IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nas/journl/v116y2019p19894-19898.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A field experiment on community policing and police legitimacy

Author

Listed:
  • Kyle Peyton

    (Department of Political Science, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511; Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511)

  • Michael Sierra-Arévalo

    (School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ 07102)

  • David G. Rand

    (Sloan School, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02142; Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02142)

Abstract

Despite decades of declining crime rates, longstanding tensions between police and the public continue to frustrate the formation of cooperative relationships necessary for the function of the police and the provision of public safety. In response, policy makers continue to promote community-oriented policing (COP) and its emphasis on positive, nonenforcement contact with the public as an effective strategy for enhancing public trust and police legitimacy. Prior research designs, however, have not leveraged the random assignment of police–public contact to identify the causal effect of such interactions on individual-level attitudes toward the police. Therefore, the question remains: Do positive, nonenforcement interactions with uniformed patrol officers actually cause meaningful improvements in attitudes toward the police? Here, we report on a randomized field experiment conducted in New Haven, CT, that sheds light on this question and identifies the individual-level consequences of positive, nonenforcement contact between police and the public. Findings indicate that a single instance of positive contact with a uniformed police officer can substantially improve public attitudes toward police, including legitimacy and willingness to cooperate. These effects persisted for up to 21 d and were not limited to individuals inclined to trust and cooperate with the police prior to the intervention. This study demonstrates that positive nonenforcement contact can improve public attitudes toward police and suggests that police departments would benefit from an increased focus on strategies that promote positive police–public interactions.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyle Peyton & Michael Sierra-Arévalo & David G. Rand, 2019. "A field experiment on community policing and police legitimacy," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(40), pages 19894-19898, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:nas:journl:v:116:y:2019:p:19894-19898
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.pnas.org/content/116/40/19894.full
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Benjamin Krick & Jonathan Petkun & Mara Revkin, 2023. "What Determines Military Legitimacy? Evidence from the Battle of Mosul in Iraq," HiCN Working Papers 402, Households in Conflict Network.
    2. Koslicki, Wendy M. & Lytle, Daniel J. & Willits, Dale W. & Brooks, Rachael, 2021. "‘Rhetoric without reality’ or effective policing strategy? An analysis of the relationship between community policing and police fatal force," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Danielle M. Shields, 2021. "Stonewalling in the Brick City: Perceptions of and Experiences with Seeking Police Assistance among LGBTQ Citizens," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-27, January.
    4. Jack Mitcham, 2023. "Agent-Based Simulation of Policy Funding Tradeoffs Through the Lens of Legitimacy and Hardship," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 26(3), pages 1-12.

    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:nas:journl:v:116:y:2019:p:19894-19898. 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: Eric Cain (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.pnas.org/ .

    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.