help with research paper
Bassmy
art4.pdf
JUSTICE QUARTERLY VOLUME 26 NUMBER 3 (SEPTEMBER 2009)
ISSN 0741-8825 print/1745-9109 online/09/030592-32 © 2009 Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences DOI: 10.1080/07418820802427825
Striking Out: Race and Support for Police Use of Force
Devon Johnson and Joseph B. Kuhns Taylor and FrancisRJQY_A_342950.sgm10.1080/07418820802427825Justice Quarterly0741-8825 (print)/1745-9109 (online)Original Article2009Taylor & Francis0000000002009Dr [email protected]
This research examines whites’ and blacks’ support for police use of force using a survey-based experiment that varies the race of the offender across four different scenarios. Bivariate results show that the race of the offender influ- ences blacks’ approval for the use of force by police, but does not affect whites’ approval. Multivariate analyses examine whether the factors influencing support for police use of force vary depending on the race of the offender. Results indicate that the predictors for approval of police use of force differ by the race of respondent, the race of offender, and the appropriateness of the use of force. The implications of the results for police–community relations are discussed.
Keywords race; police; use of force; attitude
Introduction
The manner in which police interact with the public is crucial for shaping percep- tions of police legitimacy and effectiveness. Factors like tone, demeanor, will- ingness to explain decisions, and the use of force influence perceptions of the police, affect the public’s willingness to assist police (Sunshine & Tyler, 2003), and have important implications for compliance with legal authority. People are more likely to comply with the law, even laws they believe are unfair, when they view the law and legal authorities as legitimate (Tyler, 1990).
One aspect of the law enforcement process that has raised significant concerns about the legitimacy of police, particularly in minority communities, is
Devon Johnson is an Assistant Professor of Administration of Justice at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. Her current research focuses on punishment preferences and public perceptions of crime and the police in the United States and in Trinidad & Tobago. Joseph B. Kuhns is an Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at the University of North Carolina Charlotte. His current research focuses on drug-violence relationships and on police use of force, firearms, and non-lethal weapons in the United States and abroad. Correspondence to: Devon Johnson, Administration of Justice Department, George Mason University, 10900 University Blvd, Manassas, VA 20110, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 593
the use of force. Indeed, the often tense relationship between the police and black Americans is partly rooted in concerns about police racial bias and brutality in black communities (Bayley & Mendelsohn, 1968; Brunson, 2007; Mann, 1993; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). Incidents of alleged and documented police brutality against members of minority groups have a long history (Hawkins & Thomas, 1991), and anger over police (mis)use of force has triggered several major civil disturbances since the 1960s. Incidents where white police officers are accused of using unreasonable or excessive force against black suspects, such as the 1991 beating of Rodney King in Los Angeles, the 1992 beating death of Malice Green in Detroit, and the 1999 shooting death of Amadou Diallo in New York City, are especially newsworthy, and well-publicized incidents of police brutality significantly influence attitudes toward the police (Weitzer, 2002).
Previous research has documented racial differences in approval for police use of force. Studies show that black Americans are much less likely than white Americans to approve of police use of force (Arthur & Case, 1994; Flanagan & Vaughn, 1996; Halim & Stiles, 2001; Thompson & Lee, 2004; Williams, Thomas, & Smith, 1983), a pattern which holds true across a range of situations, including the use of deadly force (Cullen et al., 1996). To expand on this literature, and more closely examine the contours of whites’ and blacks’ attitudes toward police use of force, we use a survey-based experiment from the 2001 Race, Crime and Public Opinion Study (RCPOS) that varies the race of an offender across four differ- ent scenarios. This research focuses on two main questions: (1) does approval for police use of force vary depending on the race of the offender? and (2) do the factors that explain approval for the use of force vary based on the race of the offender? We are particularly interested in the influence of two predictor variables: perceived racial bias in policing and negative racial stereotyping.
Background
Police Legitimacy, Effectiveness, and Use of Force
In order for policing to be most effective, it must occur within the context and limitations of the law, and should be delivered in ways that are not overly reli- ant on police powers (Tyler, 2006). Tyler (2004) argues that effective policing requires the support and cooperation of the public, that voluntary citizen support and cooperation are linked to perceptions of legitimacy, and that public assessments of the legitimacy of police actions depend on the manner and methods in which police exercise their legally based authority.
Citizen assessments and subsequent compliance are often directly linked to perceptions of fairness (Tyler & Huo, 2002), respectful treatment of citizens (Mastrofski, Snipes, & Supina, 1996), neutrality in dealing with citizen encoun- ters, and equity in enforcing the law. Ultimately, increased legitimacy facilitates greater public trust in police, which is important to both citizens (Tyler, 1990) and the police (Herbert, 2006) and a necessary component of a successful democracy.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
594 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
Given the important role that the use of force plays in shaping public percep- tions of police and in the policing process, it has received significant scholarly (Alpert & Dunham, 2004; Kinnaird, 2003; Skolnick & Fyfe, 1993), legal (Smith, 1998), and law enforcement leadership attention (Geller & Toch, 1995; Interna- tional Associations of Chiefs of Police, 2001). Although a comprehensive review of the use of force literature is beyond the scope of this project, a few highlights will help contextualize the present research questions.
Alpert and Dunham (2004) identified three distinct eras which helped to define and describe police actions regarding the use of force: (1) the era of non- regulation, when police operated independently and with internal or external little oversight; (2) the era of self-regulation, when professionalism and reform philosophies forced leaders and police organizations to self-assess; and (3) the era of external regulation (which presumably is occurring now) that involves court, citizen board, government commission, and even social science oversight and review of police activities regarding the use of force.
Studies show that although police are authorized to use force to apprehend offenders and protect citizens, officers actually use force fairly infrequently, even within the context of making arrests (Adams, 1996; Alpert & Dunham, 2004). As an example, a federally funded study of the Phoenix Police Depart- ment found that police only used physical force in about one of every five adult custody arrests over a two-week timeframe. Further, police sometimes chose not to use force even though force was authorized (20% of the incidents), the force used was typically at the low end of the force continuum scale, and use of weapons was particularly rare (occurring in about 2% of the encounters), with a flashlight being the most commonly used police weapon (Garner, Buchanan, Schade, & Hepburn, 1996). Yet another study of over 7,500 adult arrests in six moderate to large U.S. jurisdictions found that force was used in about 12–17% of the arrests, depending on how force was measured. Again, most of the force applied was at the lower end of the scale (Garner & Maxwell, 2002). A much broader study by the International Associations of Chiefs of Police (IACP), using data from over 500 police U.S. departments, determined that police did not use any force in 99.9639% of police–citizen contacts or incidents (not just arrests) that were reported in 1999 (International Associations of Chiefs of Police, 2001). Finally, a nationally representative survey of U.S. citizens confirmed that about one quarter of one percent of all police–citizen contacts involved any police use or threat of force (Greenfield, Langan, Smith, & Kaminski, 1997). The use of force rates noted in these studies vary depending on how force is measured (e.g., deadly force incidents, force that results in suspect injury, use of force that officers report on internal organizational forms, or citizens perceptions of force), the circumstances under which police activities are being reviewed (e.g., police encounters, traffic stops, adult arrests, or multiple types of encounters), the variety of weapons that are available to officers (e.g., some agencies have TASERs, others do not), and the training and policies used in the various departments.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 595
Despite the infrequency of police use of force, citizens and police alike remain attentive to the issue. One area of particular concern for both groups is the illegitimate use of force, including unreasonable or excessive force (Skolnick & Fyfe, 1993). According to the literature, there is not a shared consensus about what constitutes unreasonable or excessive force. These two important terms or concepts are rather difficult to define (Adams, 1999) and are quite subjective (Alpert & Smith, 1994), varying among citizens (Adams, 1996), officers (Weisburd, Greenspan, Hamilton, Bryant, & Williams, 2001) and departments (International Association of Chiefs of Police, 2001).1 Further, police use of force is often measured on a continuum, whereby officers are trained to increase force (and correspondingly change tactics and/or weapons up to the use of deadly force) as circumstances dictate and as additional measures become necessary to secure a situation or an individual (Garner et al., 1996).2 In general, the prevalence of excessive use of force varies across data sources (with higher rates reported in citizen surveys and field observations than in official police data), but is very low overall (Adams, 1996).
Another major area of concern for the public and for law enforcement is racial bias in the application of police use of force. Again, however, the evidence is not clear-cut. Past research has established that minorities (and particularly black men) are more likely than whites to be the victims of police use of deadly force, especially by firearm (Fyfe, 1982), but findings on racial differences in the use of non-lethal force are inconsistent (Adams, 1996; Weisburd et al., 2001). For example, a Phoenix study indicated that the race of
1. In the landmark case of Graham v. Conner (1989), the U.S. Supreme Court determined that using force to facilitate an arrest must be “objectively reasonable in view of all the facts and circum- stances of each particular case…” including the severity of the crime, the threat the suspect poses to officers and others, and whether the suspect is attempting to resist arrest or escape altogether. The “totality of the circumstances” calculus of reasonableness under Graham allows for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments—in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation. Further, a reasonable officer is generally defined as one who is properly trained in the legal aspects of policing and police practices regarding the use of force. Using this “reasonable man” standard, however, still leaves plenty of room for subjectivity in defining what is and is not reasonable. For example, Ross (2002) presents an assessment of over 1,200 published cases from lower federal court decisions following the Graham decision. In essence, there were substantial variations in lower court interpretations of the Graham decision, of objective reasonableness, and of the legitimacy of police use of force in a wide variety of situations. There were also substantial variations based on the type and level of force used. 2. In Tennessee v. Garner (1985) the U.S. Supreme Court provided some clarity on appropriate and inappropriate use of force (see Smith, 1998 for a summary of lower court cases in which deadly force was and was not authorized). In essence, Tennessee v. Garner prohibited police from using deadly force when a suspect was attempting to flee and he/she did not pose a significant and imme- diate threat of death or serious bodily harm to officers or others. However, deadly force and exces- sive force are not necessarily synonymous; an officer might use excessive force, but it may not be deadly force. According to Ross (2002), many lower federal courts wrestled with further defining and interpreting what excessive force means after the Graham decision, deciding where force was reasonable or excessive across four general categories of cases representing the various methods by which police typically use force in effecting arrests. Those categories included empty-hand control techniques (which can include hitting), use of handcuffs, use of implements (including batons, flash- lights, etc.), and lethal force (firearms).
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
596 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
the officer or the suspect played no role in predicting police use of force when controlling for a number of variables related to use of force decisions (Garner et al., 1996, p. 8). In contrast, a study of over 1,038 official control-of-persons reports from the Miami-Dade Police Department determined that officers were generally more likely to use force with suspects within their own racial group, but that the level of force used was sometimes correlated to race of the officer and/or the suspect (Alpert & Dunham, 2004).
Considered collectively, it is apparent that police data are mixed or incom- plete. This is partly due to the fact that data collected in one jurisdiction may not be generalizable to other departments, and because multiple factors that influence police use of force and may help account for racial differences—such as suspect demeanor, physical resistance, neighborhood context, officer experi- ence, and the supervisory style of police officials (Cao, 1999; Engel, 2003; Garner et al., 1996; Garner & Maxwell, 2002; Terrill, 2003; Terrill & Reisig, 2003)—are not included in all analyses. Moving beyond police data, Schmitt, Langan, and Durose (2002) found that blacks accounted for 10.6% of the drivers stopped by police nationwide in 1999, yet made up 22.4% of those who indi- cated that police used force during the stop. Similarly, members of minority groups are disproportionately represented among those who file official complaints (Lersch, 2001; Pate & Fridell, 1993) or report police abuse of force during police–citizen contacts (Langan, Greenfeld, Smith, Durose, & Levin, 2001).
In sum, while the literature on police use of force is extensive, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the true nature and extent of the problem. However, as Locke (1995) points out, public perceptions about police use of force may be just as important from a public policy and law enforcement perspective as the issue itself. Moreover, public perceptions of what constitutes reasonable or excessive use of force may differ from the determinations set out in police regulations and court decisions.3 Therefore, in addition to objectively measuring police use of force, including whether police use force differentially across racial groups, it is important to measure and understand public attitudes toward police use of force. Indeed, public perceptions that the police act in an appropriate and just manner—or that they do not act appropriately—have signif- icant implications for the legitimacy of the police and their ability to effectively carry out their duties.
Attitudes toward Police Use of Force
Public opinion polls and a handful of academic studies have examined public attitudes toward police use of force. Two trends stand out in this body of
3. Unlike officers, citizens are not trained in the proper and improper use of force and they gener- ally have limited experience in such situations. Thus, it is possible that situations may occur where police officers are acting lawfully and using force appropriately, but citizens nevertheless perceive their actions as unjust.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 597
research, and have remained consistent over time. First, there is a significant racial divide. Whites are more likely to favor police use of force than are blacks, and blacks are more likely than whites to perceive unequal application of the use of force. Second, the context of the situation matters. Public approval for police use of force is higher in situations where force might be considered reasonable (e.g., when an officer faces physical danger) and lower in situations where force might be considered excessive.
Previous research on attitudes toward the police has documented significant racial differences in perceptions of the police, with black Americans (adults and juveniles alike) holding more negative views of the police than white Americans (Hurst, Frank, & Browning, 2000; Smith & Hawkins, 1973; Taylor, Turner, Esbensen, & Winfree, 2001; Tuch & Weitzer, 1997).4 Studies focused specifically on attitudes toward police use of force report similar racial differences. In their review of public opinion polling data and the academic literature, Flanagan and Vaughn (1996) conclude that whites are more likely than blacks to approve of police using force. Like Flanagan and Vaughn’s research, many of the academic studies on attitudes toward police use of force examined five questions from the General Social Survey (GSS) that measure respondents’ approval for a police officer striking a citizen in a variety of situations. This series of questions has been asked of a random sample of Americans every year since 1973, offering the ability to track attitudinal changes over time.
Using GSS data from 1980, Williams et al. (1983) reported that race was the strongest predictor of public attitudes toward the use of force by police, with whites much more supportive than blacks. Both Arthur and Case (1994) and Halim and Stiles (2001), using GSS data from 1973–1991 and 1973–1994, respec- tively, also found that whites were more approving of police use of force than were blacks. This trend continued through at least the late 1990s, based on the analysis of 1996 GSS data conducted by Wilson and Dunham (2001) and the 1998 GSS analysis completed by Thompson and Lee (2004).
Other national-level and city-level research also shows that whites are more likely to approve of the use of deadly force than are blacks. For example, Cullen and his colleagues (1996) examined how support for police use of deadly force varied by the race of respondent. Based on data from a sample of 239 Cincinnati residents, they found that whites were more likely than blacks to approve of the use of legal deadly force (when a suspect exhibiting past dangerousness was fleeing), but less likely than blacks to approve of the use of illegal deadly force (when a non-violent suspect was fleeing).
The second consistent trend in the literature on attitudes toward police use of force is that the context of the situation matters. Cullen et al. (1996) show that support for the use of deadly force varies depending on whether the offender has committed nonviolent crimes or shows evidence of past dangerousness.
4. Research suggests that blacks may have more favorable views of the police than whites in cities like Detroit where blacks are a significant portion of the population and hold positions of authority, such as mayor or police chief (Frank, Brandl, Cullen, & Stichman, 1996).
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
598 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
Similarly, studies using GSS data find that support for police use of force is most pronounced in situations where the officer is being attacked, and lowest in situations where the officer is not physically threatened (Flanagan & Vaughn, 1996; Halim & Stiles, 2001; Thompson & Lee, 2004).
Sources of Support for Police Use of Force
Conflict theory and evidence from previous research suggests that perceived racial bias in policing and negative racial stereotyping may be key factors influ- encing blacks’ and whites’ support for police use of force. In addition, past studies have documented a number of other factors that predict public approval for police use of force. We review the evidence for each factor below.
Following sociologists like Blumer (1958) and Blalock (1967), who promoted theories of group position and group threat, conflict theorists in criminology contend that the criminal justice system operates to protect the interests of the dominant group in society, and to control the behavior of those who may challenge their power (Quinney, 1970; Turk, 1969). As Blauner (1972) and others note, the police play a crucial role in this model, enforcing laws that benefit the dominant group while repressing groups that threaten their power. More contemporary extensions of the conflict perspective argue that police target crime by blacks and other subordinate racial/ethnic groups, and that the crimi- nal justice system treats them more harshly than whites (Chambliss, 1999; Hawkins, 1987; Walker, Spohn, & Delone, 2000). A number of police studies support the group threat/group conflict perspective. For instance, the size of the black population has been shown to affect police spending (Jackson & Carroll, 1981), police strength (Kent & Jacobs, 2005), traffic stops resulting in searches (Petrocelli, Piquero, & Smith, 2003), arrests (Liska, Chamlin, & Reed, 1985), and police use of deadly force (Jacobs & O’Brien, 1998).
Although analyses testing the conflict model have largely focused on the macro-level, group position/conflict theories also apply to micro-level processes, and may help account for racial differences in support for police use of force (Arthur & Case, 1994; Thompson & Lee, 2004; Weitzer & Tuch, 2004). As the dominant group, whites’ approval for police use of force may be associ- ated with out-group prejudice and a desire to maintain the status quo; as the subordinate group, blacks’ support for police use of force may be tempered by a belief that police are biased against them. Evidence from previous research supports this perspective.
Consistent with the conflict perspective, perceptions of racially biased policing likely have a significant effect on attitudes about police use of force, particularly among black Americans. Findings from numerous studies indicate blacks are more likely than whites to perceive racial bias on the part of the police (Hagan & Albonetti, 1982; Hagan, Shedd, & Payne, 2006; Henderson, Cullen, Cao, Browning, & Kopache, 1997; Weitzer & Tuch, 2005, 2006; Wortley, Hagan, & Macmillan, 1997), to have been hassled by police (Browning, Cullen,
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 599
Cao, Kopache, & Stevenson, 1994) and to have personally or vicariously experi- enced police abuse (Weitzer & Tuch, 2004, 2006).
Blacks are also more likely than whites to believe that force is used dispro- portionately against blacks. For example, black residents of New York City were much more likely than their white counterparts to report that NYPD officers “often engage in brutality against blacks” (Weitzer, 2002). Using data from a national survey, Huang and Vaughn (1996) reported that 67% of blacks compared to 40% of whites reported that excessive use of force was a problem in their community. Based on interviews in three different Washington D.C. communi- ties, Weitzer (1999) found that residents of the lower-class black neighborhood reported more frequent incidents of police use of excessive force than residents in the black or white middle-class communities.
Research using experimental methods finds a similar pattern of results. Jefferis, Kaminski, Holmes, and Hanley (1994) found that viewing a controver- sial arrest videotape negatively influenced public perceptions of police use of force, particularly among non-whites. Similarly, using an experimental design that varied the race of an officer arresting a black offender, Levin and Thomas (1997) found that black respondents were more likely than white respondents to perceive violence and illegality on the part of the arresting officer, regardless of the officer’s race. Finally, Hurwitz and Peffley (2005) showed that blacks interpret police–citizen interactions differently based on the race of the citizen and their perceptions of racial fairness in the criminal justice system.
In addition to perceived racial bias, it is also likely that racial stereotyping is an important predictor of attitudes toward police use of force, especially for white respondents. Statistics show that blacks are disproportionately repre- sented among criminal offenders, particularly for homicide (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2006). Negative stereotypes of blacks are prevalent in our society (Smith 1991), and media accounts of crime perpetuate stereotypes of blacks as violent or dangerous by presenting inaccurate depictions of suspected criminals (Entman, 1992; Entman & Rojecki, 2000; Gomes & Williams, 1990; Graber, 1980). A growing body of literature links racial prejudice and stereotyping with whites’ support for punitive criminal penalties (Bobo & Johnson, 2004; Cohn, Barkan, & Halteman, 1991; Hurwitz & Peffley, 1997; Johnson, 2001, 2008; Unnever & Cullen, 2007), spending on crime (Barkan & Cohn, 2005), and, more germane to the current research, attitudes toward police use of force (Barkan & Cohn, 1998; Hurwitz & Peffley, 2005).
To date, only one study has directly addressed the link between racial attitudes and approval for police use of force. Using GSS data, Barkan and Cohn (1998) examined the effects of racial antipathy and stereotyping on whites’ support for police use of both reasonable and excessive force. They found that anti-black racial stereotyping was positively associated with whites’ approval of excessive force, but that it did not influence support for police use of reason- able force. Racial antipathy (measured as preference for social distance) did not have a significant effect on approval for police use of force in either context. Barkan and Cohn interpreted their findings in terms of the liberation hypothesis
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
600 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
(Kalven & Zeisel, 1966), noting that when the appropriateness of police use of force is not clear-cut (i.e., the excessive force context), the door is left open for beliefs like racial prejudice to influence whites’ responses.
Additional Predictors
In addition to perceived racial bias in policing and negative racial stereotyping, previous research on attitudes toward the use of force has identified a number of predictors that will be included as control variables in the following analyses. Past studies indicate that fear of crime (Barkan & Cohn, 1998), having a punitive orientation toward criminals (Arthur, 1993; Arthur & Case, 1994; Williams et al., 1983) and education (Halim & Stiles, 2001) are all positively associated with approval for police use of force. Similarly, Southern residence has also been linked to increased approval for police use of force (Halim & Stiles, 2001). Studies show that gender is an important predictor of attitudes, with men more approving of police use of force than women (Arthur, 1993; Arthur & Case, 1994; Barkan & Cohn, 1998; Thompson & Lee, 2004), while the evidence for age is mixed. Some research finds that age has a negative effect (Arthur, 1993), other studies find a positive effect (Arthur & Case, 1994; Williams et al., 1983), and still others report no effect (Thompson & Lee, 2004).
Extending Previous Research
Prior research has documented several trends in attitudes toward police use of force, as well as numerous factors that help explain support for police use of force. The present study extends previous work on this topic in several important ways to provide a better understanding of the contours of race and support for police use of force.
First, this study goes beyond simple correlations by using a survey-based experiment that varies the race of the offender across four different police– citizen encounter contexts. Survey-based experiments combine the capacity to generalize to important populations characteristic of sample surveys with the experimental control that allows stronger conclusions as to cause and effect (see Kinder & Palfrey, 1993). By experimentally manipulating the race of the offender, this research can determine if approval for police use of force varies for white and black offenders. Based on the results of past studies and the history of police–citizen relations in the USA, we expect that black respondents will be less supportive of police using force when the offender is black than when the offender is white, and that white respondents will be equally or more supportive of police use of force when the offender is black.
Second, many of the studies reviewed above suffer from data and method- ological limitations such as small non-national samples, models that are not fully specified, or national surveys that lack extensive crime-related measures
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 601
or a large number of black respondents. The 2001 RCPOS used here combines large national samples of both black and white respondents with measures of relevant variables such as attitudes toward the police, perceived police racial bias, and racial stereotyping. For this reason, the present study can test the influence of multiple predictor variables on the attitudes of black and white respondents, for black and white offenders, across four different scenarios. We expect that perceived police racial bias will reduce approval of police use of force among both white and black Americans, but expect the effect to be larger for black respondents, particularly in the context of a black offender, and in situations where the use of force may be considered excessive. We expect racial stereotyping to have a positive impact on whites’ approval for police use of force, particularly when the offender is black and when the use of force is considered excessive.
Data and Measures
The data for these analyses come from the 2001 RCPOS (Bobo & Johnson, 2001). The RCPOS is a representative national sample of 978 non-Hispanic white and 1,010 non-Hispanic black respondents living in U.S. households. The survey data were collected by Knowledge Networks, a company which uses an innovative research design that employs a Random Digit Dialing (RDD) telephone methodol- ogy to develop a representative sample of all U.S. households for participation in their online research panel. Once respondents are enrolled in their panel, Knowledge Networks is able to administer survey questionnaires via the Internet to this representative sample.5
Due to the length of the questionnaire, the data were collected in two waves. The first wave of the survey was conducted June 4–20, 2001 with a within-panel response rate of 72% for blacks and 61% for whites. These respon- dents were contacted for the second wave of the survey August 7–20, 2001. The second wave included 725 blacks and 783 whites (a re-interview response rate of 72% and 80%, respectively).6 Only the 1,508 respondents who completed both waves of the survey were included in the following analyses. The data were
5. Every household that participates in the Knowledge Network panel receives free hardware, free Internet access, free e-mail accounts, and ongoing technical support. Multi-media surveys are deliv- ered by e-mail on the same standardized hardware, through a television set, about once a week. More detailed information about Knowledge Networks’ methodology and the RCPOS can be found in the appendix of Bobo and Johnson (2004). 6. Under the most stringent assumptions (taking into account the panel recruitment response rate, the household connection rate, and the within-panel completion rate), the overall response rate was 22% for whites and 25% for blacks. A detailed comparison of the demographic characteristics of the Knowledge Networks panel and of the RCPOS sample with data from the U.S. Census was conducted and indicates that both samples are representative of the national population. Moreover, the demographic characteristics of the respondents who completed Wave 2 closely match those of the respondents who completed Wave 1, indicating that there was no systematic bias in the cases that were lost to attrition. See the appendix in Bobo and Johnson (2004) for a discussion and tables summarizing these comparative analyses.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
602 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
weighted to account for non-response bias and sampling error and were analyzed using ordinary least squares regression.7 Coding for the variables included in the analyses follows, and descriptive statistics are shown in Table 1.
Dependent Variables
The survey-based experiment used in the present study is based on the series of questions from the GSS used in previous research that measures public approval for a police officer striking a citizen in four different situations. To better ensure that respondents had a similar offender in mind, and because young adult males have the highest offending rates, we revised the questions slightly so that the target was a “teenage male” instead of a “citizen.”8 We randomly
7. Knowledge Networks computes post-stratification weights based on Current Population Survey demographic benchmarks (gender, age, race/ethnicity, region, education) to reduce sampling error and bias due to non-response in the fielding of a survey. All weights are scaled to the respective completed sample size. 8. It is possible that respondents may be less approving of police use of force against a teenager than against an adult. For this reason, our data are not directly comparable to the results from past research. However, the percentage of white respondents in this study who approved of police use of force across the four scenarios is quite similar to the results reported by Barkan and Cohn (1998) in their study of white respondents from the GSS, suggesting that the age of the offender (within a certain range) may not have a large influence on attitudes toward police use of force. Whether an offender’s age influences public support for police use of force is an open question for future research.
Table 1 Descriptive statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean SD %
Excessive force index (all) 1486 2 8 3.03 1.38 Reasonable force index (whites) 769 2 8 6.28 1.44 Reasonable force (blacks) 707 1 4 3.24 .87 White 1508 0 1 52 Age 1508 18 92 44.28 16.17 Female 1508 0 1 53 Education 1505 1 9 3.80 1.66 Income 1508 1 17 9.95 4.03 Metropolitan residence 1508 0 1 88 Southern residence 1508 0 1 44 Recent violent victimization 1502 0 1 4 Fear of crime index 1495 2 8 4.07 1.52 Political conservatism 1508 1 5 2.96 .81 Excessive use of force a problem 1489 1 4 2.27 1.02 Perceived police racial bias index 1485 3 12 9.06 2.09 Negative racial stereotyping 1508 0 10 4.43 2.41 Punitive orientation index 1468 3 11 8.70 1.76
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 603
assigned respondents to either Ballot A (“teenage black male”) or Ballot B (“teenage white male”).9 Respondents were asked: Would you approve or disap- prove of a police officer striking a teenage black/white male who: (A) said vulgar and obscene things to the officer? (B) was being questioned as a suspect in a murder case? (C) was attempting to flee custody? and (D) was attacking the police officer with his fists? Response options ranged from 1 (“strongly disap- prove”) to 4 (“strongly approve”). These response options differ from the yes/ no response format of the original items in the GSS.
In their analysis of whites’ attitudes toward police use of force using the GSS, Barkan and Cohn (1998) created two dependent variables—an excessive force index (composed of items A and B, above) and a reasonable force index (composed of items C and D). Following Barkan and Cohn (1998) and supported by principal axis factor analysis using an oblique rotation, we created two dependent variables—a measure of excessive force and a measure of reasonable force. We began with an exploratory factor analysis of the four scenarios, conducted separately for black and white respondents. (Given the significant racial divide on attitudes toward the use of force, we present these and all other analyses separately by race of respondent.) The results of the factor analyses, shown in Table 2, demonstrated that blacks and whites share the same conception of excessive force, but differ in their perceptions of reasonable force. Thus, the measure of reasonable force differs slightly for black and white respondents, as described below.
In each of the factor analyses, two factors emerged. For both whites and blacks, two items cleanly loaded on the excessive force factor with high factor loadings and no cross-loadings: “vulgar language” and “question suspect.” We summed these two items to create the excessive force index.
9. We performed a series of tests for effective ballot randomization, comparing distributions across race, gender, age, education, household income, region of residence, urbanicity, and political ideol- ogy. Of the eight separate tests, only education showed a statistically significant difference across the experimental ballots; those who received the white teenager ballot were slightly more educated than those who received the black teenager ballot.
Table 2 Factor analyses of four police use of force scenarios
White respondents Black respondents
Factor 1 Excessive
Factor 2 Reasonable
Factor 1 Excessive
Factor 2 Reasonable
Said vulgar and obscene things to officer .868 .843 Was being questioned as a suspect in a murder case
.865 .892
Was attempting to flee custody .785 .542 .757 Was attacking the police officer with his fists
.748 .651
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
604 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
The index ranged from 2 to 8, with higher scores indicating greater approval for police use of force. Cronbach’s alpha for this index was .85 for whites and .86 for blacks. Among whites, the remaining two items, “fleeing custody” and “attacking officer,” cleanly loaded on the reasonable force factor with no cross-loadings on the excessive force factor. We summed these two items to create the reasonable force index for whites, which ranged from 2 to 8, with higher scores indicating greater approval for police use of force. Cronbach’s alpha for this index was .72. Among blacks, only the “attacking officer” item cleanly loaded on the reasonable force factor. As shown in Table 2, the “fleeing custody” item had a high loading on the reasonable force factor (.76), but also cross-loaded on the excessive force factor (.54). These results indicate that, for blacks, the “fleeing suspect” scenario is a mixed case. In order to ensure that the dependent variables were empirically distinct, we dropped the “fleeing custody” item. Thus, for blacks, the measure of reason- able force was made up of one item (“attacking officer”). This measure ranged from 1 to 4, with higher scores indicating greater approval for police use of force.10
Independent Variables
Negative racial stereotyping
To measure negative racial stereotyping, respondents were asked to indicate how well the phrase “aggressive or violent” describes blacks as a group on a scale from 0 (labeled “a very inaccurate description”) to 10 (labeled “a very
10. Given the diversity of court decisions on the question of whether striking a fleeing offender constitutes reasonable or excessive force, it is perhaps not surprising that public perceptions on this topic vary. Although the Supreme Court argued for an “objective reasonableness” standard in the Graham decision, Ross’ (2002) analysis of court rulings post-Graham reveals significant variations in what was deemed reasonable or excessive. According to Ross, a variety of lower federal courts held that use of force was reasonable (i.e., not excessive) when an officer/deputy punched a prisoner who was attempting to flee while being transported to jail (Wisniewski v. Kennard, 1990), used a leg sweep to take down a suspect who was resisting arrest (Wallace v. City of Shelby, 1997), used a bear hug to control a resisting arrestee (Hart v. Rogers, 1998), wrestled a fleeing suspect to the ground because the officers thought they were faced with a dangerous fleeing felon (Matasic v. City of Campbell, 1997), hit a suspect in the head with a flashlight because he was attempting to flee following a vehicle pursuit (Carver v. Bulloch, 1990), and used a TASER to restrain an arrestee who was resisting during the issuance of a citation for jaywalking. Considered collectively, it appears that lower federal court interpretations of reasonable force, following the Graham case, consis- tently allowed for an officer to hit a fleeing suspect depending on the totality of the circumstances of the case. These court decisions, coupled with the results of the factor analysis, provide legal and empirical support for including the “fleeing custody” scenario in the reasonable force index for white respondents.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 605
good description”).11 The same or similar measures (such as “prone to violence” or “involved in drugs and gangs”) have been used extensively in prior studies of racial stereotyping across a range of datasets and research topics (e.g., Barkan & Cohn, 2005; Charles, 2000; Devine & Elliot, 1995; Hurwitz & Peffley, 2005; Kinder & Sanders, 1996; Smith, 1991). Approximately, 7% of both the black and white respondents (totaling 7% of the overall sample) refused to answer this question; to save cases, refusals were coded 5, the modal response for both blacks and whites and the neutral midpoint of the scale.12 This measure differs from the GSS items used by Barkan and Cohn (1998), which included the phrases lazy, unintelligent, desirous of living off welfare, and unpatriotic, all of which were measured on a seven-point scale.
Perceived police racial bias
We created the perceived police racial bias index by summing the responses to three items. The question wording and response options were as follows: (1) How
11. The exact introduction to the stereotyping question was as follows: “Here are a few phrases that people sometimes use to describe blacks. Of course, no word or phrase fits absolutely everybody, but indicate how well you think it describes blacks as a group. On this scale, a 10 means it is a very good description of blacks and a 0 means it is a very inaccurate description of blacks. You may not agree with some of the phrases we chose, but please try to answer the question anyway. Some rating—even a neutral score of 5—is better than no rating at all. But, if you feel you absolutely cannot answer the question, go immediately to the Next Question button.” The question format mirrors that used in the GSS, except the RCPOS uses a 0–10 scale instead of a 1–7 scale. As Bobo and Zubrinsky (2000, p. 906) note: “The bipolar trait-rating format has been shown to increase respon- dent comfort in expressing racial/ethnic group distinctions … and to yield reasonably reliable and valid measures of prejudice….” 12. Survey researchers have long been concerned with how to reduce item non-response and to handle missing data in quantitative analyses (e.g., Brick & Kalton, 1996; De Leeuw, 2001). Similarly, scholars have also identified concerns with missing data in criminological research (Brame, 2000; Brame & Pasternoster, 2003). In this cross-sectional survey, negative racial stereotyping was the only independent variable that had any meaningful missing data. We used mode substitution on this variable for three reasons: (1) the mode was the most common answer for both blacks and whites; (2) mean substitution is not truly appropriate because the variable of interest was ordinal; and (3) the mode was also the neutral midpoint of the 0–10 scale. We conducted both parametric (t-test) and non-parametric (Mann-Whitney U) tests for all respondents and for blacks and whites separately on the dependent variables (reasonable and excessive force) for those who completed the stereotype item and those who did not. The results from both tests indicated that there was no significant difference on the dependent variables between those who answered the stereotype item and those who skipped the question. Similarly, chi-square tests indicated there was no significant difference in the distribution of responses on the dependent variables for those who answered the stereotype item and those who did not. As yet another test, we examined how mode substitution would affect the mean if we considered the negative racial stereotyping variable as an interval measure rather than an ordinal measure. When the cases with missing data were excluded, the mean scores on the stereo- typing variable were 4.92 for whites and 3.81 for blacks. When the missing cases were included using mode substitution, the means were 4.93 for whites and 3.89 for blacks. These changes were non- significant, suggesting that using modal substitution did not impact the within-group means. Finally, we reran the primary regression analyses excluding the 7% of cases with missing data on the negative racial stereotyping item. In every model, the results were almost identical to those presented in the tables below, and resulted in the same substantive conclusions. As a result of all of these tests, we concluded that mode substitution was appropriate and had no adverse effect on the findings.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
606 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
much confidence do you have in the police in terms of treating blacks and whites equally? Response options ranged from “a lot of confidence” (coded 1) to “no confidence” (coded 4); (2) It has been reported that some police officers stop motorists of certain racial or ethnic groups because the officers believe that these groups are more likely than others to commit certain types of crimes. Do you believe that this practice, known as racial profiling, is widespread, or not? Response options ranged from “definitely is not widespread (coded 1) to “definitely is widespread” (coded 4); and (3) How much police brutality against members of minority groups do you think there is around the country these days? Response options ranged from “none” (coded 1) to “a lot of police brutality” (coded 4). Principal axis factor analysis indicated that all three items loaded on one factor, with loadings between .68 and .74. The perceived police racial bias index ranged from 3 to 12, with higher scores indicating more perceived racial bias. Cronbach’s alpha for the perceived police racial bias index was .76.
Control variables
We included a variety of control variables in the analyses. Fear of crime was measured by asking respondents how often they feared being robbed and how often they feared having their house burglarized. Response options for each item ranged from “never” (coded 1) to “very often” (coded 4). Principal axis factor analysis indicated both items loaded on the same factor, each with a loading of .85. The fear of crime index was created by summing the responses to these two items (Cronbach’s alpha was .84), and ranged from 2 to 8, with higher scores indicating more fear of crime. Recent violent victimization was a dummy variable, coded 1 if a respondent was the victim of a violent crime in the previ- ous year, 0 otherwise. Respondents were asked if excessive use of force is a problem in their community. Response options ranged from “not a problem at all” coded 1 to “a serious problem” (coded 4).
A punitive orientation toward criminals was measured by summing responses to three survey items measuring support for three strikes laws, stricter parole, and trying juveniles in adult courts. The question wording and response options were: (1) Do you favor or oppose sentencing a criminal to life in prison if he or she has committed three violent felonies? Response options ranged from “strongly oppose” (coded 1) to “strongly favor” (coded 4); (2) When it comes to granting parole to people in prison, should parole boards be more strict, less strict, or the same as they are now? Respondents who chose “less strict” were coded 1, “same as now” were coded 2, and “more strict” were coded 3; and finally, (3) Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Juveniles between the ages of 14 and 17 accused of violent crimes should be tried and sentenced in adult courts rather than in juvenile courts. Response options ranged from “strongly disagree” (coded 1) to “strongly agree” (coded 4). Princi- pal axis factor analysis indicated that all three items loaded on one factor (loadings ranged from .47 to .56); Cronbach’s alpha for the index was .52. The
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 607
punitiveness index ranged from 3 to 11, with higher scores indicating greater punitiveness.
Several demographic variables were also included in the analyses. Race was a dummy variable, coded 1 for white, 0 for black. Education was a nine-category variable, ranging from “less than high school” (coded 1) to “doctorate degree” (coded 9). Age was a continuous variable. Gender was a dummy variable (coded 1 for female, 0 for male) and metropolitan residence was a dummy variable (coded 1 for residence in an MSA, 0 otherwise). Southern residence was also a dummy variable and, following the regional definitions used by the U.S. Census and in the Uniform Crime Reports, was coded 1 for residence in Delaware, Maryland, Washington DC, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, or Texas, 0 for other. Political conservatism was a five-category vari- able ranging from “very liberal” (coded 1) to “very conservative” (coded 5). Income was a set of categories coded from 1 to 17, corresponding to categories of household income from less than $5,000 to $125,000 or more. When income data was missing for respondents, Knowledge Networks imputed their household income based on the median income for their census block.13
Results
Bivariate Results
Tables 3 and 4 present the bivariate results of the police use of force experi- ment by experimental ballot and provide an answer to the first research question: Does approval for police use of force vary depending on the race of the offender? Contrary to expectations, white respondents were not affected by the experimental ballot manipulation. As shown in Table 3, the race of the offender did not influence whites’ support for police use of force in any of the four situations. Whites who were asked about police striking a teenage black male (Ballot A) reported the same level of approval as whites who were asked about police striking a teenage white male (Ballot B). Thus, varying the race of an offender did not significantly impact the level of support for police use of force among white respondents.
The circumstances of the police–offender interaction, however, did matter for white respondents. Whites were much less likely to approve of police using force in situations where the force might be considered excessive (i.e., when the offender was using vulgar language or was being questioned by police) than when
13. Items included in Wave 1 of the RCPOS included fear of crime, victimization, racial stereotyping, support for three strikes laws, the belief that racial profiling is widespread, the belief that police treat whites and blacks equally, and views on the amount of police brutality against minority group members. Items included in Wave 2 included the four use of force scenarios, support for stricter parole, and support for trying juveniles in adult court. Political ideology and all demographic variables were collected when respondents initially joined the Knowledge Networks panel.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
608 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
the use of force might be considered reasonable (i.e., when an offender was trying to escape custody or was hitting the officer with his fists). Over 80% of whites disapproved (combining the mostly and strongly disapprove categories) of a police officer striking a teenage suspect in the two excessive force scenarios, whereas at least two-thirds of whites approved of the police striking a teenager in the reasonable force situations (in fact, over 90% of whites approved of the use of force when an officer was being attacked). The pattern of greater approval among
Table 3 Police use of force experiment, white respondents
Ballot A: black
teenage male
Ballot B: white
teenage male
Would you approve or disapprove of a police officer striking a teenage (black/white) male who…
(A1) Said vulgar and obscene things to officer Strongly disapprove 55 % 52 % Mostly disapprove 34 35 Mostly approve 7 10 Strongly approve 4 3 N (407) (373) Chi square = 4.12
(B1) Was being questioned as a suspect in a murder case Strongly disapprove 60 57 Mostly disapprove 36 37 Mostly approve 3 5 Strongly approve 2 2 N (405) (370) Chi square = 2.10
(C2) Was attempting to flee custody Strongly disapprove 12 9 Mostly disapprove 24 22 Mostly approve 44 46 Strongly approve 21 24 N (405) (370) Chi square = 2.73
(D2) Was attacking the police officer with his fists Strongly disapprove 3 3 Mostly disapprove 5 4 Mostly approve 34 32 Strongly approve 58 61 N (407) (366) Chi square = .92
1A and B represent excessive force scenarios; 2C and D represents reasonable force scenarios.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 609
whites for the use of reasonable force than the use of excessive force mirrors the results from previous research (Flanagan & Vaughn, 1996; Thompson & Lee, 2004).
For black respondents, the results were a bit different, and were largely consistent with expectations. As shown in Table 4, the experimental ballot manipulation produced significantly different results across three of the four scenarios. In each case, blacks were more approving of police use of force when the offender was white than when the offender was black. The only case where
Table 4 Police use of force experiment, black respondents
Ballot A: black
teenage male
Ballot B: white
teenage male
Would you approve or disapprove of a police officer striking a teenage (black/white) male who…
(A1) Said vulgar and obscene things to officer Strongly disapprove 73 % 55 % Mostly disapprove 19 34 Mostly approve 5 7 Strongly approve 2 5 N (369) (342) Chi square = 26.49***
(B1) Was being questioned as a suspect in a murder case Strongly disapprove 73 61 Mostly disapprove 18 30 Mostly approve 6 4 Strongly approve 3 4 N (367) (343) Chi square = 16.90***
(C) Was attempting to flee custody Strongly disapprove 30 24 Mostly disapprove 32 27 Mostly approve 29 37 Strongly approve 9 12 N (368) (339) Chi square = 8.26*
(D2) Was attacking the police officer with his fists Strongly disapprove 8 5 Mostly disapprove 10 7 Mostly approve 39 40 Strongly approve 43 49 N (369) (338) Chi square = 6.31
*p < .05, *** p < .001. 1A and B represent excessive force scenarios; 2D represents the reasonable force scenario.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
610 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
the difference across ballots was not significant was in the context of an offender attacking a police officer—a situation that many believe justifies the use of force. Here, blacks’ support for police use of force was the same regard- less of the race of the offender.
The circumstances of the interaction also influenced support for police use of force among blacks, though again, the results differed slightly from those of whites. Over 90% of black Americans disapproved of police striking an offender in the two situations where the use of force might be considered excessive (i.e., vulgar language and questioning a suspect). Blacks were divided about police striking a teenage male suspect who is attempting to escape custody (in contrast, most whites approved of the use of force in this scenario). Finally, similar to whites, over 80% of blacks approved of the use of force when an officer was being attacked by an offender.
Multivariate analyses
We turn now to multivariate analyses to answer the second research question: do the factors that explain approval for the use of force vary depending on the race of offender? Results from a series of ordinary least squares regression anal- yses are shown in Table 5 (for white respondents) and in Table 6 (for black respondents). For each of the models, we included the control variables, as well as the key independent variables of interest—perceived police racial bias and negative racial stereotyping. A review of tolerance levels and variance inflation factors indicated that multicollinearity was not a concern in any of the analyses.
White respondents
Models 1A and 1B in Table 5 show the standardized regression coefficients (Betas) for the reasonable force index for the white respondents. Model 1A presents the results for Ballot A (black teenage offender), and Model 1B presents the results for Ballot B (white teenage offender). Several variables had a similar effect on white support for police use of reasonable force, regardless of the race of offender. For example, white women were less approving of police using force than men, even in situations where it might be considered reasonable. Similarly, having a punitive orientation toward criminals had a significant posi- tive effect on whites’ support for police use of force in both Models 1A and 1B.
Several other variables had significant effects in only one of the reasonable force models, suggesting that some of the factors influencing whites’ support for police use of force vary depending on the race of the offender. Whites who suffered a recent violent victimization were significantly more likely to approve of the use of reasonable force against a black suspect (Model 1A), but this variable did not have an effect when the offender was white (Model 1B). The belief that excessive use of force by police is a problem in one’s neighborhood was associated
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 611
with decreased support for the reasonable use of force against a white teenager (Model 1B), but not against a black teenager (Model 1A). Similarly, whites who perceived racial bias on the part of police were significantly less likely to support police use of force against a white teenager, but this perception had no effect on their support for police use of force against a black teenager. Finally, whites who reported stereotypic attitudes about blacks were significantly more likely to favor police use of force against a black teenager, and significantly less likely to support police using force against a white teenager.
The results for the excessive force index in Models 2A and 2B indicate that only one variable had a similar effect across both the black teenager and white teenager ballots. Whites who hold a punitive orientation toward criminals were significantly more likely to approve of police use of force in the excessive force context, regardless of the race of offender. The pattern of results for the perceived police racial bias variable in the excessive force context mirrors those from the reasonable force context; whites who perceive the police as racially biased were significantly less likely to favor police use of excessive force against a white teenager, but this variable was not a significant predictor of support when the offender was a black teenager.
Although a punitive orientation and perceived police racial bias were the only two significant predictors of whites’ approval for excessive use of force against a white teenager (Model 2B), several other variables were significant predictors
Table 5 Ordinary least squares regression analysis of the use of force experiment, white respondents
Model 1A: reasonable force; black
teenager (betas)
Model 1B: reasonable force; white
teenager (betas)
Model 2A: excessive
force; black teenager (betas)
Model 2B: excessive
force; white teenager (betas)
Age −.08 −.09 .03 −.04 Education .04 −.05 −.03 −.07 Female −.14** −.12* −.11* −.05 Income .03 −.01 .01 −.04 Metropolitan resident .01 −.03 −.06 −.01 Southern resident .07 .05 −.05 −.02 Political conservatism .05 .08 .14** .01 Recent violent victimization .10* .07 −.10* −.07 Fear of crime index −.002 .05 .03 −.04 Excessive use of force a problem −.05 −.13* .10 −.02 Punitive orientation index .18*** .31*** .17** .14** Perceived police racial bias index −.09 −.15** −.09 −.18*** Negative racial stereotyping .13** −.10* .12* −.03 Adjusted R-square .10 .21 .09 .04 N 388 352 388 360
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
612 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
when the offender was a black teenager. As indicated in Model 2A, gender and victimization influenced whites’ views, with women and those who had been recently victimized by a violent crime significantly less likely to favor police using excessive force against a black teenager. In contrast, political conserva- tism and negative racial stereotyping were both associated with increased approval for the use excessive force against a black teenage offender.
Based on the results from Table 5 overall, we can draw several conclusions. First, white women are generally less supportive of police use of force than white men, regardless of the race of the offender or whether the force is reasonable or exces- sive (though gender was not statistically significant in Model 2B). Second, whites who perceive racial bias on the part of police are consistently less supportive of police using reasonable or excessive force against a white teenager, but this perception does not affect their approval for the use of force when the offender is a black teenager. Third, whites who hold a punitive orientation toward criminals are consistently more likely to favor police use of force across each of the four models than their less punitive counterparts. Finally, whites who rate blacks higher on the aggressive/violent scale are more likely to approve of police using both reasonable and excessive force against a black teenage offender, and significantly less likely to approve of police using reasonable force against a white teenager.
Black respondents
Models 1A and 1B in Table 6 show the standardized regression coefficients (Betas) for the reasonable force index for the black respondents. Model 1A presents the results for the black teenage offender (Ballot A), and Model 1B presents the results for the white teenage offender (Ballot B). Five variables in Model 1A were significant predictors of blacks’ approval for police use of reason- able force against a black teenager. Black respondents with higher incomes and who resided in the South were more supportive of police using reasonable force against a black teenage offender than those with lower incomes or who lived in other areas of the country. Black women, older blacks, and those who perceived excessive use of force to be a problem in their neighborhood, were significantly less likely to approve of police using reasonable force against a black teenage offender. Only two variables were significant predictors in Model 1B, and they had opposite effects. Black women were less approving of police use of reason- able force against a white teenager than black men, and blacks who resided in metropolitan areas were significantly more approving of the use of reasonable force against a white teenager than blacks from more rural areas.
The standardized regression coefficients for the excessive force index for black respondents are shown in Models 2A and 2B in Table 5. Model 2A presents the results for Ballot A (black teenage offender), and Model 2B presents the results for Ballot B (white teenage offender). The results in Model 2A indicate that age and political conservatism were significantly associated with increased support for police use of excessive force when the offender was a black teenager.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 613
In contrast, blacks who perceived the police to be racially biased were less likely than their counterparts to favor police use of excessive force against a black teenage offender. Perceived police racial bias also had a significant and negative effect on blacks’ approval for the use of excessive force against a white teenager as well (Model 2B). The only other variable with a significant effect in Model 2B was age, with older blacks less approving of police using excessive force against a white teenager than younger blacks.
Considered together, the results in Table 6 suggest that perceived police racial bias decreases blacks’ support for the use of force against black offend- ers, but only when the use of force is excessive. In addition, being female has a significant negative effect on blacks’ support for the use of reasonable force against both black and white offenders, but does not influence approval in the excessive force scenarios. Outside of these two factors, none of the other predictor variables had consistent effects across the four models.
Summary of multivariate results
When considering the collective results from two sets of respondents (black and white), for two different offenders (a black teenager and a white teenager), and
Table 6 Ordinary least squares regression analysis of the use of force experiment, black respondents
Model 1A: reasonable force; black
teenager (betas)
Model 1B: reasonable
force; white teenager (betas)
Model 2A: excessive
force; black teenager (betas)
Model 2B: excessive
force; white teenager (betas)
Constant Age −.16** −.05 .16** −.12* Education −.01 −.09 −.02 .04 Female −.11* −.19*** −.03 −.06 Income .15** .12 −.02 .01 Metropolitan resident −.03 .12* −.10 −.10 Southern resident .14** .03 .07 .02 Political conservatism −.01 .01 .24*** .01 Recent violent victimization .03 .01 .01 −.01 Fear of crime index .05 .02 .04 −.06 Excessive use of force a problem −.17** −.01 .08 .04 Punitive orientation index .11 .07 .10 .03 Perceived police racial bias index −.09 .07 −.14* −.16** Negative racial stereotyping −.03 .06 .05 .07 Adjusted R-square .11 .05 .12 .03 N 341 321 340 324
*p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
614 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
two levels of police force (reasonable or excessive), several themes emerge. First, the race of the offender and the level of force matter for both black and white respondents. Very few variables had consistent effects across the four models, indicating that blacks’ and whites’ attitudes toward police use of force are nuanced. Not only does approval for police use of force vary depending on the race of the offender and the use of reasonable or excessive force, but the factors that predict approval also vary across these types of conditions.
Second, our expectations about the effects of key independent variables were generally supported. As expected, negative racial stereotyping positively influ- enced whites’ support for police use of reasonable and excessive force when the offender was black, but had a negative or non-significant effect when the offender was white. Also as predicted, blacks who perceived the police to be racially biased were significantly less likely to approve of police using excessive force, regardless of the race of offender. Although we expected that perceiving the police as racially biased would reduce whites’ support for police use of force against black offenders as well, the results show that this perception only decreased whites’ approval for police use of force when the offender was white.
Third, many of the control variables did not influence support for police use of force in more than one of the eight models, and only two had generally consistent effects across models. Holding a punitive orientation toward crimi- nals was consistently a significant predictor of whites’ approval for police use of force, regardless of the race of offender or level of force. The same factor was never a significant predictor among black respondents. Among white respon- dents, gender was a significant predictor in three of the four models, with white women less approving of police use of force than white men. Similarly, gender was a significant predictor of blacks’ views in the reasonable force context, with black women less approving of the use of force than black men. In contrast, age, income, violent victimization, metropolitan residence, southern residential status, political conservatism, and the belief that excessive force is a problem in one’s community were each significant predictors in only one or two of the eight models, while education and fear of crime did not influence support for police use of force in any of the models.
Discussion and Conclusions
Previous research on attitudes toward police and police use of force has demon- strated an often profound racial gap, with white Americans holding more positive views of the police, and being more supportive of police use of force, than black Americans. In addition, past research has documented the significant role of racial prejudice in whites’ criminal justice policy attitudes, as well as the prominent influence that perceived racial bias plays has on blacks’ attitudes. Given the results of previous studies and the racial discourse that surrounds questions of police conduct, the goal of this research was to develop a more detailed and thorough understanding of blacks’ and whites’ attitudes toward police use of force.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 615
Toward this end, this study improves on past research by utilizing a survey- based experiment that specified the age, gender, and race of the offender in a scenario, rather than using the generic “citizen” common in previous studies. While the use of a teenage offender is a departure from past studies, providing more detailed information about the demographic characteristics of the offender better ensures that respondents will have a similar offender in mind, which should reduce variability in their interpretations of the scenario. Moreover, by systematically varying the race of the offender and the character- istics of the police–offender interaction, this study provides additional purchase on the conditions under which race influences support for police use of force.
This research addressed two main questions. First, does approval for police use of force vary depending on the race of the offender? The results showed that whites’ support for police use of force was largely unrelated to the race of the offender. Whites were equally likely to approve of police using force if the offender was a black teenager or a white teenager. In contrast, and consistent with expectations, the race of the offender had a significant impact on blacks’ support for police use of force. Blacks were much less likely to approve of police using force when the offender was a black teenager than when the offender was a white teenager.
The second question raised in this research was: Do the factors that explain approval for the use of force vary by the race of offender? Overall, we found that the factors influencing approval for police use of force varied by the race of respondent, the race of the offender, and the characteristics of the police– offender interaction. We were particularly interested in the effects of perceived police racial bias and negative racial stereotyping.
Among blacks, perceiving that police act in a racially discriminatory manner significantly reduced approval for the use of reasonable or excessive force when the offender was black, and also reduced approval for excessive force when the offender was white. Among whites, the perceived police racial bias variable had a significant (negative) effect on approval for police use of reasonable and excessive force against a white offender, but did not significantly influence approval for the use of force when the offender was black.
These results suggest that blacks and whites interpret police–citizen interac- tions in different ways. Blacks’ more negative response to a police officer strik- ing a black offender than a white offender is rooted in the long-standing concern in the black community about racial bias in the criminal justice system. Given their personal and vicarious experiences, blacks are sensitive to the exist- ence of racial discrimination (Feagin, 1991), and therefore particularly suspi- cious of situations where police use force against a black offender. Whites, on the other hand, who tend to view the criminal justice system as racially fair, respond similarly regardless of the race of the offender. This pattern of results mirrors those reported by Hurwitz and Peffley (2005).
We also found that the influence of negative racial stereotyping varied by the race of the offender among white respondents, but had no effect among black respondents. For whites, anti-black racial stereotyping was a significant
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
616 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
positive predictor of approval for the use of both reasonable and excessive force against a black offender, but had a negative or non-significant effect when the offender was white. Thus, while the bivariate results from this research suggested that whites’ attitudes toward police use of force were not affected by the race-of-offender experimental ballot manipulation, the results from the multivariate analyses showed that in fact whites were not immune to the racial distinctions. This finding builds on past research and helps specify the conditions under which anti-black prejudice influences whites’ criminal justice- related attitudes. Unlike Barkan and Cohn (1998), who found that racial stereo- typing only had a significant positive effect on whites’ approval for the use of excessive force against a generic “citizen,” we find that racial stereotyping has a significant positive effect on whites’ approval for both excessive and reason- able force, but only when the offender is black.
Overall, these results are consistent with the group conflict perspective. Although this study demonstrates that attitudes toward police use of force are nuanced and vary based on the nature of the police–citizen interaction, it is clear that race (whether in the form of racial prejudice or perceived racial injustice) informs whites’ and blacks’ views on this issue.
Limitations and Future Research
By examining how attitudes toward the use of force vary depending on the race of the offender, this study helps clarify the public response to police use of force. However, as Weitzer’s work shows (Weitzer, 2000; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006), the race of the officer is also an important factor in public views the police, and was not considered here. Indeed, officer race has recently been identified as an important factor predicting police–citizen traffic contacts (Gilliard-Matthews, Kowalski, & Lundman, 2008), which sometimes lead to use of force situations (Schmitt et al., 2002). There is evidence to suggest that officer race might be linked to the initial decision to use force, that the force used may vary depending on the race and resistance levels of the citizen/ suspect, and that police officers are more likely to use force against offenders of their own racial group than other racial groups (Garner & Maxwell, 2002; Terrill, 2003). Quantitative studies that vary the race of the offender and the race of the officer should be conducted in order to provide a more complete picture of public perceptions of the use of force in both intra- and inter-racial police–citizen encounters.
Similarly, in light of the growing use of TASERs and new non-lethal methods of force, quantitative studies should also examine how weapon type affects public support for police use of force. In addition, qualitative studies, like those of Brunson and his colleagues (Brunson, 2007; Brunson & Miller 2006), should also be pursued as a way to provide an in-depth understanding of public perceptions of, and experiences with, police use of force. Finally, in light of the growing diversity in the USA, future studies should go beyond the black–white paradigm
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 617
to examine the views of Latino and Asian respondents as well. Given all of the contextual variables that influence attitudes, it is important that studies exam- ine citizen perceptions of police use of force across a wide variety of respondents and a broad set of scenarios that represent real world police–citizen encounters.
Building Trust in a Community Policing Era
The findings from this study speak to the importance of procedural justice and its relationship to police legitimacy. When citizens believe the police act in a fair and equal manner, they are more likely to cooperate with police, assist police, and obey the law. Building and sustaining community trust is a signifi- cant challenge for police in America. Strengthening police–citizen relationships depends on police using force lawfully and equitably, on citizens having confi- dence that police are doing so, and on understanding why police use specific force tactics in certain situations (Tyler, 2004).
The community policing era offers an opportunity to strengthen the trust- building process. To the extent that community policing thrives, police officers should be routinely engaged with citizens in a wider variety of settings. Increased interaction between police and citizens increases the likelihood that citizens will observe more police activities first-hand and be positioned to fairly judge the effectiveness of their neighborhood policing process (Maxson, Hennigan, & Sloane, 2003), often through citizen review boards and the like (Finn, 2001). As a result, public perceptions of inequitable treatment might be either validated or improved (Hawdon, Ryan, & Griffin, 2003; also see Alpert & Dunham, 2004).
Another aspect of community policing involves the assignment of officers to zones and the decentralization of authority on the assumption that the officers and supervisors will assume responsibility for reducing crime in those assigned areas. Studies suggest that such strategies can be effective (Connell, Miggans & McGloin, 2008), and that reduced crime and disorder in turn positively influence public perceptions of the police (Bridenball & Jesilow, 2008; Maxson, Hennigan, & Sloane, 2003). Community policing zone assignments are sometimes race- specific, with more black officers assigned to work in black communities, Asian officers to work in Asian communities, etc. These resource decisions are often driven by community requests to be policed by officers who understand their concerns, speak their languages, and have similar backgrounds and experiences. Many communities want the police department to reflect the community, contributing to increases in minority officer hiring (Hickman & Reaves, 2006). These work assignments will have implications for future use of force research, as noted above.
Police and citizens need to be reminded that public perceptions of what are (or are not) appropriate police actions may differ from the regulations outlined by departments or decisions handed down in the courts, as this study shows. To the extent possible, police officers and community leaders need to work together to ensure that citizen perceptions of police use of force are fact-based
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
618 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
and reasonably informed, and not overly influenced by media accounts. At the same time, police departments need to listen to and recognize the views and needs of the communities they serve. A continual dialog between police officers and community residents may help build trust and prevent the type of discord that can often arise in response to police–citizen encounters that involve force. As Stewart (2007) notes, the community policing era provides a significant opportunity for building trust, as long as it fosters police–community partner- ships and allows for public input on police activities. While law enforcement has made many strides in the last few decades to build trust and improve police– citizen relationships, more work can be done, especially in minority communi- ties where skepticism runs higher.
Acknowledgements
We thank Stephen Mastrofski and Edward Maguire for their comments on a previous version of this manuscript.
References
Adams, K. (1996). Measuring the prevalence of police abuse of force. In W. A. Geller & H. Toch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 52–93). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Adams, K. (1999). What we know about police use of force: Use of force by police: Overview of national and local data (NCJ 176330). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Alpert, G. P., & Dunham, R. G. (2004). Understanding police use of force: Officers, suspects and reciprocity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alpert, G. P., & Smith, M. R. (1994). How reasonable is the reasonable man: Police and excessive force. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 85, 481–501.
Arthur, J. A. (1993). Interpersonal violence, criminal victimization and attitudes toward police use of force. International Review of Modern Sociology, 23, 91–106.
Arthur, J. A., & Case, C. E. (1994). Race, class and support for police use of force. Crime, Law and Social Change, 21, 167–182.
Barkan, S. E., & Cohn, S. F. (1998). Racial prejudice and support by whites for police use of force: A research note. Justice Quarterly, 15, 743–753.
Barkan, S. E., & Cohn, S. F. (2005). Why whites favor spending more money to right crime: The role of racial prejudice. Social Problems, 52, 300–314.
Bayley, D., & Mendelsohn, H. (1969). Minorities and the police. New York: Free Press. Blalock, H. (1967). Toward a theory of minority group relations. New York: Capricorn. Blauner, R. (1992). Racial oppression in America. New York: Harper and Row. Blumer, H. (1958). Race prejudice as a sense of group position. Pacific Sociological
Review, 1, 3–7. Bobo, L. D., & Johnson, D. (2001). Race, crime and public opinion study. Cambridge, MA:
Department of Sociology, Harvard University. Bobo, L. D., & Johnson, D. (2004). A taste for punishment: Black and White Americans’
views on the death penalty and the war on drugs. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 1, 151–180.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 619
Bobo, L. D., & Zubrinsky, C. (2000). Attitudes on residential integration: Perceived status differences, mere in-group preference, or racial prejudice? Social Forces, 74, 883–909.
Brame, R. (2000). Investigating treatment effects in a domestic violence experiment with partially missing outcome data. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16, 283–314.
Brame, R., & Pasternoster, R. (2003). Missing data problems in criminological research: Two case studies. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19, 55–78.
Brick, J. M., & Kalton, G. (1996). Handling missing data in survey research. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 5, 215–238.
Bridenball, B., & Jesilow, P. (2008). What matters: The formation of attitudes toward the police, Police Quarterly, 11, 151–181.
Browning, S. L., Cullen, F. T., Cao, L., Kopache, R., & Stevenson, T. J. (1994). Race and getting hassled by the police: A research note. Police Studies, 17, 1–11.
Brunson, R. K. (2007). “Police don’t like black people”: African-American young men’s accumulated police experiences. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 71–102.
Brunson, R. K., & Miller, J. (2006). Young black men and urban policing in the United States. British Journal of Criminology, 46, 613–640.
Cao, L. (1999). Curbing police brutality: What works? A reanalysis of citizen complaints at the organizational level (NCJ-192518). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Chambliss, W. J. (1999). Power, politics and crime. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Charles, C. Z. (2000). Neighborhood racial-composition preferences: Evidence from a
multiethnic metropolis. Social Problems, 47, 379–407. Cohn, S., Barkan, S., & Halteman, W. (1991). Punitive attitudes toward criminals: Racial
consensus or racial conflict? Social Problems, 38, 287–296. Connell, N. M., Miggans, K., & McGloin, J. M. (2008). Can a community policing initiative
reduce serious crime?: A local evaluation. Police Quarterly, 11, 127–150. Cullen, F. T., Cao, L., Frank, J., Langworthy, R. H., Browning, S. L., Kopache, R. et al.
(1996). “Stop or I’ll shoot”: Racial differences in support for police use of deadly force. American Behavioral Scientist, 39, 449–460.
De Leeuw, E. D. (2001). Reducing missing data in surveys: An overview of methods. Quality and Quantity, 35, 147–160.
Devine, P. G., & Elliot, A. J. (1995). Are racial stereotypes really fading? The Princeton trilogy revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 1139–1150.
Engel, R. S. (2003). How supervisory styles influence patrol officer behavior: Research for Practice (NCJ 194078). Washington, DC: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Entman, R. M. (1992). Blacks in the news: Television, modern racism and cultural change. Journalism Quarterly, 69, 341–361.
Entman, R. M., & Rojecki, A. (2000). The black image in the white mind: Media and race in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Feagin, J. R. (1991). The continuing significance of race: Antiblack discrimination in public places. American Sociological Review, 56, 101–116.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2007). Crime in the United States, 2006. Washington, DC: Department of Justice. Retrieved June 19, 2008, from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ cius2006/
Finn, P. (2001). Citizen review of police: Approaches and implementation (NCJ-184430). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Flanagan, T. J., & Vaughn, M. S. (1996). Public opinion about police abuse of force. In W. A. Geller & H. Toch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 113–128). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Frank, J., Brandl, J. S., Cullen, F. T., & Stichman, A. (1996). Reassessing the impact of race on citizens’ attitudes toward the police: A research note. Justice Quarterly, 13, 321–334.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
620 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
Fyfe, J. J. (1982). Blind justice: Police shootings in Memphis. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 73, 707–722.
Garner, J. H., Buchanan, J., Schade, T., & Hepburn, J. (1996). Understanding the use of force by and against the police (Research in Brief, November 1996). Washington, DC: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Garner, J. H., & Maxwell, C. D. (2002). Understanding the use of force by and against the police in six jurisdictions (NCJ 196694). Washington, DC: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Geller, W. A., & Toch, H. (1995). And justice for all: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.
Gilliard-Matthews, S., Kowalski, B. R., & Lundman, R. L. (2008). Officer race and citizen-reported traffic ticket decisions by police in 1999 and 2002. Police Quarterly, 11, 202–219.
Gomes, R. C., & Williams, L. F. (1990). Race and crime: The role of the media in perpet- uating racism and classism in America. Urban League Review, 14, 57–69.
Graber, D. A. (1980). Crime news and the public. New York: Praeger. Greenfield, L. A., Langan, P. A., Smith, S. K., & Kaminski, R. J. (1997). Police use of
force: National data collection (NCJ-165040). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Hagan, J., & Albonetti, C. (1982). Race, class, and the perception of criminal injustice in America. American Journal of Sociology, 88, 329–355.
Hagan, J., Shedd, C., & Payne, M. R. (2006). Race, ethnicity and youth perceptions of criminal injustice. American Sociological Review, 70, 381–407.
Halim, S., & Stiles, B. (2001). Differential support for police use of force, the death penalty, and perceived harshness of the courts: The effects of race, gender and region. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 3–23.
Hawdon, J. E., Ryan, J., & Griffin, S. P. (2003). Policing tactics and perceptions of police legitimacy. Police Quarterly, 6(4), 469–491.
Hawkins, D. F. (1987). Beyond anomalies: Rethinking the conflict perspective on race and criminal punishment. Social Forces, 65, 719–745.
Hawkins, H., & Thomas, R. (1991). White policing of black populations: A history of race and social control in America. In E. Cashmore & E. McLaughlin (Eds.), Out of order? Policing black people (pp. 65–86). New York: Routledge.
Henderson, M. L., Cullen, F. T., Cao, L., Browning, S. L., & Kopache, R. (1997). The impact of race on perceptions of criminal injustice. Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 447–462.
Herbert, S. (2006). Tangled up in blue: Conflicting paths to police legitimacy. Theoretical Criminology, 10, 481–504.
Hickman, M. J., & Reaves, B. A. (2006). Local police departments, 2003 (NCJ-210118). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Huang, W., & Vaughn, M. (1996). Support and confidence: Public attitudes toward the police. In T. Flanagan & D. Longmire (Eds.), Americans view crime and justice: A national survey of public opinion (pp. 31–46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hurst, Y. G., Frank, J., & Browning, S. L. (2000). The attitudes of juveniles toward the police: A comparison of white and black youth. Policing, 23, 37–53.
Hurwitz, J., & Peffley, M. (1997). Public perceptions of race and crime: The role of racial stereotypes. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 375–401.
Hurwitz, J., & Peffley, M. (2005). Explaining the great racial divide: Perceptions of fairness in the U.S. criminal justice system. Journal of Politics, 67, 762–783.
International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2001). Police use of force in America. Retrieved June 19, 2008, from http://www.theiacp.org/documents/pdfs/Publica- tions/2001use offorce.pdf
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 621
Jackson, P. I., & Carroll, L. (1981). Race and the war on crime: The sociopolitical deter- minants of municipal police expenditures in 90 non-southern U.S. cities. American Sociological Review, 46, 290–305.
Jacobs, D., & O’Brien, R. M. (1998). The determinants of deadly force: A structural anal- ysis of police violence. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 837–862.
Jefferis, E., Kaminski, R., Holmes, S., & Hanley, D. (1997). The effect of a videotaped arrest on public perceptions of police use of force. Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 381–395.
Johnson, D. (2001). Punitiveness on crime: Economic insecurity, racial prejudice, or both? Sociological Focus, 34, 33–54.
Johnson, D. (2008). Racial prejudice, perceived injustice and the black-white gap in punitive attitudes. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36(2), 198–206.
Kalven, H., & Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown. Kent, S. L., & Jacobs, D. (2005). Minority threat and police strength from 1980 to 2000:
A fixed-effects analysis of nonlinear and interactive effects in large U.S. cities. Criminology, 43, 731–761.
Kinder, D. R., & Palfrey, T. (1993). On behalf of an experimental political science. In T. Palfrey (Ed.), Experimental foundations of political science (pp. 1–42). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Kinder, D. R., & Sanders, L. M. (1996). Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kinnaird, B. A. (2003). Use of force: Expert guidance for decisive force response. New York: Looseleaf Law.
Langan, P. A., Greenfeld, L. A., Smith, S. K., Durose, M. R., & Levin, D. J. (2001). Contracts between the police and the public: Findings from the 1999 national survey (NCJ- 184957). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs.
Lersch, K. M. (2001). Police misconduct and minority citizens: Exploring key issues. In M. J. Palmiotto (Ed.), Police misconduct: A reader for the 21st century (pp. 58–71). Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Levin, J., & Thomas, A. (1997). Experimentally manipulating race: Perceptions of police brutality in an arrest: A research note. Justice Quarterly, 14, 577–586.
Liska, A., Chamlin, M., & Reed, M. (1985). Testing the economic production and conflict models of crime control. Social Forces, 64, 119–138.
Locke, H. G. (1995). The color of law and the issue of color: Race and the abuse of police power. In W. A. Geller & H. Toch (Eds), And justice for all: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 133–150). Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.
Mann, C. R. (1993). Unequal justice: A question of color. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Mastrofski, S., Snipes, J., & Supina, A. (1996). Compliance on demand: The public’s response to specific police requests. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 33, 269–305.
Maxson, C., Hennigan, K., & Sloane, D. C. (2003). Factors that influence public opinion of the police (NCJ-197925). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Pate, A. M., & Fridell, L. A. (1993). Police use of force: Official reports, citizen complaints, and legal consequences. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.
Petrocelli, M., Piquero, A. R., & Smith, M. R. (2003). Conflict theory and racial profiling: An empirical analysis of police traffic stop data. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31, 1–11.
Quinney, R. (1970). The social reality of crime. Boston: Little, Brown. Ross, D. L. (2002). An assessment of Graham v. Conner, ten years later. Policing: An
International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 25, 294–318. Schmitt, E. L., Langan, P. A., & Durose, M. R. (2002). Characteristics of drivers stopped
by police, 1999 (NCJ 191548). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
622 JOHNSON AND KUHNS
Skolnick, J., & Fyfe, J. (1993). Above the law: Police and the use of excessive force. New York: Free Press.
Smith, M. R. (1998). Police use of deadly force: How courts and policy-makers have misapplied Tennessee v. Garner. Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy, 7, 100–121.
Smith, T. W. (1991). Ethnic images in the United States. The Polling Report, 7, 1–8. Smith, P. E., & Hawkins, R. O. (1973). Victimization, types of citizen-police contacts,
and attitudes toward the police. Law and Society Review, 8, 135–152. Stewart, E. A. (2007). Either they don’t know or they don’t care: Black males and
negative police experiences. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 71–102. Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in
shaping public support for policing. Law and Society Review, 37, 513–547. Taylor, T. J., Turner, K. B., Esbensen, F., & Winfree, T. L., Jr. (2001). Coppin’ an
attitude: Attitudinal differences among juveniles toward police. Journal of Criminal Justice, 29, 295–305.
Terrill, W. (2003). Police use of force and suspect resistance: The micro-process of the police–suspect encounter. Police Quarterly, 6, 51–83.
Terrill, W., & Reisig, M. (2003). Neighborhood context and police use of force. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40, 291–321.
Thompson, B., & Lee, J. (2004). Who cares if police become violent? Explaining approval of police use of force using a national sample. Sociological Inquiry, 74, 381–410.
Tuch, S. A., & Weitzer, R. (1997). Trends: Racial differences in attitudes toward the police. Public Opinion Quarterly, 61, 642–663.
Turk, A. (1969). Criminality and legal order. Chicago: Rand McNally. Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Tyler, T. R. (2004). Enhancing police legitimacy. The Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science, 593, 84–99. Tyler, T. R. (2006). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual
Review of Psychology, 57, 375–400. Tyler, T. R., & Hou, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with
the police and courts. New York: Russell-Sage Foundation. Unnever, J. D., & Cullen, F. T. (2007). Reassessing the racial divide in support for capital
punishment: The continuing significance of race. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 44, 124–158.
Walker, S., Spohn, C., & Delone, M. (2000). The color of justice: Race, ethnicity and crime in America. Stamford, CT: Wadsworth.
Weisburd, D., Greenspan, R., Hamilton, E., Bryant, K., & Williams, H. (2001). The abuse of police authority: A national study of police officers’ attitudes. Washington, DC: The Police Foundation.
Weitzer, R. (1999). Citizens’ perceptions of police misconduct: Race and neighborhood context. Justice Quarterly, 16, 819–846.
Weitzer, R. (2000). White, black or blue cops? Race and citizen assessments of police officers. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 313–324.
Weitzer, R. (2002). Incidents of police misconduct and public opinion. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 397–408.
Weitzer, R., & Tuch, S. (2004). Race and perceptions of police misconduct. Social Problems, 51, 305–325.
Weitzer, R., & Tuch, S. (2005). Racially biased policing: Determinants of citizen percep- tions. Social Forces, 83, 1009–1030.
Weitzer, R., & Tuch, S. (2006). Race and policing in America: Conflict and reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, J. S., Thomas, C. W., & Singh, B. K. (1983). Situational use of police force: Public reactions. American Journal of Police, 3, 37–50.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
POLICE USE OF FORCE 623
Wilson, G., & Dunham, R. (2001). Race, class and attitudes toward crime control: The views of the African-American middle class. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 259–278.
Wortley, S., Hagan, J., & Macmillan, R. (1997). Just des(s)erts? The racial polarization of perceptions of criminal injustice. Law and Society Review, 31, 637–676.
Cases Cited
Graham v. Conner (1989). 490 U.S. 386. Tennessee v. Garner (1985). 471 U.S. 1
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [U
ni ve
rs ity
o f M
is so
ur i -
S t L
ou is
] a t 2
1: 24
1 9
N ov
em be
r 2 01
4
