IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v9y2016i03p525-547_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Baltimore Is Burning: Can I-O Psychologists Help Extinguish the Flames?

Author

Listed:
  • Ruggs, Enrica N.
  • Hebl, Michelle R.
  • Rabelo, Verónica Caridad
  • Weaver, Kayla B.
  • Kovacs, Joy
  • Kemp, Andeneshea S.

Abstract

Recent media coverage has called attention to what some see as an unreasonable use of force by law enforcement officers against unarmed Black citizens. Many of these incidents have stirred widespread concern, as there has been a large public outcry indicating that the incidents appear to have racial undertones, which is particularly pronounced given the fatal consequences that are too frequent. This article focuses on how psychological research on racial bias can explain some of the cognitive and affective processes that could be influencing law enforcement officer behavior in at least some of these incidents. Further, we discuss how industrial–organizational (I-O) psychologists can use this research and leverage current practices within the field to develop solutions and effectively deal with individual racial biases among officers within the law enforcement community. We also discuss avenues of future research within I-O psychology and hope to spark a conversation within the I-O community about additional ways the field can address tensions that have arisen between law enforcement and different communities regarding perceptions of excessive use of force by officers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruggs, Enrica N. & Hebl, Michelle R. & Rabelo, Verónica Caridad & Weaver, Kayla B. & Kovacs, Joy & Kemp, Andeneshea S., 2016. "Baltimore Is Burning: Can I-O Psychologists Help Extinguish the Flames?," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 525-547, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:9:y:2016:i:03:p:525-547_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942616000055/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:9:y:2016:i:03:p:525-547_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.