Item Details

Print View

Multi-Method Evaluation of Police Use of Force Outcomes [electronic resource]: Cities, Counties, and National, 1998-2007 [United States]

Geoffrey P. Alpert, Michael R. Smith, Lorie Fridell
Format
Computer Resource; Online; Dataset
Published
Ann Arbor, Mich. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] 2011
Edition
2011-04-28
Series
ICPSR
ICPSR (Series)
Access Restriction
AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to investigate how and why injuries occur to police and citizens during use of force events. The research team conducted a national survey (Part 1) of a stratified random sample of United States law enforcement agencies regarding the deployment of, policies for, and training with less lethal technologies. Finalized surveys were mailed in July 2006 to 950 law enforcement agencies, and a total of 518 law enforcement agencies provided information on less lethal force generally and on their deployment and policies regarding conducted energy devices (CEDs) in particular. A total of 292 variables are included in the National Use of Force Survey Data (Part 1) including items about weapons deployment, force policies, training, force reporting/review, force incidents and outcomes, and conducted energy devices (CEDs). Researchers also collected agency-supplied use of force data from law enforcement agencies in Richland County, South Carolina; Miami-Dade, Florida; and Seattle, Washington; to identify individual and situational predictors of injuries to officers and citizens during use of force events. The Richland County, South Carolina Data (Part 2) include 441 use-of-force reports from January 2005 through July 2006. Part 2 contains 17 variables including whether the officer or suspect was injured, 8 measures of officer force, 3 measures of suspect resistance, the number of witnesses and officers present at each incident, and the number of suspects that resisted or assaulted officers for each incident. The Miami-Dade County, Florida Data (Part 3) consist of 762 use-of-force incidents that occurred between January 2002 and May 2006. Part 3 contains 15 variables, including 4 measures of officer force, the most serious resistance on the part of the suspect, whether the officer or suspect was injured, whether the suspect was impaired by drugs or alcohol, the officer's length of service in years, and several demographic variables pertaining to the suspect and officer. The Seattle, Washington Data (Part 4) consist of 676 use-of-force incidents that occurred between December 1, 2005, as 15 variables, including 3 measures of officer force, whether the suspect or officer was injured, whether the suspect was impaired by drugs or alcohol, whether the suspect used, or threatened to use, physical force against the officer(s), and several demographic variables relating to the suspect and officer(s). The researchers obtained use of force survey data from several large departments representing different types of law enforcement agencies (municipal, county, sheriff's department) in different states. The research team combined use of force data from multiple agencies into a single dataset. This Multiagency Use of Force Data (Part 5) includes 24,928 use-of-force incidents obtained from 12 law enforcement agencies from 1998 through 2007. Part 5 consists a total of 21 variables, including the year the incident took place, demographic variables relating to the suspect, the type of force used by the officer, whether the suspect or officer was injured, and 5 measures of the department's policy regarding the use of CEDs and pepper spray. Lastly, longitudinal data were also collected for the Orlando, Florida and Austin, Texas police departments. The Orlando, Florida Longitudinal Data (Part 6) comprise 4,222 use-of-force incidents aggregated to 108 months -- a 9 year period from 1998 through 2006. Finally, the Austin, Texas Longitudinal Data (Part 7) include 6,596 force incidents aggregated over 60 months- a 5 year period from 2002 through 2006. Part 6 and Part 7 are comprised of seven variables documenting whether a Taser was implemented, the number of suspects and officers injured in a month, the number of force incidents per month, and the number of CEDs uses per month.Cf: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25781.v1
Contents
  • National Use of Force Survey Data
  • Richland County, South Carolina Data
  • Miami-Dade County, Florida Data
  • Seattle, Washington Data
  • Multiagency Use of Force Data
  • Orlando, Florida Longitudinal Data
  • Austin, Texas Longitudinal Data
Description
Mode of access: Intranet.
Notes
Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2016-02-11.
Series Statement
ICPSR 25781
ICPSR (Series) 25781
Other Forms
Also available as downloadable files.
Copyright Not EvaluatedCopyright Not Evaluated
Technical Details
  • Staff View

    LEADER 06855cmm a2200589la 4500
    001 ICPSR25781
    003 MiAaI
    006 m f a u
    007 cr mn mmmmuuuu
    008 160211s2011 miu f a eng d
    035
      
      
    a| (MiAaI)ICPSR25781
    040
      
      
    a| MiAaI c| MiAaI
    245
    0
    0
    a| Multi-Method Evaluation of Police Use of Force Outcomes h| [electronic resource] b| Cities, Counties, and National, 1998-2007 [United States] c| Geoffrey P. Alpert, Michael R. Smith, Lorie Fridell
    250
      
      
    a| 2011-04-28
    260
      
      
    a| Ann Arbor, Mich. b| Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor] c| 2011
    490
      
      
    a| ICPSR v| 25781
    516
      
      
    a| Numeric
    538
      
      
    a| Mode of access: Intranet.
    500
      
      
    a| Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2016-02-11.
    536
      
      
    a| United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice c| 2005-IJ-CX-0056
    506
      
      
    a| AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.
    530
      
      
    a| Also available as downloadable files.
    522
      
      
    a| Austin
    522
      
      
    a| Florida
    522
      
      
    a| Orlando
    522
      
      
    a| Seattle
    522
      
      
    a| South Carolina
    522
      
      
    a| Texas
    522
      
      
    a| United States
    522
      
      
    a| Washington
    520
    3
      
    a| The purpose of the study was to investigate how and why injuries occur to police and citizens during use of force events. The research team conducted a national survey (Part 1) of a stratified random sample of United States law enforcement agencies regarding the deployment of, policies for, and training with less lethal technologies. Finalized surveys were mailed in July 2006 to 950 law enforcement agencies, and a total of 518 law enforcement agencies provided information on less lethal force generally and on their deployment and policies regarding conducted energy devices (CEDs) in particular. A total of 292 variables are included in the National Use of Force Survey Data (Part 1) including items about weapons deployment, force policies, training, force reporting/review, force incidents and outcomes, and conducted energy devices (CEDs). Researchers also collected agency-supplied use of force data from law enforcement agencies in Richland County, South Carolina; Miami-Dade, Florida; and Seattle, Washington; to identify individual and situational predictors of injuries to officers and citizens during use of force events. The Richland County, South Carolina Data (Part 2) include 441 use-of-force reports from January 2005 through July 2006. Part 2 contains 17 variables including whether the officer or suspect was injured, 8 measures of officer force, 3 measures of suspect resistance, the number of witnesses and officers present at each incident, and the number of suspects that resisted or assaulted officers for each incident. The Miami-Dade County, Florida Data (Part 3) consist of 762 use-of-force incidents that occurred between January 2002 and May 2006. Part 3 contains 15 variables, including 4 measures of officer force, the most serious resistance on the part of the suspect, whether the officer or suspect was injured, whether the suspect was impaired by drugs or alcohol, the officer's length of service in years, and several demographic variables pertaining to the suspect and officer. The Seattle, Washington Data (Part 4) consist of 676 use-of-force incidents that occurred between December 1, 2005, as 15 variables, including 3 measures of officer force, whether the suspect or officer was injured, whether the suspect was impaired by drugs or alcohol, whether the suspect used, or threatened to use, physical force against the officer(s), and several demographic variables relating to the suspect and officer(s). The researchers obtained use of force survey data from several large departments representing different types of law enforcement agencies (municipal, county, sheriff's department) in different states. The research team combined use of force data from multiple agencies into a single dataset. This Multiagency Use of Force Data (Part 5) includes 24,928 use-of-force incidents obtained from 12 law enforcement agencies from 1998 through 2007. Part 5 consists a total of 21 variables, including the year the incident took place, demographic variables relating to the suspect, the type of force used by the officer, whether the suspect or officer was injured, and 5 measures of the department's policy regarding the use of CEDs and pepper spray. Lastly, longitudinal data were also collected for the Orlando, Florida and Austin, Texas police departments. The Orlando, Florida Longitudinal Data (Part 6) comprise 4,222 use-of-force incidents aggregated to 108 months -- a 9 year period from 1998 through 2006. Finally, the Austin, Texas Longitudinal Data (Part 7) include 6,596 force incidents aggregated over 60 months- a 5 year period from 2002 through 2006. Part 6 and Part 7 are comprised of seven variables documenting whether a Taser was implemented, the number of suspects and officers injured in a month, the number of force incidents per month, and the number of CEDs uses per month.Cf: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25781.v1
    505
      
      
    t| National Use of Force Survey Data
    505
      
      
    t| Richland County, South Carolina Data
    505
      
      
    t| Miami-Dade County, Florida Data
    505
      
      
    t| Seattle, Washington Data
    505
      
      
    t| Multiagency Use of Force Data
    505
      
      
    t| Orlando, Florida Longitudinal Data
    505
      
      
    t| Austin, Texas Longitudinal Data
    567
      
      
    a| All law enforcement agencies in the United States in 2005 (Part 1); All use-of-force incidents in Richland County, South Carolina, from January 2005 through July 2006 (Part 2); All use-of-force incidents in Miami-Dade County, Florida, from January 2002 through May 2006 (Part 3); All use-of-force incidents in Seattle, Washington, from December 2005 through October 2006 (Part 4); All use-of-force incidents reported by 12 police agencies from January 1998 through December 2006 (Part 5); All use-of-force incidents in Orlando, Florida, from January 1998 through December 2006 (Part 6); All use-of-force incidents in Austin, Texas, from January 2002 through December 2006 (Part 7).
    650
      
    7
    a| police 2| icpsr
    650
      
    7
    a| police equipment 2| icpsr
    650
      
    7
    a| police response 2| icpsr
    650
      
    7
    a| police use of force 2| icpsr
    650
      
    7
    a| police weapons 2| icpsr
    653
    0
      
    a| NACJD IX. Police
    653
    0
      
    a| ICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice System
    700
    2
      
    a| Alpert, Geoffrey P. u| University of South Carolina
    700
    2
      
    a| Smith, Michael R. u| University of South Carolina
    700
    2
      
    a| Fridell, Lorie u| University of South Florida
    710
    2
      
    a| Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.
    830
      
    0
    a| ICPSR (Series) v| 25781
    856
    4
    0
    u| http://proxy01.its.virginia.edu/login?url=http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25781.v1
    999
      
      
    w| WEB l| INTERNET m| UVA-LIB t| INTERNET
▾See more
▴See less

Availability

Access Online