Striking or grappling? Comparing public and officers' perceptions of police use of force

Le résumé fourni par la source

Police officers use physical arrest and control techniques far more often than firearms, yet public understanding of how people judge these actions is limited, specifically regarding different styles of unarmed arrest. This study examined how civilians and law enforcement officers evaluate different types of police use of force, focusing on whether opinions change depending on the kind of technique used. Using short video clips of the same police encounter, the study employed a 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design that varied by officer race (Black or White), suspect race (Black or White), type of force used (striking, operationalized as a punch, or grappling, operationalized as a double-leg takedown), and video format (complete or segmented vignette). Civilians ( n = 996) and officers ( n = 744) randomly watched one of these videos and rated the officer's performance and response. Both groups viewed grappling as more appropriate and professional than striking. Grappling officers were more likely to have their performance rated as “excellent” than striking officers in both the civilian (48.2% vs. 34.1% of responses) and law enforcement samples (66.5% vs. 42.9%). Officer and suspect race did not significantly affect judgments, though officers' ratings were influenced by whether they saw the full or edited version of the video. Few participants supported disciplinary action against the officer, though civilians were more likely to recommend additional training. Overall, the findings show that people's reactions to police use of force depend heavily on how the force looks—not just whether it is legally justified—highlighting the importance of context and perception in public and professional evaluations.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.