carter, 1985; Frank et al., 2005; Garcia & Cao, 2005; Kusow, Wilson, & Martin, 1997; Payne & Gainey, 2007; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Skogan, 1978; Sung, 2006, Van Craen, 2012), a growing body of literature emerged that made use of multiple-item indices to examine public evaluations of general/global police performance. An index measure of global/general attitudes toward the police usually consists of a cohesive set of multiple items and reflects concern over whether or not police officers “treat all citizens equally,” “are fair,” “are courteous,” “communicate well,” and “provide quality services” (Correia, 2010; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Rosenbaum et al., 2005). For example, using data obtained from three levels of police agencies (i.e., city, county, and state), Reisig and Correia (1997) created a scale of

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Review of Measure on Public ATP

33

global attitudes toward the police consisting of three items: “The [name of the policing agency] officers treat all citizens equally”; “[Name of policing agency] officers are usually courteous”; and “Indicate the quality of service provided by [name of policing agency]” (p. 315). Similarly, responses ranged from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” This global ATP measure fully captured the public’s broad image of the police. Specifically, the proxy was useful in situations when the respondents had no prior contact with police officers (Worrall, 1999). In addition, the public’s general perceptions reflected the legitimacy of police in presenting social institutions and policies (Almond & Verba, 1963). For example, Schuck and Rosenbaum (2005) argued that residents’ global attitudes refer to the “reservoir” of abstract sentiment that can be called upon to help maintain the institution’s legitimacy in the face of unfavorable policies or deeds. However, with the movement of community policing, some criticized that global attitudes should be broken down into areas of specific police work to provide more actionable information for police agency leaders (Schuck et al., 2008). Many researchers further expanded and explored additional dimensions beyond the scope of general attitudes that included public satisfaction with police work/services (e.g., Frank et al., 1996; McCluskey et al., 2008; Nation, 2011; Weitzer & Tuch, 2005;Wentz & Schlimgen,2012), evaluations of police performance (e.g., Howell, Perry, & Vile, 2004; Reisig & Correia, 1997; Rosenbaum et al., 2005), rating police performance (e.g., O’Connor, 2008), confidence in the police (e.g., Cao et al., 1996; Ren et al., 2005), and so forth. For example, in their examination of the relationship between race, community context, and confidence in the police, Cao et al. (1996) created a five-item scale to assess whether respondents believed that police were responsive, cared about the neighborhood’s safety, maintained order, and were able to protect residents against crime. The items included: “When people in my neighborhood call the police, they come right away,” “The police do a good job in my neighborhood in making sure that no one disturbs the peace,” “The police care a lot about the safety of the people in my neighborhood,” “The police do a good job in protecting me against crime,” and “There are not enough police in my neighborhood to deal with crime” (p. 22). Similarly, examples illustrated in Table 3-1 reveal that multi-items tapped the unidimensional and latent construct of public attitudes toward the

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

34

Policing Diversity

police as confirmed by exploratory factor analysis (Huebner et al., 2004; Reisig & Parks, 2000). Overall, most studies conducted pertaining to police-community relations have generally operationalized public ATP as a unidimensional construct; in doing so they have tended to overlook the possibility of a multidimensional concept of citizen attitudes toward the police (Worrall, 1999). Schafer et al. (2003) argued that in an era of community policing, it is imperative to consider not only how the public generally perceives of the police, but also to determine as well how neighborhood residents view the police services provided to them and their immediate neighbors. More recently, Schuck and Rosenbaum (2005) addressed the need for an ATP multidimensional construct directed specifically toward comparing the views of different racial groups.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

1980S TO PRESENT: MULTIDIMENSIONAL CONSTRUCT Worrall (1999) noted that since people have different interests and concerns separating them from one another, a multidimensional approach to public attitudes toward the police should be taken. Traditionally, a unidimensional portrayal of ATP implies that police work is unidimensional. In reality, American police departments perform a host of functions, varying from crime control to the provision of helping services. Some citizens may think of public safety and order as their top priority (e.g., among Whites), whereas others might emphasize the importance of a supportive, amicable, and nondiscriminatory police agency (e.g., minority groups). These diverse “interests” and “concerns” called for the development of a multidimensional construct of public ATP. As Sullivan et al. (1987) pointed out, different socio-economic and demographic groups may “not share the same ways of conceptualizing aspects of policing” (p.177). Given the importance of a multidimensional construct of ATP, two principal approaches to survey-based assessments of ATP have been developed since the early 1980s. The first approach expands the scope of ATP from a general dimension to a number of specific dimensions. For example, Scaglion and Condon’s (1980) work was the first to examine multiple dimensions of public ATP (Sullivan et al., 1987). They found that African Americans and Whites have somewhat different cognitive perceptions of the police and called for the need to

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Review of Measure on Public ATP

35

examine the formation of public attitude structures. Sullivan et al. (1987) examined the structure of public attitudes toward the police across different age and racial/ethnic groups by selecting 30 items that had previously been used to measure ATP’s multidimensionality. Using factor analysis, they identified seven relatively distinct factors. Their findings revealed that the subpopulations in their data exhibited attitudes that were not unidimensional and were structurally distinct for racial groups such as African Americans, Cuban Americans, and Anglos. Similarly, Dunham and Alpert (1988) identified 30 survey items that were related to prior ATP studies and then examined the relationship between neighborhood characteristics and residents’ ratings of the police. The results from factor analysis indicated that public attitudes toward the police consisted of five distinct dimensions: demeanor (measures the subject’s perceptions of the general demeanor of police officers or his orientation toward the citizens), responsibility (concerns the role of the police and citizens in controlling crime), discretion (measures agreement with the need for variability in enforcing the law, and especially in stretching procedural safeguards), ethnic (concerns the justification for the suspicion that certain ethnic groups are more crime prone), and patrol (measures the approval of active patrol strategies). Dunham and Alpert’s scales were considered to be the first of the ones that shifted away from a unidimensional focus to a multidimensional focus on ATP research. Following the research conducted by Dunham and Alpert (1988), Webb and Marshall (1995) found that race, age, social class, and contact experience produced different effects on the measures of attitudes toward the police based on a sample of 790 respondents collected in Omaha, Nebraska in 1991. By the same token, Worrall (1999) broke down the concept of support for the police into two distinct dimensions- namely efficacy and image. The first dimension refers to the perceived authority of the police, including perceptions of their ability to protect citizens, solve crime, and prevent crime (similar to specific attitudes). The second dimension reflects diffused public support for police agencies that consists of perceptions of police friendliness and fairness (similar to global attitudes). The data used by Worrall were gathered from a national telephone survey of 1,005 citizens, and the findings supported the view that public attitudes toward the local police were both complex and multidimensional in character. More importantly, the results revealed that efficacy and image were two distinct, orthogonal

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

36

Policing Diversity

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

dimensions. Each dimension was susceptible to quite different ratings depending upon which independent and dependent variables were examined (Worrall, 1999). Table 3-1: Partially Summarized Scope of Attitudes toward the Police Measure of multi-item Study Scope of ATP combination of ATP Cao et al. Confidence in 1. When people in my the police neighborhood call the police, (1996) they come right away. 2. The police do a good job in my neighborhood in making sure that no one disturbs the peace. 3. The police care a lot about the safety of the people in my neighborhood. 4. The police do a good job in protecting me against crime. 5. There are not enough police in my neighborhood to deal with crime. (reverse coded) Frank et al. Satisfaction 1. In general, how satisfied are with police you with the police? (1996) 2. How good a job are the police doing controlling the street sale and use of illegal drugs in your neighborhood? 3. How good a job are the police doing to keep order on the streets and sidewalks in your neighborhood? Huang & Confidence 1. Crime protection and support for 2. Crime solving Vaughn police 3. Crime prevention (1996) 4. Promptness. 5. Friendliness. 6. Fairness. 7. Use of force.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Review of Measure on Public ATP

37

Table 3-1(Continued) Partially Summarized Scope of Attitudes toward the Police Measure of multi-item Study Scope of ATP combination of ATP Reisig & Evaluations of 1. The [name of the policing agency] officers treat all citizens Correia (1997) police performance equally. 2. [Name of policing agency] officers are usually courteous. 3. Indicate the quality of service provided by [name of policing agency]. Satisfaction 1. The police in this neighborhood Sampson & with police are responsive to local issues. Jeglum 2. The police are doing a good Bartusch job in dealing with problems that (1998) really concern people in this neighborhood. 3. The police are not doing a good job in preventing crime in this neighborhood (reverse coded). 4. The police do a good job in responding to people in the neighborhood after they have been victims of crime. 5. The police are not able to maintain order on the streets and sidewalks in the neighborhoods (reverse coded). Reisig & Satisfaction 1. How satisfied are you with the Parks (2000) with police quality of police service in your neighborhood? 2. Police provide services that neighborhood residents want? 3. How would you rate the job the police are doing in terms of working with people in your neighborhood to solve local problems?

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

38

Policing Diversity

Table 3-1(Continued) Partially Summarized Scope of Attitudes toward the Police Measure of multi-item Study Scope of ATP combination of ATP Sims et al. Attitudes 1. Harrisburg police are quite open toward the to the opinions of citizens. (2002) police 2. Harrisburg police respond to citizens’ calls for service in a timely manner. 3. Harrisburg police officers are easy to contact. 4. Rating of police on working with police in neighborhood to solve community problems. Ho & McKean Confidence in 1. Asheville Police Department the police (APD) does a good job. (2004) 2. Police respond to minorities fairly. 3. Comfortable asking APD for assistance. Howell et Evaluations of 1. Quality of police protection. police 2. Police response time. al.(2004) 3. Police effectiveness in apprehending suspects. 4. Police courtesy. 5. How well the police avoid excessive force. 1. Police officers perform politely Satisfaction Hwang, in handling traffic accidents or with police McGarrell, & Benson (2005) performance violations. 2. Police investigators in my jurisdiction are kind and helpful even when consulted on a case that is not under their jurisdiction. 3. Police officers in my jurisdiction investigate fairly regardless of the difference of social status of victims.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Review of Measure on Public ATP

39

Table 3-1(Continued) Partially Summarized Scope of Attitudes toward the Police Measure of multi-item combination Study Scope of ATP of ATP 4. Recent reduction of work hours for officers in police substation resulted in officers in my jurisdiction performing better than in the past. 5. I am satisfied with the police service in my jurisdiction. Confidence in 1. Solving crimes (finding and Nofziger & police arresting perpetrators). Williams 2. Working with the community to (2005) prevent crime. 3. Deterring crime by being a visible presence (patrolling, etc.). 4. How well do you think the [name] PD is prepared to handle a major crisis? Ren et al. Confidence in 1. The police officers are usually the police fair. (2005) 2. The police officers are usually courteous. 3. The police officers are usually honest. 4. The police officers are usually not intimidating. 5. The police officers work with citizens together in solving problems. 6. The police officers treat all citizens equally in general. 7. The police officers show concern when asked questions.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

40

Policing Diversity

Table 3-1(Continued) Partially Summarized Scope of Attitudes toward the Police Measure of multi-item Study Scope of ATP combination of ATP Rosenbaum Evaluation of 1. Being responsive to community police concern. et al. (2005) performance 2. Preventing crime in community. 3. Being polite to residents. Weitzer & Satisfaction 1. In general, how satisfied or with police dissatisfied are you with the police Tuch (2005) department in your city? 2. In general, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the police officers who serve your neighborhood? McCluskey et Satisfaction 1. How satisfied are you with the with police quality of police service in your al. (2008) neighborhood? 2. How strongly do you agree or disagree with that police provide services that neighborhood residents want? 3. How would you rate the job the police are doing in terms of working with people in your neighborhood to solve local problems? O’ Connor Rating police 1. Do you think your local police performance force does [rating] at enforcing (2008) laws? 2. Do you think your local police force does [rating] at promptly responding to calls? 3. Do you think your local police force does [rating] at being easy to talk to? 4. Do you think your local police force does

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Review of Measure on Public ATP

41

Table 3-1(Continued) Partially Summarized Scope of Attitudes toward the Police Measure of multi-item combination Study Scope of ATP of ATP [rating] at supplying information? 5. Do you think your local police force does [rating] at ensuring safety? Satisfaction 1. How satisfied are you with the Dai & with police police? Johnson 2. How satisfied are you with the (2009) job the police are doing working together with the residents of your neighborhood to solve local problems? 3. How satisfied are you with the job the police are doing in your neighborhood to prevent crime? 1. Overall, how satisfied are you Dukes et al. Satisfaction with the quality of police service in with police (2009) your neighborhood? service 2. How would you rate the job police are doing in terms of working with people in your neighborhood to solve neighborhood problems? 3. How effective are the Colorado Spring police officers in reducing citizens’ fear of crime? Sprott & Rating police 1. Enforcing laws. work 2. Promptly responding to calls. Dobb (2009) 3. Being approachable. 4. Providing information to the public about how to reduce crime. 5. Ensuring citizen safety. 6. Treating people fairly.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

42

Policing Diversity

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Table 3-1(Continued) Partially Summarized Scope of Attitudes toward the Police Measure of multi-item combination Study Scope of ATP of ATP Wu et al. Satisfaction 1. The police play an important with police role in preventing crime in this (2009) neighborhood. 2. The police do a good job in responding to people in this neighborhood after they have been victims of crime. 3. Police are generally helpful when dealing with people in this neighborhood. 1. How good a job are the police Citizens’ Wentz & perceptions of doing to keep order on the streets Schlimgen and sidewalks in your police service (2012) neighborhoods? 2. How good a job are the police doing in controlling the sale and use of illegal drugs in your neighborhoods? 3. How good a job are the police doing in controlling gang activity in your neighborhoods? Following this trend in ATP research, Schafer et al. (2003) noted that using community policing-specific measures to assess public evaluations of police performance is quite useful for the innovative goals of community policing. Schafer et al. argued that both general and specific attitudes represent very different dimensions regarding public perceptions of police service and have different policy implications for community policing goal advancement. While general attitudes capture a broad impression of the police (e.g., at a city, state, or national level), specific attitudes focus on police work in a community, a neighborhood, or even a given block. Accordingly, Schafer et al. (2003) created three outcome measures designed to capture the different dimensions of public ATP: (a) global satisfaction [i.e., overall, how satisfied are you with the quality of police services in

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

A Review of Measure on Public ATP

43

your neighborhood?]; (b) satisfaction with traditional police operations [e.g., police officers are easy to contact; police officers respond to calls for service in a timely manner]; and (c) satisfaction with community policing operations [e.g., how would you rate the job the police are doing in terms of working with people in your neighborhood to solve neighborhood problems; citizens in this community are not comfortable working closely with the police]. Using data collected from a Midwestern community, Schafer et al.’s (2003) findings further supported the use of a multidimensional construct to measure public perceptions of police service. Given that the level of satisfaction with the police varies across different dimensions, Huebner et al. (2004) also measured citizens’ perceptions in three different dimensions: (a) global support for police services; (b) satisfaction with traditional policing services; and, (c) perceptions of community policing. They argued that “utilizing three outcome measures allowed for consideration of the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon and facilitated the testing of the predictive validity of the exogenous variables” (pp.126-127). Findings supported Huebner et al.’s argument that there was a significant variation in the several exogenous factors. The second approach to the assessment of ATP tends to focus on the effects of general and specific/global dimensions of ATP (Brandl et al., 1994). A growing number of researchers have argued that the effect of global/general attitudes also plays an important role in explaining specific attitudes toward the police along with other exploratory factors (Brandl et al., 1994). In Easton’s (1965) book entitled A Framework for Political Analysis, two distinct dimensions of public support associated with political systems were identified: diffuse (general) and specific. Easton defined diffuse (general) support as “that which continues independently of the specific rewards which the member may feel he obtains from belonging to the system” (p.125). In other words, diffuse support is an evaluation of an organization’s overall performance. In contrast, specific support refers to “input to a system that occurs as a return for the specific benefits and advantages that members of a system experience as part of their membership. It represents or reflects the satisfaction a member feels when he perceives his demands as been met” (p.125). Subsequently, Dennis (1976) expanded on Easton’s framework by stating that “specific support refers to an evaluation of a particular role incumbent within the institution, whereas diffuse support involves a

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

44

Policing Diversity

generalization of support for the institution … a regime-level sentiment and support or rejection of institutional authority” (Brandl et al., 1994, p.121). In Dennis’ argument, the general and specific support levels normally differ substantially. Dennis further explained that diffuse support is a higher order construct than specific support and, as a result, specific support would be influenced by the levels of institutional diffuse support (Brandl et al., 1994). White and Menke’s (1982) work was the first to verify Dennis’ thesis regarding global and specific attitudes toward a social institution. Their findings also supported the hypothesis that general items typically produce more favorable attitudes than do specific items. Brandl et al. (1994) made another attempt to measure citizen attitudes toward the police as a multidimensional construct by distinguishing between global (e.g., general community satisfaction) and specific perceptions (e.g., satisfaction pertaining to particular incidents). Using data obtained through a panel survey consisting of 398 residents of a large Midwestern city, they found that the two general and specific dimensions produced similar levels of support for the police. Further, their results revealed that global attitudes had significant effects on specific assessments of police performance. Reisig and Giacomazzi (1998) argued that relevant research related to public ATP should be expanded to include public attitudes at the neighborhood level given that differences toward police services are thought to be reflective of various value structures. For example, while mature residents tend to focus on neighborhood safety and security, younger residents generally value freedom from the police. Accordingly, factor analysis was used to distinguish between two distinct dimensions, general police performance and community policing scales, in order to access public perceptions of police service by demographic and contextual factors. Subsequently, Reisig and Giacomazzi (1998) found that different public ATP dimensions were indeed influenced by various residential characteristics and settings. They also reported that no significant association was found between general police performance and community policing service. Similarly, Schuck and Rosenbaum (2005) distinguished public attitudes toward the police through global and neighborhood assessments in order to determine whether race and contact experience varied across these two dimensions. Specifically, the survey respondents in their study were first asked to describe their general attitudes based on three items: (a) police officers are often rude to the

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

A Review of Measure on Public ATP

45

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

public; (b) police officers are verbally abusive to citizens; and, (c) police officers stop people for no good reason. In contrast, neighborhood-specific measures consisted of four items: (a) police are rude to people they stop in your neighborhood; (b) police are verbally abusive to people in your neighborhood; (c) police physically abuse people in your neighborhood; and, (d) police stop too many people on neighborhood streets without a good reason. The results derived from Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) offered strong support for the need to differentiate between global and neighborhood-specific attitudes toward the police. Although the underlying measurement structure was similar across racial groups, the relationship between global and neighborhood attitudes was stronger for African Americans and Latinos as opposed to Whites. In addition, there was a greater variation in specific attitudes among both African Americans and Latinos than was presented among Whites. Developing multidimensional public attitude constructs toward the police has become a requirement for mainstream scholarship. Although some researchers (Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005) have called for a distinction to be made between generalized and localized community-based measures, Schafer et al. (2003) observed that “police can only maintain order and provide effective services when they enjoy the public’s support and approval. [Thus], the emergence community policing reinforces the importance of public support and attitudes toward the police in determining the outcome of police efforts” (p. 441). It can be concluded that growing evidence demonstrates the need to differentiate between global and specific public perceptions in order to determine the degree of association between the two types of attitudes (Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005). Brandl et al. (1994) argued that “global and specific attitudes toward the police are causally related, and that the causal effects are asymmetrically reciprocal” (p.131), with the former effect relatively stronger than the latter.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Chapter IV

Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

OVERALL REVIEW Although public attitudes toward the police has been an enduring topic of discussion in American society (Wu et al., 2009), most research has not reflected any single analytical theory or model conceptualization (Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). Similarly, Brown and Benedict (2002) pointed out that: “there is no consensus as to which combinations of variables explain the greatest variance in attitudes toward the police” (p. 564). For over four decades now police scholars and practitioners alike have been trying to identify the key determinants of ATP as viewed from a variety of perspectives (Wu et al., 2009). For example, in his pioneering work in this area, Decker (1981) concluded that:

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

[t]wo kinds of explanatory variables will be examined, individual level and contextual. Individual-level variables of importance will include race, age, sex, socioeconomic status, and personal experience with the police. The contextual variables include crime rates, community beliefs regarding police, likelihood of victimization, and several programmatic innovations designed to improved citizen attitudes. (p. 80) Other researchers have suggested that public perceptions can be influenced by actual police performance- namely, crime rates and victimization experience (e.g., Koenig, 1980), the influence of mass media (e.g., Scaglion & Condon, 1980), and community “concentrated disadvantage” (e.g., Smith, Visher, & Davidson, 1984). Recognizing the lack of a comprehensive theory, a review of existing literature 47

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

48

Policing Diversity

reveals three rather distinctive models commonly used to explain public attitudes toward the police at both the individual and neighborhood levels. Traditionally, attention has been directed toward the effects of demographic factors (Brown & Benedict, 2002; Campbell & Schuman, 1972; Cao et al., 1996; Decker, 1981; Hahn, 1971; Kautt, 2011; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Nation, 2011; Ren et al., 2005; Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012; Wu et al., 2009; Zeitz, 1965) concerning the influence that race/ethnicity, age, gender, and educational attainment have on public perceptions of the police. In the past two decades, however, policecitizen interaction factors have attracted more attention (Brandl et al., 1994; Cao et al., 1996; Correia et al., 1996; Dai & Johnson, 2009; Kautt, 2011; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Nation, 2011; Ren et al., 2005; Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012; Worrall, 1999; Wu et al., 2009). For example, voluntary and involuntary contacts made by residents are often considered important determinants of public attitudes toward the police (Brown & Benedict, 2002). Recently, Skogan (2009) emphasized the police performance (accountability) model, suggesting that the public holds police accountable for controlling crime and dealing with neighborhood-level problems. In the following review, explanatory factors and empirical findings that are often included in each model are discussed.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

DEMOGRAPHIC MODEL The relationship between individual attributes and satisfaction with the police are examined in the demographic model. Generally, early researchers focused on individual demographics and their association with police work ratings, namely race, socioeconomic status, age, and gender (Decker, 1981; Sullivan et al., 1987). To a large extent, no study pertaining to public police ratings can move forward without including key demographic variables (Brown & Benedict, 2002). Therefore, the demographic model can be perceived as the foundational model of research, whereas other models can be viewed as an extension from this base model. The demographic model was originally developed in the 1960s and early 1970s at a time when major research on public attitudes toward the police began to emerge (Sullivan et al., 1987; Webb & Marshall, 1995). During that turbulent period, individual-level socio-economic and racial/cultural attributes played a significant role in which four

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

49

presidential commissions singled out race as the primary focus of police-community relations (PCR) (Webb & Marshall, 1995). As mentioned earlier, the Kerner Commission was established in 1968 in order to study civil disturbances and specifically point out the “deep hostility between police and ghetto communities as a primary cause of the disorders” (as cited by Sullivan et al., 1987, p. 299). Not surprising, race became the “must have” variable related to this topic over the past 40 years (Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). In the beginning, race was examined as two mutually exclusive groups: minority vs. White (Campbell & Schuman, 1972; Furstenberg & Wellford, 1973; Hadar & Snortum, 1974; Hahn, 1971; Zeit, 1965). More recently, however, this factor is now composed of three groups due to a dramatic increase in the Hispanic population (Reitzel et al., 2004). Similarly, age and gender are important predictors related to the American public’s rating of police officers (Sullivan et al., 1987). For example, numerous arrests are made each year in which a majority of individuals taken into custody are young males who typically report lower levels of police support (Wu et al., 2009). In addition, family or individual incomes, social class, and/or educational background are demographic characteristics that are sometimes included in the analysis of ATP data. However, a review of the literature revealed that there has been no significant expansion of these variables since the 1970s. Rather, the most noticeable change was to break down the ethnic groups into three categories rather than using the traditional dichotomous approach (Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). Although researchers have determined that citizens in general tend to hold positive views toward the police (Wu et al., 2009), this finding has not always been equal across racial and ethnic groups (Huebner et al., 2004; President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, 1967a; Sullivan et al., 1987). For example, Weitzer and Tuch (2006) noted that race/ethnicity has consistently emerged as the most consistent predictor of public attitudes toward the police. Since the late 1960s the extensive research has consistently documented the fact that African Americans tend to view the police less favorably than Whites (Bayley & Mendelsohn 1969; Brandl et al., 1994; Campbell & Schuman, 1972; Correia et al.,1996; Frank et al., 2005; Gabbidon & Higgins, 2009; Garofalo, 1977; Ho & McKean, 2004; Huebner et al., 2004; Jacob, 1971; Nation, 2011; Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Schafer et al., 2003; Schuck et al., 2008; Webb & Marshall, 1995;

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

50

Policing Diversity

Weitzer & Tuch, 2005; 2006; Wu et al., 2009). For example, in one study, approximately 80% of Whites expressed favorable impressions of the police whereas African American citizens generally scored 25 percentage points or more lower in favorable impression (Huang & Vaughn, 1996). In a recent survey conducted by Lai and Zhao (2010) consisting of 756 Houstonian residents, African Americans reported statistically significant lower levels of both general attitudes and specific trust toward the police. Thus, the core question becomes: “Why do African Americans view the police more negatively?” Based on the existing literature, first, they tend to believe that their White counterparts are treated more leniently (Walker, 1997; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006), thus suggesting that perhaps personal perceptions and negative contact experiences do indeed matter. For example, Jacob (1971) argued that “Blacks perceive the police as more corrupt, more unfair, more excitable, more harsh, tougher, weaker, lazier, less intelligent, less friendly, more cruel, and more on the bad than the good side of White respondents” (p. 73). In a telephone survey taken from over 12,000 residents living in three metropolitan areas of Florida (St. Louis, Rochester, and TampaSt. Petersburg), Dean (1980) found that the combined effect of being an African American who had contact experience with the police reduced their levels of satisfaction substantially . Finally, Schafer et al. (2003) summarized the impact of race on attributes toward police as follows:

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Riots swept through Miami after the 1989 fatal shooting of an African American motorcyclist [Lersch, 2001]; in 1992, similar problems occurred in Los Angeles following the acquittals of the four officers charged with beating Rodney King [Jesilow, Meyer, & Namazzi, 1995]. In the late 1990s, the New York City Police Department was the target of protests in the aftermath of the torturing of Abner Louima and the shooting of Amadou Diallo. (p. 441) These sequential findings highlighted why African Americans consistently tend to harbor negative attitudes toward police officers. In another example, Weitzer and Tuch (1999) conducted an empirical study and found police mistreatment of African Americans to be five times more likely than for Whites. Other researchers had similar findings suggesting that the police might treat African Americans more

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

51

harshly (Graziano, Schuck, & Martin, 2010; Henderson, Cullen, Cao, Browning, & Kopache, 1997; Miller, 2009; Reitzel et al., 2004). Second, neighborhood conditions may also affect evaluations of the police by African Americans (Brown & Benedict, 2002; Nation, 2011; Schafer et al., 2003, Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012). Traditionally, researchers have noted that African Americans are more likely to reside in communities where the living conditions are poor and median family income is low, suggesting a parallel effect of socioeconomic status on public attitudes toward the police (Alpert & Dunham, 1988; Albrecht & Green, 1977; Cao et al., 1996; Frank et al., 1996; Huebner et al., 2004; Sullivan et al., 1987; Sims et al., 2002). Researchers have also suggested that this difference exists due to the differential treatment of White and African American neighborhoods by police (Terrill & Reisig, 2003). For example, Weitzer (2000) examined citizens’ perceptions of racial profiling and found that there was a shared belief across White and African American communities that police treated Whites and African Americans differently. In addition, Weitzer and Tuch (2006) argued that African American neighborhoods tend to have more serious crime problems than White neighborhoods in part because local police fail to do their jobs in the tougher African American neighborhoods. As a result, African Americans tend to hold relatively negative attitudes toward the local police as a consequence (Garcia & Cao, 2005). From a group conflict perspective, finally, Wu et al. (2009) found that African Americans displayed unfavorable attitudes toward the police in part because they felt a sense of unequal treatment by the criminal justice system. For example, while African Americans made up less than 12% of the total U.S. population in 2004, they accounted for 37% of the total arrests for violent crimes and nearly 40% of all inmates in state and federal correctional facilities are African Americans. Using data obtained from a random sample telephone survey of 756 respondents, researchers Zhao, Lai, Ren, and Lawton (2011) found that African Americans were more likely to believe in the existence of racially biased policing than Whites. During the past two decades, the Hispanic population in the United States has increased substantially (Therrien & Ramirez, 2001). According to 2009 census estimates, approximately 45.5 million people identified themselves as Hispanics, representing the largest minority group in America constituting over 15.1% of the population (Bureau of Census, 2009). In addition, projections have been reported that by the

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

52

Policing Diversity

year 2100, Hispanics will make up over 33% of the total US population (Bureau of Census, 2000). Consequently, Hispanic residents’ views of the police have gained the increased attention of scholars (Schuck et al., 2004). Carter (1985) conducted one of the first surveys designed to specifically address Hispanic attitudes toward the Houston police; however, his work was done without using a comparison group of either Whites or African Americans. Carter’s results revealed that Hispanics gave relatively low ratings to the police. Later, results from a 1988 telephone poll of 1,147 New York City residents conducted by the New York Times showed that 69% of African Americans, 53% of Hispanics, and 37% of Whites felt that police favored one race over another (as cited by Huang & Vaughn, 1996). Finally, Lasley (1994) suggested that Hispanics take a “middle ground” between Whites and African Americans when reporting their attitudes toward the police. Despite the longstanding tradition of examining the relationship between race/ethnicity and ATP, much research has focused exclusively on making comparisons between Whites and African Americans (Reitzel et al., 2004). Further, some literature has been overly anecdotal in which unsubstantiated assertions have been made (Escobar, 1999; Mirande, 1987). In other works, the number of Hispanic subjects was often too small for statistical analysis related to this topic; as a consequence, researchers were limited to focusing only in terms of Whites and African Americans (e.g., Howell et al., 2004; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Nation, 2011; Weitzer, Tuch, & Skogan, 2008), comparing Hispanics only to Whites (e.g., Correia, 2010; Holmes, 2003; McCluskey et al., 2008), or by lumping Hispanics and African Americans together into a “non-White” category. In other words, few studies were conducted to systematically compare Whites, African Americans, and Hispanics (e.g., Thomas & Burns, 2005; Tuch & Weitzer, 1997; Webb & Marshall, 1995; Weitzer & Tuch, 2005; 2006). A review of the existing literature indicates that Hispanic citizens tend to rate local police departments lower than Whites, but somewhat higher than African Americans (Cheurprakobkit, 2000; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Lasley, 1994; Miller & Davis, 2008; Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005; Schuck et al., 2004; Skogan, 2006b; Webb & Marshall, 1995). Utilizing a national survey of 1,792 individuals living in metropolitan areas with a population of at least 100,000, Weitzer and Tuch (2005) found that African Americans and Hispanics reported unfavorable police ratings, thus offering evidence that Hispanics’ general judgment

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

53

of the police was likely in the middle of a continuum between African Americans and Whites. By attempting to identify factors associated with the low ratings of police officers among Hispanic respondents, Correia (2010) pointed out that “language and culture barriers, the continuous threat of deportation, a lack of familiarity with the justice system, the acculturation process, and the negative experiences immigrants have had with law enforcement in their home countries” (p. 99). Correia thus concluded that these factors might lead Hispanic immigrants to hold relatively negative attitudes toward the police. Similarly, Culver (2004) found that the interactions between Hispanics and police were closely associated with several important factors. Specifically, Hispanics were more likely to report linguistic barriers, fear of police, and the constant threat of deportation (see also, Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). As a result, they may rate the police relatively lower than Whites (Holmes, 2003). Notably, recent research has revealed that Hispanics’ attitudes are changing (Brown & Benedict, 2002). For example, Cheurprakobkit and Bartsch (1999) found that Hispanics in two Texas cities, Midland and Odessa, rated local police departments very positively. Often, a respondent’s age is also a significant predictor of ATP as indicated by a review of the literature showing an inverse relationship between age and positive perceptions (Schafer et al., 2003). To date, most researchers have found that older citizens tend to have more favorable attitudes toward the police than do younger citizens (Brandl et al., 1994; Cao et al., 1996; Dai & Johnson, 2009; Frank et al., 1996; Garcia & Cao, 2005; Huang & Vaughn, 1996; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Wu et al., 2009). Using a random sample of survey data collected in a medium-size city in the state of Washington, for example, Ren et al. (2005) found that age was the most robust predictor of public satisfaction with the local police. To further explain the less positive attitudes toward the police held by youth, Gaines, Kappeler, and Vaughn (1994) suggested that younger people were more freedom-oriented whereas older people were more safetyoriented. Therefore, younger citizens tended to believe that the police should deal more aggressively with crime, were more likely to think that police use too much force, and, as a result, were more likely to be dissatisfied with police treatment and services. Similar findings were also reported by Cordner, Marenin, and Murphy (1986) in a sample of college students who rated campus police less favorably than did

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

54

Policing Diversity

faculty and staff most likely due to being more likely to engage in risky behaviors. In contrast, other researchers reported no significant association between age and public attitudes toward the police (Davis, 1990; Nofziger & Williams, 2005; Parker et al., 1995; Reisig & Correia, 1997; Schuck et al., 2008). For example, Parker et al.’s (1995) study pertaining to the perceptions of the local police departments among 630 African American respondents in Atlanta, GA, and Washington, DC found that age was not a significant predictor related to ATP. Compared to race and age, the impact of gender on public ATP is also largely consistent (Wu et al., 2009). A majority of research has shown that female respondents tend to rate the police higher than their male counterparts (Apple & O’Brien, 1983; Cao et al., 1996; Cheurprakobkit, 2000; Correia et al., 1996; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Reisig & Correia, 1997; Reisig & Giacomazzi,1998; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Sampson & Jeglum Bartusch, 1998; Weitzer & Tuch, 2002). According to Brown and Benedict (2002), this is because males are somewhat more likely than females to become involved in situations resulting in an arrest and/or the use of force by police. In recent research in which the influence of gender on ATP has been examined using racial and ethnic groups, results have been somewhat mixed: First, White females tended to hold more favorable attitudes toward the police than White males; however, gender was not a significant predictor of ATP among minority groups (e.g., Huebner et al., 2004). Second, Hispanic and African American minority females held more favorable attitudes toward the police than their male counterparts; however, there was no comparable gender difference among White respondents (e.g., McCluskey et al., 2008; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). Third, female respondents consistently reported higher levels of satisfaction with the police than male counterparts regardless of race and ethnicity (e.g., Correia, 2010). Thus far, there has been no creditable reason offered to explain why minority females tend to report higher levels of positive attitudes toward the police. In this regard, Correia (2010) speculated that under the movement of community policing, the police actively sought to help alleviate the challenges faced by minorities and worked to provide high levels of service to this population. Hence, evaluations of police by minorities have gradually begun to change based on police efforts made in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Notably, a considerable number of researchers have found that gender has no impact on public attitudes

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

55

toward the police (Brandl et al., 1994; Dai & Johnson, 2009; Frank et al., 1996; Huang & Vaughn, 1996; Nation, 2011; Parker et al., 1995; Reisig & Correia, 1997; Ren et al., 2005; Schuck et al., 2008; Worrall, 1999). Social class or socioeconomic status (SES) is another factor commonly identified with research pertaining to public attitudes toward the police (Wu et al., 2009). Normally, three measures have been used as a proxy to tap into a respondent’s socioeconomic status: (a) educational attainment; (b) household income; and, (c) subjective selfratings. Assumedly, an increase in educational attainment and household income is correlated with an increase in one’s social status. According to Reisig and Parks (2000), a higher level of socioeconomic status will plausibly lead to positive police ratings. For example, Weitzer and Tuch (2005) reported that among all racial and ethnic samples the level of formal education was significantly related to citizen satisfaction with police services (see also, Holmes, 2003; Schuck et al., 2008). Priest and Carter (1999) indicated that economically and educationally advantaged African Americans tend to display more favorable evaluations of police than their less advantaged counterparts. Conversely, Wu et al. (2009) reported that working-class and less educated people tend to hold less well favorable attitudes toward the police due to their disproportionate propensity of becoming the subjects of police control.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL In the first half of this chapter, a review of American police history has shown that positive change is surrounded by one central theme: how the police can control crime and improve the quality of life in a neighborhood. In his book, Varieties of Police Behavior, Wilson (1968) identified three primary functions of American police: (a) crime control; (b) order maintenance; and, (c) provision of services. Undoubtedly, the police agency’s organizational priority universally is crime control (Zhao, He, & Lovrich, 2003). Notably, under either the professional model of policing or the community policing model, crime control is always the top organizational priority of American police. Over three decades of research related to public satisfaction with the police, the character of the linkage existing between neighborhood crime and public evaluations of police performance has consistently received intense attention (Cao et al., 1996). Recently, Skogan (2009)

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

56

Policing Diversity

noted: “One body of research on opinions about police treats confidence in the police as a dependent variable that is influenced in part by assessments of neighborhood conditions” (p. 301). Skogan further suggested that the accountability model represents those factors related to neighborhood conditions since citizens “hold police accountable for local crime, disorder, and fear” (p. 301). Not surprising, the bottom line of police work is to take responsibility for crime and related neighborhood conditions, namely fear of crime and signs of disorder. As a result, when residents’ perceptions of crime or victimization rates are high, the police will always receive low citizen ratings (Skogan, 2009). These neighborhood effects can be separated into two distinct categories: (a) contextual or “quality of life” influences (e.g., actual or perceived levels of crime and disorder) (Dai & Johnson, 2009; Reisig & Parks, 2000); and, (b) cultural influences (e.g., individuals’ perceptions of the collective beliefs, behaviors, rating of police jobs, and neighborhood qualities) (Decker, 1981; Schafer et al., 2003). Accordingly, the accountability model is designed to broaden the public’s scope of analyzing police evaluations by incorporating crime levels (Jesilow et al., 1995; Reisig & Correia, 1997; Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Ren et al., 2005; Schafer et al., 2003; Weitzer et al., 2008), victimization rates (Cao et al., 1996; Frank et al., 1996; O’Connor, 2008; Payne & Gainey, 2007), and neighborhood police ratings (Weitzer & Tuch, 2005; 2006; Xu, Fiedler, & Faming, 2005; Zhao et al., 2011). In recent studies, collective efficacy has also been incorporated into this model to reflect the effect of neighborhood cohesion in crime control (Correia, 2010; Gibson, Zhao, Lovrich, & Gaffney, 2002; Huebner et al., 2004; Ren et al., 2005; Xu et al., 2005). The following review focuses on key factors in relation to their impact on public attitudes toward the police. In a majority of studies, it has been suggested that neighborhoodlevel crime shapes public attitudes toward the police (Brown & Benedict, 2002). In other words, crime has consistently drawn attention from scholars given that a police officer’s main professional responsibility is to control crime. Using data obtained from a national survey consisting of 1,792 respondents across three racial/ethnic groups, Weitzer and Tuch (2005) found that perceptions of neighborhood crime at the individual level significantly decreased citizens’ satisfaction with police work (see also, Skogan, 2009). At the macro-level, Reisig and Parks (2000) and Sampson and Jeglum

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

57

Bartusch (1998) also found that variations in neighborhood homicide rates were linked to differences in citizen assessments of police even when controlling for important neighborhood factors (i.e., poverty) and individual factors (i.e., race). Similarly, Wu et al. (2009) found that violent crime rates at the aggregate level differentiated citizens’ satisfaction with the police. In addition, Sung (2006) discovered that homicide rates affected public confidence in police effectiveness based on data collected from the Executive Opinion Survey (World Economic Forum). With respect to a comparative study, Thomas and Burns (2005) found that both Whites and African Americans who perceived serious crime existing in their neighborhoods reported less police satisfaction. Of note here is the need for a common measure of crime. For example, Weitzer and Tuch (2006) suggested that a crime proxy pertaining to local police agency evaluations is exclusively measured by either residents’ perceptions of crime at the individual level (e.g., Cao et al., 1996; Holmes, 2003; Huebner et al., 2004; McCluskey et al., 2008; Nofziger & Williams, 2005; Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998; Schafer et al., 2003; Weitzer & Tuch, 2002; 2005; Yun et al., 2010) or actual crime (e.g., UCR) at the aggregate level (e.g., Dai & Johnson, 2009; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Renauer, 2007; Wu et al., 2009). Thus, crime rates measured at a neighborhood/aggregate level will leave the assumption that crime incidents have an equal impact on neighborhood residents. However, “hot spot” research has shown that crime incidents are often limited to very small geographic locations (i.e., one or two blocks) and may vary significantly across urban different neighborhood locations. In other words, crime incidents that were unequally distributed varied significantly at the neighborhood levels (Sherman et al., 1995). Unfortunately, no studies have been conducted to date to examine the relationship between actual block-level crime incidents and residents’ perceptions of police performance. In particular, Lai and Zhao (2010) conducted the first known research wherein authentic neighborhood crime incidents were used to predict public attitudes toward the police. Decker (1981) pointed out that victimization experiences were important in relation to ATP due to the strong relationship between minority status and the likelihood of being victimized. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that crime victims would have less favorable perceptions of the police than their non-victim counterparts (Frank et al., 1996; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Ren et al., 2005; Wu et al., 2009). In

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

58

Policing Diversity

other words, victimization or vicarious victimization experiences can erode public confidence in police officers’ ability to fulfill their crime control mandate (Decker, 1981). Essentially, researchers have suggested that victimization experiences may cause individuals to feel either physically vulnerable or believe that the police failed to protect them (Cao et al., 1996; Frank et al., 1996; O’Connor, 2008; Payne & Gainey, 2007). Ren et al. (2005) argued that the primary source of a victim’s negative police rating could possibly be the result of holding the police responsible for an unfortunate incident. For example, in an evaluation of the relationship between race and police performance in four cities, Howell et al. (2004) found that African American victims reported lower police service ratings in Charlotte, North Carolina and Chicago, Illinois. They concluded that when in a “normal” minority position, African Americans are more likely to blame the police for personal victimizations. Notably, other researchers found that victimization was not related to public attitudes toward the police (Cao et al., 1996; Garcia & Cao, 2005; Nofziger & Williams, 2005; Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998; Skogan, 1978). For example, Thomas and Burns (2005) concluded that victimization had no significant effect on citizen satisfaction with the police across three racial groups of respondents. In terms of neighborhood policing, subjective perceptions among residents tended to result in positive attitudes (Weitzer & Tuch, 2005; Xu et al., 2005; Zhao et al., 2011). For example, Weitzer and Tuch (2006) found that police effectiveness pertaining to crime prevention increased the levels of public satisfaction more than any other demographic variables simply because residents typically regard crime control and prevention as being the principal concern of policing. In other words, if police officers were viewed as performing poorly, this could possibly erode the basic trust and confidence in the citizen’s police department, or vice versa for residents who felt the police were doing a good job in regard to their neighborhoods. Through a review of literature, the relationship between collective efficacy and public satisfaction with the police has also been explored. For example, Sampson et al. (1997) defined collective efficacy as a form of “social cohesion among neighbors combined with their willingness to intervene on behalf of the common good” (p. 918) or, in other words, a reflection of mutual trust and the capacity for collective action. Using survey data obtained from 8,782 residents living in 343 Chicago neighborhoods, Sampson et al. found that the levels of collective efficacy mattered greatly in the reduction of violent crimes.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

59

Similar to past measures of social ties, social integration appeared to exist when citizens knew their neighbors, spoke to them regularly, and felt that their neighborhood was a “real home” (Gibson et al., 2002; Morenoff, Sampson, & Raudenbush, 2001). According to Morenoff et al. (2001), social integration may be expected or arise from the possibility that it is an antecedent to collective efficacy. By further examining the relationship between collective efficacy and social integration, Gibson et al. (2002) concluded that "individual perceptions of collective efficacy, which are based on residents’ perception of how trustworthy they feel their neighbors are and whether they feel that neighbors are willing to intervene as agents of informal control, are dependent on the extent to which individuals feel integrated into their own neighborhood" (p. 543). That is, social integration is the initial step through which neighbors get to know one another in a positive way and thereby create mutual trust and respect that leads to the willingness to help each other. Similarly, Cao et al. (1996) found that the degree of social integration present is a robust predictor in explaining public confidence in the police (see also, Crank & Giacomazzi, 2007; Ren et al., 2005). In a comparative study, Huebner et al. (2004) found a positive relationship between collective efficacy and satisfaction with the police in a White sample, whereas African American citizens who reported higher levels of collective efficacy rated traditional police services in a more positive fashion as well (i.e., police are easy to contact and respond to calls for service in a timely manner).

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

POLICE-CITIZEN INTERACTION MODEL Police-citizen interaction can be considered as the most recent model that has emerged along with America’s greatest reform in policing history- community policing (Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012). If the demographic model began in the 1960s, and the accountability model stemmed from society’s fundamental police mission, then the current model had its genesis in the 1980s, a time when the movement began to accelerate and police-citizen interactions became one of the hallmarks of community policing. Essentially, police administrators throughout the United States began to realize that their officers had limited resources to meet local demands without public support with respect to solving crimes, alleviating neighborhood problems, maintaining order, and building crime prevention partnerships (Cordner, 2010;

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

60

Policing Diversity

Rosenbaum et al., 2005; Skogan, 2006a; Wilson, 2006; Zhao, 1994). Similarly, community policing also encouraged residents to participate in the active “coproduction” of public safety along with their police (Cordner, 1998; Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005; Skogan, 2003). During this period numerous studies were conducted in which community policing was shown to improve the quality of police-citizen interactions, convince citizens to cooperate with law enforcement (i.e., crime reporters, informants, problem solvers, law abiders, etc.), and develop positive attitudes toward law enforcement officers (Renauer, 2007; Rosenbaum, 1994; Skogan & Hartnett, 1997; Tyler, 2001). According to Hawdon and Ryan (2003), “two central tenets of community policing are that police should work in cooperation with, and earn the trust of, the community” (p. 55). Hence, the first step in earning public trust is to emphasize the quality of police-citizen interactions. A number of researchers have suggested that positive police-citizen interactions should be considered as major predictors of police ratings (Brandl et al., 1994; Ren et al., 2005; Rosenbaum et al., 2005; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Zevitz & Rettammel, 1990). For example, Schafer et al. (2003) argued that public evaluations of the police and police services may derive as much from an individual’s personal experience with law enforcement as a reflection of one’s demographic characteristics. Certain groups such as minorities and/or youth may express less favorable perceptions because they are more likely to have negative interactions with the police. Hence, community policing becomes an expansion of the foundational demographic model (Langan, Greenfeld, Smith, Durose, & Levin, 2001). Of note, there are several types of police-citizen interactions. First, Decker (1981) suggested that the most important distinction involves the voluntary/resident-initiated contact vs. the involuntary/policeinitiated contact. Specifically, voluntary or resident-initiated interactions tend to produce more positive results, whereas involuntary or police-initiated interactions tend to occur in more adversarial situations. However, both types of interactions involve formal and purpose-oriented law enforcement situations. Subsequent research has generally supported Decker’s claim. For example, Rosenbaum et al. (2005) found that people who initiated police interaction (i.e., calling for assistance) were more satisfied than persons who were targets of police-initiated encounters such as traffic stops. Second, neighborhood police interaction refers to any form of contact with the police rather than any specific voluntary or involuntary

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

61

scenarios. The contact is a casual and individual-based interaction that usually occurs in neighborhoods. An example would be friendly chatting with a police officer at the corner of a street or in a church. Following this line of research, finally, Reisig and Giacomazzi (1998) noted that police-resident coproduction of order can be grouped into the third type of police-citizen interaction. Coproduction of order is a systematic, formal, and grouped-based interaction that reflects an important strategy of community policing (Cordner, 2010; Reisig & Parks, 2004). In the following review, the four types of interaction are discussed in relation to how they affect public attitudes toward the police. In the first type of citizen-initiated interaction, the police are generally approached by a citizen in need of service (e.g., crime victims, witnesses of suspicious activity, persons in need of general assistance, etc.). This category of interaction is hypothesized as being more positive than police-initiated contacts given that the police are playing a supportive role in which citizens are made to realize that the police are capable of “doing something” (Decker, 1981; Ren et al., 2005). A majority of researchers who examined the citizen-initiated interaction found a positive public rating effect on police performance (Brandl et al., 1994; Brown & Benedict, 2002; Cheurprakobkit, 2000; Nation, 2011; Reisig & Correia, 1997; Rosenbaum et al., 2005; Webb & Marshall, 1995). Specifically, crime victims who were satisfied with the officers’ handling of a particular incident also tended to rate the police favorably (Brown & Benedict, 2002; Reisig & Parks 2000). Conversely, Schuck et al. (2008) found that negative experiences led to citizen dissatisfaction with the levels of police performance regardless of neighborhood or global contexts (see also, Schafer et al., 2003). By the same token, Huebner et al. (2004) found that voluntary dissatisfied experiences greatly diminished the levels of satisfaction with the police. Second, involuntary interactions are those initiated by the police that are quite frequently adversarial in nature, thus provoking hostility on the part of some citizens and possibly lowering confidence in the police (Decker, 1981). Specifically, the most common form of policeinitiated interaction that a citizen may experience involves a traffic stop (Rosenbaum et al., 2005). For example, if the stop is not handled with professionalism and courtesy by the officer, the citizen may feel frustrated, hostile, and angry. According to Ren et al. (2005), drivers

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

62

Policing Diversity

caught in these situations may feel that police should pay more attention to “serious crimes” rather than minor traffic offenses. In this regard, Jesilow et al. (1995) found that persons who had received a traffic citation or had been arrested actually lowered the rating they made of police work. Similarly, Ren et al. (2005) found that receiving a traffic ticket led to lower levels of public confidence in the police. By examining police-initiated interaction experiences in neighborhoods, Reisig and Parks (2002) found that respondents who were dissatisfied with a traffic stop experience reported less favorable attitudes toward the police than those who had no police contact (see also, Schuck et al., 2008). In terms of a comparative study, Huebner et al. (2004) found a similar association across racial groups. Third, neighborhood interactions generally involve informal and friendly communication with the police (Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012). Due to the nature of contact, Brandl et al. (1994) suggested that these interactions capture an individual’s cognitive processes associated with existing police stereotypes and reinforce that existing belief system. For example, Cheurprakobkit (2000) reported that if citizens have positive stereotypical images of the police and enjoy talking with them, they would be more likely to express high police performance ratings (see also, Huang & Vaughn, 1996; Worrall, 1999). In addition, Schuck and Rosenbaum (2005) found that neighborhood interaction experiences had a significant association with attitudes toward community policing services since residents were more willing to participate in neighborhood affairs. Police-citizen coproduction is the final type of interaction model that refers to the willingness of neighborhood residents to actively engage in cooperative behaviors aimed at helping the police prevent criminal and deviant behavior (e.g., participating in a block watch, providing valuable information, keeping the streets safe from crime, etc.) (Zhao, 1994). Whereas collective efficacy focuses on the social network among community neighbors (Sampson et al., 1997), policecitizen coproduction emphasizes the relationship between the police and residents in crime prevention efforts (Zhao, 1994). Basically, limited empirical evidence is available pertaining to the relationship between citizens’ participation in the coproduction of order. However, Scott (2002) and Schafer et al. (2003) found that community policing was positively associated with coproduction, suggesting that residents’ involvement in crime prevention and access to the police provide an important partnership between the police and local residents.

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Theoretical Models of Research on Public ATP

63

SUMMARY From an historical perspective, the relationship between the development of policing and three theoretical models (demographic, accountability, and police-citizen interaction) that are used by researchers to explain public attitudes toward the police were discussed. In particular, the multidimensional construct of public ATP was examined in relation to the innovation of community policing. For example, Schuck and Rosenbaum (2005) suggested that the concept was largely influenced by the theory of community policing: .

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Given the importance of public attitudes within theories of community policing and problem oriented policing, … the conception and measurement of … [ATP] constructs … residents’ attitudes toward the police are better represented by a two-dimensional model that differentiates global perceptions of the police from assessments of the police in the respondents’ neighborhood. (p. 397) The demographic model was originally developed in the 1960s and early 1970s at a time when research on public attitudes toward the police began to emerge. For example, in an ambitious work, Decker (1981) made a great effort to identify those researchers who had contributed to the explanation of citizen ATP (e.g., Campbell & Schuman, 1971; Hahn, 1971; Jocob, 1971; Skogan, 1978; Zeitz, 1965) and found that “[r]ace, socioeconomic status, age, and sex have been the predominant predictors. Of these four … race has received the greatest emphasis” (p. 81). In regard to the accountability model, the organizational priority of the police was undoubtedly crime control (Zhao et al., 2003). More recently, Skogan (2009) noted that “[o]ne body of research … treats confidence in the police as a dependent variable that is influenced in part by assessments of neighborhood conditions” (p. 301), suggesting that the accountability model has been highly interactive with community policing over the past few decades. Finally, the police-citizen interaction model has emphasized public ATP since the government and policing agencies have struggled to identify the significant tension between the police and minority communities, both during and after the period of PCR (Schafer et al., 2003). Accordingly, Table 4-1 presents the connection between the

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

64

Policing Diversity

historical movement of policing, the multidimensional construct, and the three theoretical models of ATP.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Table 4-1: Connection between Policing Development, the Multidimensional Construct, and Three Theoretical Models of ATP Multidimensional Construct of Community Policing (1980s-) ATP Social unrest and racial riots Demographic Model (1960s-1970s) Police-community relations (PCR) (1970s-1980s) Professionalism Model (1930sAccountability Model 1950s) Community Policing (1980s-) Police-Community Relations Police-Citizen Interaction Model (PCR) (1960s-1970s) Community Policing (1980s-)

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Chapter V

Methodology

HYPOTHESES For over four decades, police scholars and practitioners have attempted to identify the key determinants of public attitudes toward the police (ATP) (e.g., Campbell & Schuman, 1972; Cao et al., 1996; Correia et al., 1996; Decker, 1981; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Ren et al., 2005; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Schuck et al., 2008; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). Three theoretical models were identified in Chapter IV that are relevant to the study of public attitudes toward the police. In this chapter, a series of hypotheses derived from the theoretical models are applied to public opinions as they relate to the police: (a) hypotheses pertaining to the causal link between the dependent variables: general attitudes and specific attitudes; and (b) hypotheses related to the impact that demographic variables, accountability, and police-citizen interactions have on public ATP as well as the relationship between exploratory and dependent variables.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Multidimensional Construct of ATP A growing amount of research has indicated that the concept of public attitudes toward the police is a multidimensional construct (Brandl et al., 1994; Schafer et al., 2003; Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005; Worrall, 1999). In light of fact, a primary goal of this research monograph is to explore whether commonly researched variables that have been shown to predict general public attitudes toward the police can also predict perceptions based on community policing criteria. In addition, the increased significance of community policing in American policing may necessitate a reorientation of outcome measures used to assess the performance of police organizations (e.g., Schafer et al., 2003; Schuck et al., 2008). Accordingly, the first research hypothesis is as follows: 65

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

66

Policing Diversity Hypothesis 1: Public attitudes toward the police are best represented by two dimensions that differentiate global perceptions of the police from assessments of specific police services provided in a respondent’s neighborhood.

Demographic Model In the demographic model, the relationship between individual demographics and attitudes toward the police is the primary focus. According to the review of the literature conducted for this study, the variables of race, age, gender, and education are significantly associated with public opinions of the police (e.g., Brown & Benedict, 2002; Lai & Zhao, 2010; Schafer et al., 2003). Based on their review, the following hypotheses have been posited: Hypothesis 2a. Minority status is negatively correlated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes). Hypothesis 2b. Age is positively correlated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes). Hypothesis 2c. Female status is positively correlated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes). Hypothesis 2d. Educational attainment is positively correlated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes).

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Accountability Model Drawing from Skogan’s (2009) suggestion, the central focus of the accountability model concerns the relationship between exploratory variables (i.e., crime and neighborhood conditions) and public evaluations of the police given that citizens “hold police accountable for local crime, disorder, and fear” (p. 301). Relevant studies have shown that such indicators have a significant impact on the public’s judgment of the police; these indicators include actual crime levels,

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Methodology

67

victimization experience, rating of the job police do, and collective efficacy (Correia, 2010; Gibson et al., 2002; Ren et al., 2005; Schafer et al., 2003; Skogan, 2009; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006; Xu et al., 2005). Hypothesis 3a. Crime is negatively associated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes). Hypothesis 3b. Victimization experience is negatively associated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes). Hypothesis 3c. Rating of the job police do is positive associated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes). Hypothesis 3d. Collective efficacy is positively associated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes). Police-Citizen Interaction Model

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The existing body of literature suggests strongly that citizen interaction with the police has a significant effect on one’s attitudes toward law enforcement (Brandl et al., 1994; Brown & Benedict, 2002; Decker, 1981; Reisig & Parks, 2000; Ren et al., 2005; Rosenbaum et al., 2005; Schafer et al., 2003; Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). As a consequence, four variables are included to represent this model: (a) citizen-initiated interaction; (b) police-initiated interaction; (c) neighborhood interaction; and, (d) police-citizen coproduction. Hypothesis 4a. Citizen-initiated interaction is positively associated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes). Hypothesis 4b. Police-initiated interaction is negatively associated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes).

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

68

Policing Diversity Hypothesis 4c. Neighborhood interaction is positively associated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes). Hypothesis 4d. Police-citizen coproduction is positively associated with public attitudes toward the police across two domains (i.e., global and specific attitudes).

A summary of the expected relationships among exploratory and dependent variables is presented in Table 5-1. Table 5-1: Summary of the Expected Relationships among Exploratory and Dependent Variables Exploratory variables

General Attitudes

Specific Attitudes

Negative Positive Positive Positive

Negative Positive Positive Positive

Negative Negative

Negative Negative

Positive Positive

Positive Positive

Positive

Positive

Negative

Negative

Positive

Positive

Positive

Positive

Demographic model 1. Race (minority) 2. Age 3. Gender (female) 4. Education

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Accountability Model 1. Violent crime incident 2. Victimization experience 3. Rating of police job 4. Collective efficacy Police-citizen Interaction Model 1. Citizen-initiated interaction 2. Police-initiated interaction 3. Neighborhood interaction 4. Police-citizen coproduction

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Methodology

69

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

THE RESEARCH SETTING According to the 2009 U.S. Bureau of Census, Houston, Texas was the fourth largest city in the United States featuring a population of 2.3 million people living within an area encompassing 579 square miles. In comparison to the 2000 census data, the city’s population had grown by 15%, or by over two million inhabitants. In part, Houston is a multicultural city due to its many academic institutions, renowned hospitals, and large industries. In addition, more than 90 languages are spoken in the city partially due to an influx of diverse streams of immigrants (i.e., Houston has the third largest Hispanic population in the United States). According to the 2005-2009 American Community Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, Whites made up 40.32% of Houston’s population, and Blacks or African Americans made up 17.78%. While Hispanics or Latinos made up 22.5 %, other racial and ethnic minority groups represented 19.4% of Houston’s population. In addition, males accounted for 50.5% of Houston’s population and females accounted for 49.5%. In terms of economic characteristics, the median household income was $42,797, the per capita income was $25,625, and 19% of the population or 16% of families were below the poverty level (Bureau of Census, 2009). Similar to other large cities in the United States, Houston also suffered from social turmoil and racial riots during the 1960s, such as the Texas Southern University Riots of 1967. In the past, virtually all police patrolling was performed in squad cars; therefore, citizens seldom met officers face-to-face unless they might have had an occasion to talk with an officer on the street. In other words, most encounters between residents and law enforcement tended to occur when police were ticketing drivers, responding to calls for service, or dealing with criminal incidents (Brown & Wycoff, 1987). According to Bahn (1974), low police visibility and a lack of normal contact may have left citizens feeling that the police neither knew nor cared about them. Essentially, most citizens felt that there was no one around to enforce social norms. Paying close attention to the development of community policing in other agencies throughout the United States during the early 1980s, Lee Brown −Houston’s first African American police chief − implemented Neighborhood-Oriented Policing (NOP) as a strategy to reduce public fear of crime and improve police services (Roth & Kennedy, 2011). Responsive strategies implemented included victim

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

70

Policing Diversity

recontact, newsletters, citizen-contact patrol, community-based police stations (storefronts), and community organizations (Brown & Wycoff, 1987). For example, police community stations have been the cornerstone of HPD’s outreach program for the past three decades. The Houston city marshal’s division, Houston airport police, and Houston park police were launched in 1992, and in early 2004 the HPD absorbed the Neighborhood Protection Division from the City of Houston Planning Department and that unit was renamed the Neighborhood Protection Corps in 2005. Consequently, HPD has emphasized “hot spot patrol concentration” that functions to improve the quality of life among police community stations (storefronts). To date, HPD has employed a total of 7,000 employees consisting of 5,400 sworn officers and 1,600 civilian employees, respectively. In addition, 27 storefronts nested in 15 patrol beats are currently in operation (City of Houston, 2011).

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

THE DATA The data used for this study were part of a large scale research project conducted for the Houston Police Department between January 4 and January 30, 2010 in the metropolitan area of Houston. The purpose of the telephone survey was to obtain information on public attitudes toward the Houston Police Department, on perception of neighborhood safety, and on community development. The geographic area from which the sample was drawn was defined by zip code. For this project, all zip codes for Houston, TX were gathered from http://zip4.usps.com/zip4/ and the list was confirmed via zip code reports from the sample vendor. The sample distribution was proportional to the population in each of the zip codes, with a total of 45,990 total records extracted, ultimately yielding the 1,850 residents in the metropolitan area of Houston who completed interviews. Random digit dialing (RDD) methodologies via computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) were used to collect the data. Additionally, respondents in Spanish-only speaking households were provided with the opportunity to complete the interview in Spanish. The response rate for the 2010 survey was 37%. A total of 536 respondents were removed from the analyses because the respondents’ home addresses fell in surrounding zip codes, but were not in the areas served exclusively by the Houston Police Department. After deletion of those respondents, 1,314 completed

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Methodology

71

surveys were included in the analyses. A series of t-tests were performed to determine whether there was a significant difference between those who answered these questions and those who did not, based on demographic characteristics. No significant variation was found between the two groups. MEASURES Dependent Variables Two distinct factors were used as dependent variables in the analysis. First, General Attitudes were based on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree on how the respondents evaluated Houston police officers according to the following four criteria: (a) were courteous; (b) were respectful toward people; (c) were fair; and, (d) communicated very well. The General Attitudes index expressed by respondents was derived from previous studies (e.g., Reisig & Giacomazzi, 1998; Ren et al., 2005; Webb & Marshall, 1995) and had similar factor loadings (e.g., Ren et al., 2005). The second index, Specific Attitudes, consisted of four items used to measure how satisfied respondents felt toward HPD in relation to community service. Again, using a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = very unsatisfied to 5 = very satisfied, respondents rated officers according to the following standards: (a) satisfied with response time to calls for service; (b) satisfied with police visibility; (c) satisfied with crime prevention efforts; and, (d) satisfied with interaction with citizens. Because the Specific Attitudes measure required respondents to address levels of satisfaction with specific elements of community policing (Schafer et al., 2003; Schuck & Rosenbaum, 2005), their responses also were taken as a sign of the legitimacy of the police (Tyler, 2005).

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Exploratory Variables The exploratory variables used in this study were grouped according to the three models discussed earlier in the literature review. In the demographic model consisting of race/ethnicity, age, gender, and educational attainment variables, race/ethnicity was coded into four dummy variables: (a) White; (b) African American; (c) Hispanic; or, (d) “other,” namely Asian, Pacific Islander, etc. Age was measured by an ordinal variable ranging from 1 (< 25 years old) to 5 (65 years >)

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

72

Policing Diversity

that was converted from a respondent’s reported year of birth, and gender was coded as a dichotomous variable (0 = male and1= female). Finally, educational attainment was coded from 1 (< than high school), 2 (high school or GED), 3 (training school certification), 4 (associate degree or some college), 5 (college graduate), to 6 (graduate or professional degree). Four variables pertaining to the accountability model were used to represent neighborhood indicators, and they included (a) violent crime incident(s); (b) victimization experience; (c) rating of police; and, (d) collective efficacy. The first variable, violent crime incident(s), was measured by confrontations reported to the HPD over the past 12 months that occurred within a 0.3 mile radius of each respondent’s residence. Therefore, each respondent was treated individually within a buffer of a 0.3 mile (1,582 feet radius) that was much smaller than the number of violent crime incidents at an aggregated level such as neighborhood or census tracts. The locations of violent crime incidents were provided by the Houston Police Department with x and y coordinators. Similarly, the x and y coordinators for each respondent were based on his or her residence at the time of the telephone interview. Second, victimization experience was a dichotomous variable acquired by asking respondents if they or any household cohabitant(s) had been a victim of crime over the past 12 months (0 = no victim experience and 1 = victim of at least one experience). Third, rating of police was a continuous variable based on a continuum scale ranging from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) in which respondents were asked: “How would you rate the job that the Houston Police Department is doing in the area where you live?” In addition, the following four items were designed to measure a neighborhood’s collective efficacy: (a) How many neighbors do you know by name? (b) When you do a favor for a neighbor, can you generally trust the neighbor to return the favor? (c) If you were in need of help with your car in front of your residence, how much faith do you have that your neighbors would come to your assistance? (d) Would you describe your neighborhood as a place where people mostly help one another or as a place where people mostly go their own way? Using Varimax rotation, the factor loadings analyses revealed that these four items loaded on a single factor with an Eigenvalue of 2.03 and a Cronbach’s index alpha of 0.63. Four variables were used to tap into the police-citizen interaction model: (a) citizen-initiated; (b) police-initiated; (c) neighborhood

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Methodology

73

interacton; and, (d) police-citizen coproduction. First, police-citizen interaction was coded into three dummy variables (0 = never experienced; 1 = police-initiated interaction; 2 = citizen-initiated interaction) based on asking the survey respondents two questions: “During the past 12 months, have you had any contact with a Houston Police Department officer?” and “Was this contact initiated by the police?” Second, neighborhood interaction was a dichotomous variable in which the respondent was asked: “In the last 12 months have you been to any community or church meeting where an officer of the Houston Police Department spoke?” (1 = Yes, 0 = Never). Third, an index of five items was developed to measure the police-citizen coproduction variable. On a scale ranging from 1 = having no involvement to 4 = very involved, respondents were asked how involved they thought that citizens were in activities related to the following neighborhood crime controls: (a) keeping the streets of Houston safe from crimes; (b) participating in a block watch; (c) providing valuable information; (d) providing a safe neighborhood environment for children; and, (e) obeying the law. Using Varimax rotation, the factor loading analyses revealed that all five items loaded on a single factor with an Eigenvalue of 2.47 and Cronbach’s alpha = 0.73.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS In addition to the use of descriptive statistics, chi-square, bivariate statistics, and one-way ANOVA, the method of structural equation modeling (SEM) was the most advanced statistical method utilized in the data analysis. Briefly, SEM is a statistical method that uses various types of models to depict structural relationships among observed variables hypothesized for a phenomenon being investigated. Specifically, the direct and indirect effects of variables can be tested simultaneously in SEM models that reflect hypothesized structures of how sets of variables at different levels of analysis (individual and contextual) are interrelated (Schumacker & Lomax, 2004). For example, Skogan (2009) hypothesized that public confidence in the police was influenced by neighborhood conditions such as crime and fear of crime based on theoretical models (reassurance vs. accountability). The SEM technique can be used to determine whether the model derived from such theories is empirically supported by observed events documented in the data described here. Accordingly, SEM tests theoretical models using the scientific method of hypothesis

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

74

Policing Diversity

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

testing to advance one’s understanding of complex relationships among diverse constructs (Schumacker & Lomax, 2004). According to Byrne (2010), SEM features two important procedural qualities: (a) the causal processes under study are represented by a series of structural equations, and (b) these structural relations can be pictorially modeled to enable a more thorough conceptualization of the theory under study. The hypothesized model can then be simultaneously tested by an analysis of the entire set of variables to determine whether it is consistent with the data (Xu et al., 2005). In this study the SEM technique enables the researcher to present a relatively complete picture of how theoretical models influence both the general and specific attitudes toward the police and attitude toward community policing services. In addition, SEM allows for the simultaneous testing of multiple relationships between exogenous (e.g., race and gender) and endogenous (e.g., general attitudes) variables as well as among endogenous variables (e.g., general and specific attitudes). Given the important development of SEM in research pertaining to ATP, all analyses were conducted using AMOS 18.0, and parameters are estimated using the maximum likelihood (ML) algorithm. A variety of absolute and relative (or incremental) indices are consulted to assess a model’s goodness of fit. An absolute fit index includes χ2 statistics where χ2 is the likely ratio statistic used to test whether a given model provides an acceptable fit to the observed data. A model is considered to be a good fit when the χ2 test fails to reject the null hypothesis in the population at the .05 level (Bollen & Long, 1993; Kline, 2005). According to Xu et al. (2005), a researcher should therefore seek to obtain a nonsignificant χ2 value with associated degrees of freedom. They go on to discuss the following in addition: Although the χ2 test provides valuable information about a statistically false model, it is sensitive to sample size. Generally, one should not only rely solely on it when assessing the fit of a model, especially when the sample size is large (generally above 200). (p. 180) In light of this observation, Jöreskog and Sörbom (1989) suggested that the use of a χ2 ratio to degrees of freedom (CMIN/DF) was a better measure of fit, and Kline (2005) argued that a model fit was acceptable if CMIN/DF was less than 3 (see also, Dukes et al., 2009; Gibson et al., 2002).

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Methodology

75

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

In addition, “researchers have addressed the χ2 limitations (noted above) by developing goodness-of-fit indices that take a more pragmatic approach to the evaluation process” (Byrne, 2010, p. 77). Relative indices include the comparative fit index (CFI), goodness-offit index (GFI), adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) (Bentler, 1990; Gibson et al., 2002; Xu et al., 2005). The CFI assesses the relative improvement in fit of the hypothesized model compared with a baseline model that is typically the independent model assuming zero relationships among the variables. The CFI coefficient value ranges from zero to 1.00, with values greater than 0.90 indicating a reasonably good fit of the hypothesized model (Hu & Bentler, 1999). The GFI was another measure suggested by Jöreskog and Sörbom (1989) for assessing the model’s overall fit based on a ratio of the squared sum of discrepancies to the observed variances, thus allowing for a scale (Xu et al., 2005). A GFI value of 0.90 or larger generally indicates a good fit (Loehlin, 1992). In order to arrive at any particular goodness of fit level, AGFI takes into account the number of degrees of freedom. Other things being equal, a good fit is attained with fewer unknowns; hence, more degrees of freedom should represent a better model (Xu et al., 2005). Generally, an AGFI value of 0.90 or larger would present a close fit (Loehlin, 1992). Finally, RMSEA takes the error of population approximation and degrees of freedom into account and measures the lack of fit of the hypothesized model to the population covariance matrix. A value of zero implies the best fit, whereas higher values suggest a worse fit (Byrne, 2010; Kline, 2005). As a rule of thumb, an RMSEA of 0.05 or less indicates a close approximate fit of the model, values between 0.05 and 0.08 suggest a reasonable error of approximation, 0.08 and 0.10 indicate a mediocre fit, and those >0.10 signify a poor fit (Brown & Cudeck, 1993; MacCallum, Brown, & Sugawara, 1996; Schumacker & Lomax, 2004) (see Table 5-2).

Policing Diversity : Determinants of White, Black, and Hispanic Attitudes toward Police, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

76

Policing Diversity

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Table 5-2: Fit Indices for Structural Equation Models Model fit Interpretation Acceptable level criterion Chi-square Compares obtained A non-significant χ2 indicated 2 (χ ) χ2 value with tabled that the model fits the data. However, since the value of χ2 is value for given df. sensitive to sample size, Jöreskog and Sörbom (1989) suggest the use of the ratio of χ2 to degree of freedom (CMIN/DF) as a better of fit. A model fit is acceptable when (CMIN/DF) is less than 3 (Gibson et al., 2002; Kline, 2005). CFI Value larger to .90 0 (not fit) to 1 (perfect fit). reflects a good fit. GFI Value close to .95 0 (not fit) to 1 (perfect fit). reflects a good fit AGFI Value adjusted for 0 (not fit) to 1 (perfect fit). df, with close to .95 a good fit model. RMSEA Value less than .05