Cargando…
Considering Objective and Subjective Measures for Police Use of Force Evaluation
In spite of significant interest in the application of police use of force (UOF) from organisations, researchers, and the general public, there remains no industry standard for how police UOF is trained, and by extension, evaluated. While certain UOF behaviours can be objectively measured (e.g., cor...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8157287/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34069786 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105351 |
_version_ | 1783699649502117888 |
---|---|
author | Di Nota, Paula M. Chan, Jennifer F. Huhta, Juha-Matti Andersen, Judith P. |
author_facet | Di Nota, Paula M. Chan, Jennifer F. Huhta, Juha-Matti Andersen, Judith P. |
author_sort | Di Nota, Paula M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | In spite of significant interest in the application of police use of force (UOF) from organisations, researchers, and the general public, there remains no industry standard for how police UOF is trained, and by extension, evaluated. While certain UOF behaviours can be objectively measured (e.g., correct shoot/no shoot decision making (DM), shot accuracy), the subjective evaluation of many UOF skills (e.g., situation awareness, SA) falls to the discretion of individual instructors. The aim of the current brief communication is to consider the operationalisation of essential UOF behaviours as objective and subjective measures, respectively. Using longitudinal data from a sample of Canadian police officers (n = 57) evaluated during UOF training scenarios, we discuss how objective and subjective measures reflect changes in officer performance over time. Objective lethal force DM was measured as a binary ‘correct–incorrect’ outcome and subjective SA was measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘unacceptable’ to ‘exceptional’. Subjective evaluation of SA demonstrated significant changes over time, while DM remained relatively high and stable. Given the practical and professional implications of UOF, we recommend that a combination of objective and subjective measures is systematically implemented at all stages of police UOF training and evaluation (i.e., basic, advanced, in-service). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8157287 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81572872021-05-28 Considering Objective and Subjective Measures for Police Use of Force Evaluation Di Nota, Paula M. Chan, Jennifer F. Huhta, Juha-Matti Andersen, Judith P. Int J Environ Res Public Health Communication In spite of significant interest in the application of police use of force (UOF) from organisations, researchers, and the general public, there remains no industry standard for how police UOF is trained, and by extension, evaluated. While certain UOF behaviours can be objectively measured (e.g., correct shoot/no shoot decision making (DM), shot accuracy), the subjective evaluation of many UOF skills (e.g., situation awareness, SA) falls to the discretion of individual instructors. The aim of the current brief communication is to consider the operationalisation of essential UOF behaviours as objective and subjective measures, respectively. Using longitudinal data from a sample of Canadian police officers (n = 57) evaluated during UOF training scenarios, we discuss how objective and subjective measures reflect changes in officer performance over time. Objective lethal force DM was measured as a binary ‘correct–incorrect’ outcome and subjective SA was measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘unacceptable’ to ‘exceptional’. Subjective evaluation of SA demonstrated significant changes over time, while DM remained relatively high and stable. Given the practical and professional implications of UOF, we recommend that a combination of objective and subjective measures is systematically implemented at all stages of police UOF training and evaluation (i.e., basic, advanced, in-service). MDPI 2021-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8157287/ /pubmed/34069786 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105351 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Communication Di Nota, Paula M. Chan, Jennifer F. Huhta, Juha-Matti Andersen, Judith P. Considering Objective and Subjective Measures for Police Use of Force Evaluation |
title | Considering Objective and Subjective Measures for Police Use of Force Evaluation |
title_full | Considering Objective and Subjective Measures for Police Use of Force Evaluation |
title_fullStr | Considering Objective and Subjective Measures for Police Use of Force Evaluation |
title_full_unstemmed | Considering Objective and Subjective Measures for Police Use of Force Evaluation |
title_short | Considering Objective and Subjective Measures for Police Use of Force Evaluation |
title_sort | considering objective and subjective measures for police use of force evaluation |
topic | Communication |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8157287/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34069786 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105351 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dinotapaulam consideringobjectiveandsubjectivemeasuresforpoliceuseofforceevaluation AT chanjenniferf consideringobjectiveandsubjectivemeasuresforpoliceuseofforceevaluation AT huhtajuhamatti consideringobjectiveandsubjectivemeasuresforpoliceuseofforceevaluation AT andersenjudithp consideringobjectiveandsubjectivemeasuresforpoliceuseofforceevaluation |