Cargando…

FAST Policing by Telephone: a Randomised Controlled Trial

RESEARCH QUESTION: Can caller satisfaction and trust in police be improved (or equalled), after police agree to send a police car to meet with a caller face-to-face, by the alternative of immediate transfer of the call to a police officer who speaks to the caller at length by telephone? DATA: A tota...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rothwell, Stacey, McFadzien, Kent, Strang, Heather, Kumar, Sumit, Hooper, Graham, Pughsley, Alan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9447353/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41887-022-00083-w
_version_ 1784783839433850880
author Rothwell, Stacey
McFadzien, Kent
Strang, Heather
Kumar, Sumit
Hooper, Graham
Pughsley, Alan
author_facet Rothwell, Stacey
McFadzien, Kent
Strang, Heather
Kumar, Sumit
Hooper, Graham
Pughsley, Alan
author_sort Rothwell, Stacey
collection PubMed
description RESEARCH QUESTION: Can caller satisfaction and trust in police be improved (or equalled), after police agree to send a police car to meet with a caller face-to-face, by the alternative of immediate transfer of the call to a police officer who speaks to the caller at length by telephone? DATA: A total of 1016 calls for police service to 999 or 101 assigned by call takers as falling into a “medium” priority category were checked for eligibility, including consent of the caller to speak immediately to a police officer by phone if possible. Eligible offence types excluded domestic abuse but included a variety of other matters. A majority (57.7%) of eligible cases were about threats made by neighbours, workplace colleagues or others known to the caller. A total of 450 cases were selected as eligible for the test sample out of a total of assessed as potentially eligible. METHODS: Eligible cases were randomly assigned to either a control group (N = 225) of business as usual (BAU) attempts to provide a face-to-face meeting with a police officer, or the experimental group (N = 225) receiving immediate telephone transfer to a police officer who talked with the caller for over an hour as the initial police response. Analyses were done by intention-to-treat. While 99.75% (N = 249/250) of the experimental cases were treated as assigned, only about half of the 225 control cases actually received a face-to-face meeting with a police officer. All 450 assigned callers who gave consent to enter the experiment were contacted for a satisfaction survey at least 14 days following random assignment of the cases, from which the completion rate was 72.5% (almost identical in the two treatment groups). FINDINGS: Eligible, consenting callers reported substantially higher levels of being “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the experimental police response by telephone (92.6%) than with the BAU efforts to arrange a face-to-face meeting between a police officer and the caller (68.9%). Trust and confidence in Kent police declined among 21% of callers receiving BAU service, but only 9% of callers given immediate telephone service. The median time from the initial call to a conversation between police and caller was under 1 min for the experimental treatment vs. 2721 min for the 80% of BAU control treatments in which any conversation between an officer and a caller occurred within 96 h after the call. CONCLUSION: This first experiment in a research collaboration on FAST (Finding Alternative and Speedier Tactics) policing has opened the door to further tests of immediate response by remote communications (Rothwell, et al. Cambridge Journal of Evidence-Based Policing, 6, 1–24, 2022). For the kinds of cases included in this experiment, there is a clear preference by callers for the speedier service by a simple phone call over much slower attempts to provide a face-to-face meeting. If broadly adopted across many other high-volume, low-harm categories of requests for police service, fast policing by phone, video or silent live-chat online could improve public approval of policing while allowing more time for police to prevent more serious crimes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9447353
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94473532022-09-06 FAST Policing by Telephone: a Randomised Controlled Trial Rothwell, Stacey McFadzien, Kent Strang, Heather Kumar, Sumit Hooper, Graham Pughsley, Alan Camb J Evid Based Polic Research Article RESEARCH QUESTION: Can caller satisfaction and trust in police be improved (or equalled), after police agree to send a police car to meet with a caller face-to-face, by the alternative of immediate transfer of the call to a police officer who speaks to the caller at length by telephone? DATA: A total of 1016 calls for police service to 999 or 101 assigned by call takers as falling into a “medium” priority category were checked for eligibility, including consent of the caller to speak immediately to a police officer by phone if possible. Eligible offence types excluded domestic abuse but included a variety of other matters. A majority (57.7%) of eligible cases were about threats made by neighbours, workplace colleagues or others known to the caller. A total of 450 cases were selected as eligible for the test sample out of a total of assessed as potentially eligible. METHODS: Eligible cases were randomly assigned to either a control group (N = 225) of business as usual (BAU) attempts to provide a face-to-face meeting with a police officer, or the experimental group (N = 225) receiving immediate telephone transfer to a police officer who talked with the caller for over an hour as the initial police response. Analyses were done by intention-to-treat. While 99.75% (N = 249/250) of the experimental cases were treated as assigned, only about half of the 225 control cases actually received a face-to-face meeting with a police officer. All 450 assigned callers who gave consent to enter the experiment were contacted for a satisfaction survey at least 14 days following random assignment of the cases, from which the completion rate was 72.5% (almost identical in the two treatment groups). FINDINGS: Eligible, consenting callers reported substantially higher levels of being “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the experimental police response by telephone (92.6%) than with the BAU efforts to arrange a face-to-face meeting between a police officer and the caller (68.9%). Trust and confidence in Kent police declined among 21% of callers receiving BAU service, but only 9% of callers given immediate telephone service. The median time from the initial call to a conversation between police and caller was under 1 min for the experimental treatment vs. 2721 min for the 80% of BAU control treatments in which any conversation between an officer and a caller occurred within 96 h after the call. CONCLUSION: This first experiment in a research collaboration on FAST (Finding Alternative and Speedier Tactics) policing has opened the door to further tests of immediate response by remote communications (Rothwell, et al. Cambridge Journal of Evidence-Based Policing, 6, 1–24, 2022). For the kinds of cases included in this experiment, there is a clear preference by callers for the speedier service by a simple phone call over much slower attempts to provide a face-to-face meeting. If broadly adopted across many other high-volume, low-harm categories of requests for police service, fast policing by phone, video or silent live-chat online could improve public approval of policing while allowing more time for police to prevent more serious crimes. Springer International Publishing 2022-09-06 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9447353/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41887-022-00083-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research Article
Rothwell, Stacey
McFadzien, Kent
Strang, Heather
Kumar, Sumit
Hooper, Graham
Pughsley, Alan
FAST Policing by Telephone: a Randomised Controlled Trial
title FAST Policing by Telephone: a Randomised Controlled Trial
title_full FAST Policing by Telephone: a Randomised Controlled Trial
title_fullStr FAST Policing by Telephone: a Randomised Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed FAST Policing by Telephone: a Randomised Controlled Trial
title_short FAST Policing by Telephone: a Randomised Controlled Trial
title_sort fast policing by telephone: a randomised controlled trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9447353/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41887-022-00083-w
work_keys_str_mv AT rothwellstacey fastpolicingbytelephonearandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT mcfadzienkent fastpolicingbytelephonearandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT strangheather fastpolicingbytelephonearandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT kumarsumit fastpolicingbytelephonearandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hoopergraham fastpolicingbytelephonearandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT pughsleyalan fastpolicingbytelephonearandomisedcontrolledtrial