The Proclivity to Rely on Professional Experience and Evidence-Based Policing: Findings From a Survey of High-Ranking Officers in the Israel Police

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (10) ◽  
pp. 1456-1474 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tal Jonathan-Zamir ◽  
David Weisburd ◽  
Michal Dayan ◽  
Maia Zisso
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Police Officers ◽  
Professional Experience ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
High Ranking ◽  
Psychological Mechanisms ◽  
Personal Level ◽  
Evidence Based Policing

Studies have identified that police officers often support and value evidence-based policing (EBP), but nevertheless prefer relying on experience when making decisions. Yet, policing scholars have paid little attention to the generality of this proclivity, the psychological mechanisms behind it, or to its implications for implementing EBP. The present study illuminates this phenomenon. We review its psychological foundations and use a survey of high-ranking officers from the Israel Police to examine its prevalence. We find that while officers support EBP overall, they believe that decisions should be based primarily on experience, not research. The two were found to be separate (although correlated) constructs. Furthermore, we find that the preference for experience as the basis for decision making is an overarching trait, not associated with personal-level characteristics. We discuss the implications of our findings and argue that attempts to implement EBP should recognize and work with this inherent psychological inclination.

scholarly journals Evidence-based policing

2020 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 162-185
Author(s):  
Dragana Spasić
Keyword(s):  
Police Officers ◽  
Professional Community ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Comprehensive Description ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Police Decision Making ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based Policing

The concept of evidence-based policing is a relatively new approach to policing that has been drawing the attention of the scientific and professional public for more than two decades, and which was inspired by a broader movement, based on the notion of "evidence-based practice". Around the world associations (so called societies) have been set up to advance the idea of evidence-based policing trough conducting and disseminating police research. The intention of the academic and professional community is to create a knowledge base that will assist the police in making decisions regarding the implementation of particular strategies and tactics in order to achieve the desired goal. Despite the current relevance of this issue, a previously conducted survey among police officers and police educators from these areas has shown that a large number of them are not yet aware of the concept mentioned above. Bearing this in mind, as well as the fact that the majority of the respondents stated that they turn to journal Bezbednost when acquiring information about the latest topics and trends in the field of policing, the author here seeks to give brief but comprehensive description of the new concept. In order to make this possible, the first part of the paper gives an overview of the notion of evidence-based medicine and the early origins of the idea of evidence-based policing. The second part of the paper is devoted to defining the notion of evidence-based policing and to more closely defining the term "evidence" in this context. Finally, a model is presented, created by Sherman, that represents the proposed framework for incorporating this concept into the police decision-making process.

scholarly journals Policing Research and the Rise of the ‘Evidence-Base’: Police Officer and Staff Understandings of Research, its Implementation and ‘What Works’

Sociology ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 813-829 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Lumsden ◽  
Jackie Goode
Keyword(s):  
Police Officers ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Conducting Research ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Organisational Factors ◽  
Evidence Based Policing

Despite the pitfalls identified in previous critiques of the evidence-based practice movement in education, health, medicine and social care, recent years have witnessed its spread to the realm of policing. This article considers the rise of evidence-based policy and practice as a dominant discourse in policing in the UK, and the implications this has for social scientists conducting research in this area, and for police officers and staff. Social scientists conducting research with police must consider organisational factors impacting upon police work, as well as the wider political agendas which constrain it – in this case, the ways in which the adoption of evidence-based policing and the related ‘gold standard’ used to evaluate research act as a ‘technology of power’ to shape the nature of policing/research. The discussion draws on semi-structured interviews conducted with police officers and staff from police forces in England.

scholarly journals Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study

10.2196/17718 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. e17718
Author(s):  
Monika Jurkeviciute ◽  
Henrik Eriksson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Preferences ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Professional Experience ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Professional Experiences

Background Evidence-based practice refers to building clinical decisions on credible research evidence, professional experience, and patient preferences. However, there is a growing concern that evidence in the context of electronic health (eHealth) is not sufficiently used when forming policies and practice of health care. In this context, using evaluation and research evidence in clinical or policy decisions dominates the discourse. However, the use of additional types of evidence, such as professional experience, is underexplored. Moreover, there might be other ways of using evidence than in clinical or policy decisions. Objective This study aimed to analyze how different types of evidence (such as evaluation outcomes [including patient preferences], professional experiences, and existing scientific evidence from other research) obtained within the development and evaluation of an eHealth trial are used by diverse stakeholders. An additional aim was to identify barriers to the use of evidence and ways to support its use. Methods This study was built on a case of an eHealth trial funded by the European Union. The project included 4 care centers, 2 research and development companies that provided the web-based physical exercise program and an activity monitoring device, and 2 science institutions. The qualitative data collection included 9 semistructured interviews conducted 8 months after the evaluation was concluded. The data analysis concerned (1) activities and decisions that were made based on evidence after the project ended, (2) evidence used for those activities and decisions, (3) in what way the evidence was used, and (4) barriers to the use of evidence. Results Evidence generated from eHealth trials can be used by various stakeholders for decisions regarding clinical integration of eHealth solutions, policy making, scientific publishing, research funding applications, eHealth technology, and teaching. Evaluation evidence has less value than professional experiences to local decision making regarding eHealth integration into clinical practice. Professional experiences constitute the evidence that is valuable to the highest variety of activities and decisions in relation to eHealth trials. When using existing scientific evidence related to eHealth trials, it is important to consider contextual relevance, such as location or disease. To support the use of evidence, it is suggested to create possibilities for health care professionals to gain experience, assess a few rather than a large number of variables, and design for shorter iterative cycles of evaluation. Conclusions Initiatives to support and standardize evidence-based practice in the context of eHealth should consider the complexities in how the evidence is used in order to achieve better uptake of evidence in practice. However, one should be aware that the assumption of fact-based decision making in organizations is misleading. In order to create better chances that the evidence produced would be used, this should be addressed through the design of eHealth trials.

scholarly journals Testing the Efficacy of a 1-Day Police Decision-Making and Autonomic Modulation Intervention: A Quasi-Random Pragmatic Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Maria Di Nota ◽  
Joseph Arpaia ◽  
Evelyn Carol Boychuk ◽  
Peter I. Collins ◽  
Judith Pizarro Andersen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Police Officers ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Police Training ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Autonomic Modulation ◽  
Training And Education ◽  
Lethal Force

Contemporary discourse has identified several urgent priorities concerning police training and education, including: (a) empirically testing and validating the effectiveness of current programming in reducing lethal force decision-making errors; (b) integrating evidence-based content and pedagogical approaches into police curriculum; and (c) understanding the breadth and length of programming necessary to ensure learning and transfer of skills to operational field settings. Widespread calls to identify effective and actionable training programs have been met with numerous research studies, systematic reviews, and policy recommendations that reveal the need to train officers’ internal physiological awareness, which is foundational in shaping cognitive decision-making, emotion regulation, and behavior under stressful conditions. Several investigations have shown improvements to both lethal force errors and physiological recovery following a multi-day autonomic modulation (AM) intervention. Immediate and sustained training gains are observed following repeated practice with clinically validated protocols integrated into training scenarios. Despite evidence-based support for AM in addressing the aforementioned priorities, police organizations are faced with limited time and funding for training and education. The goal of the current quasi-random pragmatic controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of a modified 1-day version of an established AM intervention. A sample of active-duty police officers were quasi-randomly assigned to an AM intervention (n = 82) or waitlist control group (n = 105). Lethal force errors and objective measures of autonomic arousal and recovery were measured during reality-based scenarios pre- and post-training and at 12-month follow-up. In contrast to previous investigations of longer AM intervention protocols, no significant training-related improvements to behavioral or physiological outcomes were found immediately post-intervention or at follow-up. The current results suggest that single-day training is insufficient to learn the physiological awareness and regulation skills necessary to perform effectively during lethal force encounters, as demonstrated by a lack of immediate or sustained training effects. Practical considerations, such as resource allocation, that may undermine the effectiveness of implementing evidence-based police training are discussed.

European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) Guidelines for Ovarian Cancer Surgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. 1534-1542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denis Querleu ◽  
François Planchamp ◽  
Luis Chiva ◽  
Christina Fotopoulou ◽  
Desmond Barton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Surgical Management ◽  
Fallopian Tube ◽  
European Society ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Professional Experience ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Gynaecological Oncology ◽  
Development Group

MethodsThe European Society of Gynaecological Oncology council nominated an international multidisciplinary development group made of practicing clinicians who have demonstrated leadership and interest in the care of ovarian cancer (20 experts across Europe). To ensure that the statements are evidence based, the current literature identified from a systematic search has been reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group (expert agreement). The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Before publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 66 international reviewers independent from the development group including patients representatives.ResultsThe guidelines cover preoperative workup, specialized multidisciplinary decision making, and surgical management of diagnosed epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancers. The guidelines are also illustrated by algorithms.

scholarly journals ‘It’s a Profession, it Isn’t a Job’: Police Officers’ Views on the Professionalisation of Policing in England

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 4-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Lumsden
Keyword(s):  
Police Officers ◽  
Public Management ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Top Down ◽  
New Public ◽  
Government Reforms ◽  
Evidence Based Policing

This article focuses on police officers’ views on the professionalisation of policing in England against a backdrop of government reforms to policing via establishment of the College of Policing, evidence-based policing, and a period of austerity. Police officers view professionalisation as linked to top-down government reforms, education and recruitment, building of an evidence-base, and ethics of policing (Peelian principles). These elements are further entangled with new public management principles, highlighting the ways in which professionalism can be used as a technology of control to discipline workers. There are tensions between the government’s top-down drive for police organisations to professionalise and officers’ bottom-up views on policing as an established profession. Data are presented from qualitative interviews with 15 police officers and staff in England.

Intention is not method, belief is not evidence, rank is not proof

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 188-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renée J. Mitchell ◽  
Stuart Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Executive Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Police Ethics ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based Policing ◽  
Decision Making Model

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to argue that police research has reached a level of acceptance such that executive management has an ethical obligation to their communities to use evidence-based practices. Design/methodology/approach Using an Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) framework the authors apply an ethical-based decision-making model to policing decisions. EBM does not allow physicians to ignore research when giving guidance to patients. The authors compare the two professional approaches to decision making and argue policing has reached a level of research that if ignored, just like medicine, should be considered unethical. Police interventions can potentially be harmful. Rather than do no harm, the authors argue that police managers should implement practices that are the least harmful based on the current research. Findings The authors found policing has a substantial amount of research showing what works, what does not, and what looks promising to allow police executives to make decisions based on evidence rather than tradition, culture, or best practice. There is a deep enough fund of knowledge to enable law enforcement leadership to evaluate policies on how well the policies and procedures they enforce prevent crime with a minimum of harm to the communities they are sworn to protect and serve. Originality/value Policing has yet to view community interventions as potentially harmful. Realigning police ethics from a lying, cheating, stealing, lens to a “doing the least harm” lens can alter the practitioner’s view of why evidence-based policing is important. Viewing executive decision from an evidence-based ethical platform is the future of evaluating police executive decisions.

scholarly journals Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika Jurkeviciute ◽  
Henrik Eriksson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Preferences ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Professional Experience ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Professional Experiences

BACKGROUND Evidence-based practice refers to building clinical decisions on credible research evidence, professional experience, and patient preferences. However, there is a growing concern that evidence in the context of electronic health (eHealth) is not sufficiently used when forming policies and practice of health care. In this context, using evaluation and research evidence in clinical or policy decisions dominates the discourse. However, the use of additional types of evidence, such as professional experience, is underexplored. Moreover, there might be other ways of using evidence than in clinical or policy decisions. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to analyze how different types of evidence (such as evaluation outcomes [including patient preferences], professional experiences, and existing scientific evidence from other research) obtained within the development and evaluation of an eHealth trial are used by diverse stakeholders. An additional aim was to identify barriers to the use of evidence and ways to support its use. METHODS This study was built on a case of an eHealth trial funded by the European Union. The project included 4 care centers, 2 research and development companies that provided the web-based physical exercise program and an activity monitoring device, and 2 science institutions. The qualitative data collection included 9 semistructured interviews conducted 8 months after the evaluation was concluded. The data analysis concerned (1) activities and decisions that were made based on evidence after the project ended, (2) evidence used for those activities and decisions, (3) in what way the evidence was used, and (4) barriers to the use of evidence. RESULTS Evidence generated from eHealth trials can be used by various stakeholders for decisions regarding clinical integration of eHealth solutions, policy making, scientific publishing, research funding applications, eHealth technology, and teaching. Evaluation evidence has less value than professional experiences to local decision making regarding eHealth integration into clinical practice. Professional experiences constitute the evidence that is valuable to the highest variety of activities and decisions in relation to eHealth trials. When using existing scientific evidence related to eHealth trials, it is important to consider contextual relevance, such as location or disease. To support the use of evidence, it is suggested to create possibilities for health care professionals to gain experience, assess a few rather than a large number of variables, and design for shorter iterative cycles of evaluation. CONCLUSIONS Initiatives to support and standardize evidence-based practice in the context of eHealth should consider the complexities in how the evidence is used in order to achieve better uptake of evidence in practice. However, one should be aware that the assumption of fact-based decision making in organizations is misleading. In order to create better chances that the evidence produced would be used, this should be addressed through the design of eHealth trials.

scholarly journals Prioritizing Indecent Image Offenders: A Systematic Review and Economic Approach to Understand the Benefits of Evidence-Based Policing Strategies

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Giles ◽  
Laurence Alison
Keyword(s):  
Police Officers ◽  
Economic Burden ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Male Population ◽  
Lifetime Costs ◽  
Police Action ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Clear Idea ◽  
Effective Use ◽  
Evidence Based Policing

In 2013, there were an estimated 50,000 individuals involved in downloading and sharing indecent images of children (IIOC) in the United Kingdom (UK). This poses challenges for limited police resources. We argue that police officers can make most effective use of limited resources by prioritizing those offenders who pose the greatest risk of contact offending, by nature of demonstrable pedophilia, hebephilia or dual offending status and thus, those at highest risk must be dealt with first. What is currently lacking is a clear idea of the potential scale of the problem in socio-economic terms and why, therefore, it is so important that evidence-based approaches to offender detection and investigation continue to be a top priority for funders and policy makers. A systematic literature review was undertaken to address two related questions. First, what is the scale of the problem in the UK, in terms of the number of pedophilic and hebephilic individuals who pose a risk of contact offending against a child? Second, what is the potential socio-economic burden generated by the national IIOC suspect pool if left unattended to by targeted police action? Applying population estimates of pedophilia and hebephilia to the male population (16–89 years), we estimate there are between 2,365–5,991 males with paedophila and 12,218–30,952 males with hebephilia who are likely contact offenders. Applying average prevalence and incidence based costing methods to a conservative estimate of one victim per offender, the combined socio-economic burden from these persons could amount to £236-£597 million (incident costs) increasing to £2.9-£7.3 billion (lifetime costs; £3.3-£8.3 billion including QALY measures). Applying the same costs to CEOP (2013) estimate of 50,000 IIOC offenders we estimate that between 6,000 and 27,500 dual offenders could have already committed past contact offenses, contributing an economic burden of between £97–£445 million (incident costs) increasing to £1.2–£5.4 billion (lifetime costs; £1.4–£6.2 billion including QALY measures). Future contact offenses could contribute a further burden of £16–£18.6 million (incident costs) increasing to £198–£227 million (lifetime costs; £226–£260 million including QALY measures). Drawing upon these findings, we argue for the benefits of a research-informed prioritization approach to target IIOC offenders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document