Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Corsaro, N., Brunson, R. K., & McGarrell, E. F. (2013). Problem-oriented policing and open-air drug markets: Examining the Rockford pulling levers deterrence strategy. Crime & Delinquency, 59(7), 1085–1107.

Abstract: Problem-oriented policing strategies have been regarded as promising approaches for disrupting open-air drug markets in vulnerable communities. Pulling levers deterrence interventions, which are consistent with the problem-oriented framework, have shown potential as an effective mechanism for reducing and preventing youth, gun, and gang violence. This study examines the effect of a strategic, pulling levers intervention that was implemented by law enforcement officials in Rockford, Illinois, to address drug markets in a high crime neighborhood. The initiative builds on a similar effort developed in High Point, North Carolina, and represents an extension of pulling levers that was originally developed in Boston. The impact evaluation uses a mixed method of quantitative hierarchical growth curve models and qualitative interviews with residents. Study findings suggest that the Rockford strategy was associated with a statistically significant and substantive reduction in crime, drug, and nuisance offenses in the target neighborhood. Results from this examination have implications for both research and public policy.

Questions to Consider:

1. In Rockford, the pulling-levers deterrence message and social services were provided to a small group of five suspected drug offenders. Do you think that there is a critical mass of offenders that must be reached for the pulling-levers strategy to work? Would you assume that reaching additional offenders is more beneficial, or is it safe to assume that those reached will communicate with others the consequences of continued offending?
    

Lum, C., Telep, C. W., Koper, C. S., & Grieco, J. (2012). Receptivity to research in policing. Justice Research and Policy, 14(1), 61–95.

Abstract: Evidence-based policing—using research and scientific processes to inform police decisions—is a complex approach to policing that involves various challenges. One primary difficulty is how research can be translated into digestible and familiar forms for practitioners. A central part of successful translation is the receptivity of decision makers to research as well as how research is presented and packaged to increase receptivity. In this article we first discuss the complexity of evidence-based policing, highlighting the much-lamented gap between research and practice. We review research from other disciplines and also in policing about what contributes to research being better received and used by practitioners. We then describe our own receptivity survey, offering preliminary findings about the receptivity of officers to research, researchers, and tactics influenced by research. Finally, we conclude with examples of the types of efforts practitioners and researchers can engage in that might improve receptivity to research. Specifically, we discuss the Evidence-Based Policing Matrix as a research translation tool, as well as multiple demonstrations conducted by the authors that focus on institutionalizing the use of research into daily police activities.

Questions to Consider:

1. The authors do not offer higher education as a cure-all to some of the challenges of translating research into policy. Nevertheless, do you believe that a college degree fosters a greater appreciation for science, more generally? Does a degree in a criminal-justice-related field help with translating research into practice for those who enter the policing field? Explain.
    

Willis, J. J. (2013). First-line supervision and strategic decision making under Compstat and community policing. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 24(2), 235–256.

Abstract: Compstat and community policing are powerful movements in U.S. police reform. Although different in important respects, both are heralded for being strategic, or strengthening a police organization’s capacity to detect changes in crime and disorder and respond effectively. Using data from six focus groups, this study examines how first-line supervisors reported making decisions and offering guidance on crime and disorder problems. Its major finding is that co-implementation of these reforms had affected supervision unevenly. A challenge to policymakers and researchers is to reconsider how patrol supervision in co-implementing departments might be restructured to strengthen the strategic dimensions of both reforms.

Questions to Consider:

1. Many of the discussions of accountability in CompStat center on upper-level managers, not frontline supervisors. Is it possibility to dramatically increase a sergeant’s accountability for officer performance when the sergeant, unlike a precinct commander, is less likely to be questioned by superiors? How?