Content uploaded by Mario S. Staller
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mario S. Staller on Aug 27, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Optimising Coaching in Police Training
Mario S. Staller
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Leeds Beckett
University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sports Coaching
January 2021
2
Abstract
The thesis focuses on coaching in preparing police officers for conflict situations in
the institutionalised setting of police training. The aim was to provide (a) empirical
data about different relevant aspects associated with coaching in the domain of police
training and (b) guidance for optimising coaching in police training based on these
results. Based on the who-what-how model of coaching decision-making, the studies
within this thesis investigate the wants and needs of learners, the current coaching
practice in police training and the sources, topics and application of coaching
knowledge by police trainers.
Drawing from data from a German police academy (Study 1, 2, 4), German speaking
police trainers (Study 5) and an expert panel of self-defence coaches (Study 3), the
thesis provides evidence for (a) the wants and needs of the learner in police training;
(b) the content that is needed in order cope with the demands in the field; (c) positive
and negative aspects of the structure and delivery of police training; (d) problems in
skill development associated with a modularised and linear approach to learning in
police training; and (e) shortcomings in domain-specific coaching knowledge and
coach learning. Based on the findings, ten recommendations for optimising coaching
in police training emerged, which target both coaches and the institution they serve.
3
Acknowledgements
Since this PhD journey comes to an end, there are a few individuals I would like to
thank in particular.
To Jamie – for providing me with excellent supervision and the most intensive
feedback I have seen so far. Your comments were always straight to the point, like a
really good straight punch. This allowed me to level-up my fighting skills – or in that
case, my skills building up arguments and a clear narrative. Good feedback is hard to
find – and you are one of the hardest punchers. So thank you – for punching me again
and again J.
To Andy – for showing me what coaching is all about. Whenever I thought I knew a
lot about coaching, I had a discussion with you and my views on certain aspects were
challenged. You got me thinking every time we spoke. Thank you for all your
enthusiasm all these years. And of course, you are the main reason I pursued this
PhD. So, thank you for taking me on board and providing me with outstanding
supervision.
To Swen – for being the fastest source of feedback I have ever had and starting this
journey with me back in 2016. You always showed me different perspectives on the
same things and I always could rely on you – even at 04.30 am. Besides that, I am
grateful for having found a friend I could wear superhero shirts with on academic
conferences. Thank you, bro!
To Beeeeeeeeeni – for being such an amazing colleague, friend and role model.
Thank you for everything: from discussing ideas, to comments on texts and for having
cappuccino with me. Without you I would not have been here. Greeeeez!!! J
To Olli - for sharing my love for police and conflict management training and being
such an excellent friend over 15 years. Without your help I would not have been this
far. Thank you for always being there. Bad Boys for Life!
To Rudi – for also sharing my love for police and conflict management training and
for continuously showing me the skills I have no clue about J. Thank you, my friend.
To Valentina and Isa – for helping me with the data collection, for taking your time to
discuss with me weird ideas and sharing the passion for the same subject. Thank you!
4
To André – for making this work possible by providing access to police training and
for being such a professional that is not afraid of critically reflect on current practices.
You have an extra-ordinary mindset. Thank you.
To Nam – for providing me with all the clues I needed.
To all the police officers, that participated in this work – for, yes, participating. Without
your engagement this work has not been possible. Thank you for helping optimising
coaching in police training.
To all train2survive Krav Magis – for pursuing this journey of making conflict
management training better with me. You are awesome.
To Vero – for letting me pursue my dreams and for drawing me back to a normal life
(at least every now and then). You are everything I ever dreamt of. And I promise: this
was the last one.
And finally, to my personal superheroes: Batman, Spiderman and the Flash. Thank
you for being such amazing superheroes. Let’s save the world!
5
Table of Contents
Abstract 2
Acknowledgements 3
Table of Contents 5
List of Tables 11
List of Figures 12
1 Introduction 13
1.1 Statement of the Problem 15
1.2 Significance of the Thesis 16
1.3 Aims and Objectives 17
1.4 A Personal Reflection About the Decisions Made by the Researcher 18
1.5 Structure of the Thesis 19
2 Literature Review 22
2.1 Police Training in Germany 23
2.1.1 The Danger Potential of the Police Profession in Germany 23
2.1.2 Police Training: Scope and Training Objectives 25
2.1.3 Research in police training 26
2.2 The Complex and Nonlinear Nature of Violent Encounters 27
2.3 Coaching in Sports 31
2.4 Coaching in Police Training 36
2.4.1 Understanding the “Who“ 38
2.4.2 Understanding the “What“ 40
2.4.2.1 Different User Groups – Different Performance Models 43
2.4.2.2 Hidden Curricula 44
2.4.3 Understanding the „How“ 45
2.4.3.1 Development of Relationship between coach and learner 45
2.4.3.2 Expectations and Perceptions of Learner 45
2.4.3.3 Effective Environments for Skill Development in Police Training 46
2.4.3.3.1 Representative Learning Environments 46
2.4.3.3.2 The Ecological Dynamics Framework 49
2.4.4 Understanding the context 50
2.4.5 Understanding the self 51
2.4.6 Understanding the coaching process 52
2.5 Setting the Agenda for the Empirical Section 53
6
3 General Methods 55
3.1 Methods Employed in the Thesis 56
3.2 A Qualitative Research Agenda 56
3.3 Contextualisation of the Research 57
3.3.1 Research in the Context of Police Training in Germany 58
3.3.2 Reflections about being a Practitioners and a Researcher 59
3.3.3 Epistemological and Ontological Approach to the Thesis 60
3.4 Ensuring Quality in the Research Process 62
3.4.1 Worthy Topic 62
3.4.2 Rich Rigor 62
3.4.3 Sincerity 63
3.4.4 Credibility 64
3.4.5 Resonance 65
3.4.6 Significant Contribution 65
3.4.7 Ethics 65
3.4.8 Coherence 67
3.5 Reflections after the Studies 67
3.6 Concluding Remarks 69
4 Police recruits ‘wants and subjective needs in mandatory police
training 70
4.1 Abstract 71
4.2 Author’s Contribution 72
4.3 Introduction 72
4.4 Methods 74
4.4.1 Participants 75
4.4.2 Interview Procedures 75
4.4.3 Data Analysis 76
4.4.4 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis 77
4.4.5 Overview of the Results 78
4.4.6 Relevance of Police Training 80
4.4.7 Motivating Aspects of Police Training 81
4.4.8 Negative Aspects of Police Training 82
4.4.9 Characteristics of a Competent Police Trainer 84
4.5 Discussion 87
4.5.1 Positive and Negative Aspects in Police Training 87
7
4.5.2 Characteristics of Competent Police Trainers 89
4.5.3 Further Research 90
4.5.4 Limitations 91
4.6 Conclusion 91
5 Police recruits’ perception of skill transfer from training to the field 93
5.1 Abstract 94
5.2 Author’s Contribution 95
5.3 Introduction 95
5.4 Method 98
5.4.1 Participants 98
5.4.2 Interview Procedures 99
5.4.3 Data Analysis 99
5.4.4 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis 100
5.5 Results 101
5.5.1 Overview of the Results 101
5.5.2 Differences between Training and the Field 103
5.5.2.1 Citizen Behaviour 103
5.5.2.2 Operational Behaviour 104
5.5.2.3 Overall Situation 105
5.5.2.4 Prerequisites 106
5.5.3 Necessary Operational Competencies 106
5.5.4 Evaluation of Police Training 108
5.5.4.1 Application of the Learned Training Content in the Field 108
5.5.4.2 Perceived Improvements 109
5.5.4.3 Good design of the learning environment 109
5.5.4.4 Transmission of a Grim World Scheme 110
5.6 Discussion 112
5.6.1 Differences Between Training and the Field 112
5.6.2 Positive Evaluation of Police Training 114
5.6.3 Further Research 115
5.6.4 Limitations 115
5.7 Conclusion 116
6 Preparing for Physical Conflict Situations - An Expert Consensus 117
6.1 Abstract 118
6.2 Author’s Contribution 119
8
6.3 Introduction 119
6.4 Method 123
6.4.1 Identification and Invitation of Expert Coaches 123
6.4.2 The Expert Panel 125
6.4.3 Content of the Survey Rounds and Analysis 127
6.4.4 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis 130
6.5 Results 130
6.5.1 Characteristics of Expert Performance in Self-Defence 130
6.5.2 Content of Training 133
6.6 Discussion 135
6.6.1 Situational Awareness and De-escalatory Behaviour 135
6.6.2 Attacking Aggressively 136
6.6.3 Decision-Making Under the Representative Demands 137
6.6.4 Limitations 138
6.7 Conclusion and Practical Implications 140
7 Coaching in Police Training – A Case Study 142
7.1 Abstract 143
7.2 Author’s Contribution 145
7.3 Introduction 145
7.4 Planning Training Sessions in Police Training 145
7.5 Delivering Training Sessions in Police Training 147
7.5.1 Reflecting on Training Sessions in Police Training 150
7.5.2 Aims and Scope of the Study 152
7.6 Methods 152
7.6.1 Data Collection 152
7.6.2 Data Analysis 156
7.6.3 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis 157
7.7 Results 158
7.7.1 Delivery of Police Training 158
7.7.1.1 Structure of police training 158
7.7.1.2 Content and Delivery 162
7.7.1.3 Lack of Representative Task Design 162
7.7.2 Planning and Reflecting Training Sessions 164
7.7.3 Planning and considerations before the training session 167
7.7.4 Single-loop reflection about the training session 169
7.7.5 Double-loop and triple-loop reflection about the training session 172
9
7.8 Discussion 173
7.8.1 The Structure and Delivery of Police Training 173
7.8.1.1 Lack of a Consistent Rationale for the Structure of Police Training
173
7.8.1.2 Traditional, Linear Structure and Delivery of Police Training 175
7.8.1.3 Low Amount of Qualitative Time-on-Task 177
7.8.2 Representative Learning Design in Police Training 177
7.8.3 (Reflective) Planning Decisions 179
7.8.4 The Depth of Reflection 181
7.8.5 Limitations 183
7.9 Conclusion and Practical Implications 184
7.9.1 Further Research 185
7.10 Conclusion 186
8 Topics, Sources and the Application of Coaching Knowledge in Police
Training 188
8.1 Abstract 189
8.2 Author’s Contribution 190
8.3 Introduction 190
8.4 Method 193
8.4.1 Participants 193
8.4.2 Online survey 194
8.4.3 Procedures 194
8.4.4 Data analysis 195
8.4.5 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis 195
8.5 Results 196
8.5.1 Topics of Coaching Knowledge 196
8.5.2 Sources of Coaching Knowledge 199
8.5.3 Topics, Sources and Application of Recently Acquired Knowledge 203
8.6 Discussion 207
8.6.1 Context-Specifity of Police Training Knowledge 207
8.6.2 Need for Knowledge Structures for Reflection 210
8.6.3 Practical Implications 213
8.6.4 Limitations 215
8.7 Conclusion 215
10
9 General Discussion 217
9.1 Knowledge Domains of Coaching in Police Training 219
9.1.1 Understanding the Who 219
9.1.2 Understanding the What 221
9.1.3 Understanding the How 223
9.1.4 Understanding the Context 224
9.1.5 Understanding Self 225
9.1.6 Understanding coaching practice 227
9.2 Overview of the Recommendations for Optimising Coaching in Police
Training 229
9.3 Reflections as a Practitioner and Researcher 232
9.4 Future Research 232
9.4.1 The Alignment Between Training and the Criterion Environment 232
9.4.2 Coach Learning and Development 234
9.4.3 Knowledge Management 234
9.5 Limitations 235
9.6 Conclusion 236
10 References 237
11
List of Tables
Table 1: Participants and Data per Study 20
Table 2: Results of qualitative analysis of interviews displaying hierarchical
themes. Numbers in brackets denote number of participants
contributing to the raw data theme) 79
Table 3: Results of qualitative analysis of interviews displaying hierarchical
themes (Numbers in brackets display how many participants
contributed to the raw data). 102
Table 4: Characteristics of expert coaches (n = 16) 127
Table 5: Content and structure of the survey rounds 129
Table 6: Expert consensus (n = 16) on the characteristics of expert
performance in self-defence situations 132
Table 7: Ranking of the Content that should be trained on in Self-Defence
Training 134
Table 8: Table of Themes 158
Table 9: Descriptive statistics for time-on-task for the three different training
sessions 160
Table 10: Descriptive statistics for time-on-task for the three different training
sessions on supplementary activities 161
Table 11: Results of qualitative analysis of interviews displaying hierarchical
themes (Numbers in brackets display the number of meaning units
that contributed to the data). 165
Table 12: Demographic details of participants 193
Table 13: Questions posed about sources, topics and application of coaching
knowledge 194
Table 14: Participants' perception of what they need to know more about to
be a better coach 197
Table 15: Participants perception of why they need to know the knowledge
reported in Table 3 198
Table 16: Participants' preferred method of acquiring coaching knowledge 200
Table 17: Participants' reasons for preferring particular methods of acquiring
coaching knowledge 201
Table 18: Last thing participants' perceived they had found useful for their
coaching 204
Table 19: The source of the last thing that participants perceived they had
learned or found useful 205
Table 20: How participants perceive they used the acquired knowledge 206
Table 21: List of recommendations for optimising coaching in the domain of
police training 231
!
12
List of Figures
Figure 1: Police officers assaulted and killed on duty in Germany
(1972 - 2018) 24
Figure 2: The coaching schematic 33
Figure 3: The redrawn coaching schematic 35
Figure 4: The who-what-how model of coaching 36
Figure 5: The who-what-how model of coaching in police training 37
Figure 6: Identification and recruitment of the expert panel 124
Figure 7: Recruitment and compilation of expert coaches 126
Figure 8: Structure of observed training days with additional information
regarding content, training facility and number of coaches,
participants and observing researchers, respectively. 155
Figure 9: The modified who-what-how model for decision-making within
police training coaching 228
Figure 10: Levels of reflection in police training 229
13
Chapter 1: Introduction
1 Introduction
14
The profession of a police officer involves coping with a broad range of situations.
How these situations develop and unfold cannot be foreseen. Even routine
deployments can result in life threatening situations for the officer (e.g. knife attack
against the police officer), whereas, ‘high risk’ deployments can turn out to be non-
threatening once the police officer arrives at the scene (e.g. martial arts class
practicing in the park). Furthermore, police-citizen encounters are characterized by
high interactional dynamics and an inherent complexity (Alpert, 2004; Makin et al.,
2018; Todak and James, 2018; Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019a) meaning
that even unarmed encounters pose a serious risk of injury to the police officer and
the other party (Ellrich, Pfeiffer and Baier, 2010; Ellrich, Baier and Pfeiffer, 2011;
Bochenek and Staller, 2014; Ellrich and Baier, 2016).
Coping with such complex and dynamic operational situations is an expectation of
competent police officers within the framework of their legal mandate. In addition to
standard police situations, critical conflict constellations must also be handled
professionally (Staller and Zaiser, 2015b; Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Makin et al., 2018).
For that purpose, police officers are equipped with numerous technologies and have
a variety of tactical options at their disposal. The precise options available differ
depending on the country, the local jurisdiction, and the unit the police officer is
assigned to. Furthermore, necessary individual competences are developed, trained
and developed in institutional teaching-learning settings (Schmalzl, 2008; Körner and
Staller, 2017; Rajakaruna et al., 2017).
The current thesis focuses on these institutionalised police training learning
environments (“Polizeitraining”) in Germany. There is no consensus on a common
definition of police training and the exact content to be learnt within these setting (see
Chapter 2). In this thesis, police training is understood as the systematic and
purposeful development of skills and abilities in order to professionally manage (a)
citizen contacts, especially (but not only) in conflict situations; (b) operational
situations; and (c) acts of aggression against police officers. The objective of police
training is to develop and to optimise the competence to act professionally in such
situational settings. Enhancing officer safety is part of this training process. At its core,
police training is a pedagogical process with coaches and trainees as the acting
individuals (Abraham and Collins, 2011a).
Since police training encompasses a variety of situations to be handled by police
professionals (e.g. traffic stops, driving, police-citizen encounters, etc.) that are
functionally different (e.g. driving to a crime scene vs. handling a domestic abuse call),
15
this thesis focuses on learning environments in police training that focus on the
management of conflict. These learning programmes are also known as “police use
of force training” (Rajakaruna et al., 2017) or “officer safety training” (Cushion, 2020).
1.1 Statement of the Problem
The current body of work has been sparked by personal experiences from more than
10 years as a police trainer in a German police institution. During this time many
concerns about police training emerged: Ranging from questions about what should
be trained with officers and how these decisions were reached to questions about
how to design practice activities and why. As the starting point, these questions
pointed towards to what this thesis is about: Providing police trainers (and coach
developers and decision makers) with information about what police trainers should
be thinking of when developing competent police officers. With this focus, the thesis
is not about coach education; even though the results might influence coach
education. The thesis is concerned with optimising coaching in the domain of police
training.
As such the thesis aligns with the epistemological and ontological approach of
pragmatism (Giacobbi, Poczwardowski and Hager, 2005; Cruickshank and Collins,
2017; Jenkins, 2017). By collecting evidence from various aspects of police training
from different sources, the thesis aims at providing a coherent view of aspects that
might be worth optimising. In relation to my personal believes about different
optimisable aspects of police training, the thesis is set out to explore if those believes
are correct or have to be changed. As such the research process was designed in a
way that this work does not become a self-fulfilling prophecy with regards to finding
out what I wanted to find out. Adopting this critical stance, allows focusing discussions
and recommendations for optimising coaching in police training on empirical evidence
of police training in Germany.
Concerning existing empirical evidence, data continuously show that police training
that is focused on handling violent confrontations does not transfer sufficiently to real
world situations (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden, Landman, et al., 2015).
Even though, transfer deficits in preparation for (un)armed conflict situations have
been detected, little attempts to optimise the learning environments in order to better
prepare police officers for coping with violent confrontations have been made to date
(Renden, Savelsbergh and Oudejans, 2016; Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Bertram
16
and Körner, 2017; Staller, Cole, et al., 2017; Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis,
2019a, 2019b; Cushion, 2020).
Possible reasons for the scarcity of research conducted in this area are difficulties in
gaining access to police samples, challenges in the collection and analysis of police
data and difficulties of the police to reflect on inner-institutional practices (Jasch,
2019). For example, there is the historical problem that the law enforcement
community does not believe that individuals outside the policing profession would
assist them in performing their duties (Terrill, 2003). The lack of trust in academic
endeavours may stem from the little or no useful return from the data collected
compared to the resources (e.g. time, manpower) spent to support the research.
Furthermore, problematic issues involve the schedule of participants (police recruits
and police trainers) and sensitive data protection issues.
While research within the professional domain of policing is scarce, research
investigating learning environments for civilians aiming at developing skills for coping
with violent confrontations (“self-defence training”) is also lacking. Studies so far
focused on the effectiveness of self-defence programs (Brecklin, 2008; Ball and
Martin, 2012; Senn et al., 2015; Jordan and Mossman, 2017b, 2017a, 2018),
representative learning environments (Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017) and the
perspective of self-defence practitioners (Heil, Staller and Körner, 2017a, 2019).
However, questions concerning what is needed to cope with conflict situations still
remain unanswered.
In sum, the scarcity of empirical research in the domain of police training with regards
to skill transfer for violent confrontations leads to a limited evidence-base for police
trainers, curriculum designers, coach developers, and decision-makers to draw on as
they prepare their assigned officers for the demands in the field.
1.2 Significance of the Thesis
The current thesis has a practical and theoretical significance. From a practical point
of view, the thesis will provide recommendations for the optimisation of learning
environments in law enforcement for the preparation of police officers for potentially
violent encounters. By providing empirical evidence, the thesis will facilitate the
development of evidence-based curricula in law enforcement settings and will help
coaches and decision-makers within the organisation reflecting about the structure
and organisation of police training. Furthermore, the current work will support coach
developers to enhance coach learning and development for police trainer within the
17
police. Additionally, the results of the thesis might inform conflict management training
beyond the domain of policing (e.g. civilian self-defence training, personal protection
training for correctional officers). Even though some behavioural options differ
between other target groups and police officers (e.g. use of force, tactical equipment,
etc.), there are situations, where the same principles apply for all domains (e.g.
unarmed self-defence). Therefore, other training settings dealing with the
management of physical conflict may also be informed by the empirical evidence
produced by this research. From a theoretical point of view, the current thesis will
broaden our understanding of the coaching process in police training (and other
training settings focusing on conflict management). Specifically, the current body of
work advanced the who-what-who model of coaching in the context of policing (Staller
and Zaiser, 2015a), which was originally based on work by Muir and colleagues (Muir
et al., 2011, 2015; Abraham et al., 2015).
1.3 Aims and Objectives
The overarching aim of this thesis was to provide evidence-based guidance for
optimising coaching in police training. To this end, the who-what-how model of
coaching decision-making (Muir et al., 2011, 2015; Abraham et al., 2015) was used
as a framework to mutually informing objectives:
1. To understand what police recruits perceive they want and need from
police training (Chapter 4),
2. To understand if and how police recruits perceive that their training
transfers from training to the real world and if training meets the demand
of their operational environment (Chapter 5),
3. To understand what training content is needed to prepare for physical
conflict situations and what expertise in the context of self-defence
situations looks like (Chapter 6),
4. To understand how police training is structured and delivered and how
coaches plan and reflect on their practice (Chapter 7),
5. To understand where police trainers get their knowledge from, which
knowledge areas they prefer and use (Chapter 8).
18
1.4 A Personal Reflection About the Decisions Made by the
Researcher
In order to fully understand the structure and content of this thesis, it is important to
recognise that it is the result of more than five years of part-time study; during which
time, significant changes ‘behind the scenes’ led to the need to problem solve and
adapt. The central focus of the thesis is police training in Germany. Although, I have
always had optimising coaching in police training in mind, at the beginning of this
journey the direction of travel (and some data collection) started differently.
In Germany, many agencies, commanders and coaches associated with police
training were reluctant to support or take part in research before the mid-2010s
(Staller and Körner, 2019b). At the start of this study (February 2015), it was not clear
if an agency would support the project. As a result, the PhD journey began with a
more general approach to conflict management and self-defence training. Part way
through my programme of study, my career changed from a sworn police officer to a
full time academic. This transition, and a lectureship at the German Sports University
Cologne, opened doors, resulting in a collaboration between the German Sports
University (collaborating with Swen Körner) and the University of Applied Sciences of
Police and Public Management in Hesse (HfPV), which was officially signed in early
2017. The HfPV is in charge of the basic training of the police recruits in Hessen.
Hence, two years into the journey when data collection for objective 3 was already
finished and data collection for objective 6 (which was a side project at that time) was
almost complete, an opportunity presented itself to focus directly on police training.
As such, I decided to narrow the focus of my study from self-defence and conflict
management training broadly to police training specifically. Besides the opportunity
presented by the HfPV, there were reasons for the narrowing focus. First, even in the
self-defence domain it is hard to conduct research on the actual coaching practice.
The reluctance to take part in research surrounding self-defence training could be
seen in other projects (Heil, Staller and Körner, 2017b; Körner and Staller, 2018a).
Second, the diversity of self-defence training practices and styles (Staller et al., 2016)
may limit the practical implications of this research to the investigated style or system.
Third, police training is more impactful and seemed to have a greater need for
development than civilian self-defence training following political pressure to better
prepare police officers for conflict (Behr, 2018). Fourth, finally and personally, a focus
on law enforcement was more likely to advance my career.
19
The narrowing in focus from generic self-defence training to specific police training (in
Hesse) has three implications for the thesis. First, the subject under investigation was
broadened slightly from a focus on self-defence (Chapter 6) to the range of conflict
management skills covered in police training (Chapter 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9). Second, while
latter studies concentrated on the perception of police officers of Hesse (Chapter 4,
5, 7 and 8) an earlier study sought the views of police training coaches across other
states in Germany, and even Austria (Chapter 9), as sampling was dependent on my
professional and personal network. Third, ethical approval for studies in Chapters 4,
5, 7, and 8 had to be granted by the German Sports University Cologne because of
the status as a collaboration partner to the HfPV. Fortunately, because coping with
conflict was at the core of each study, the findings from all empirical studies inform
the overarching aim of this thesis.
Finally, the structure of the thesis does not reflect the chronology in which the studies
were conducted. Since opportunities for studies arose, while other studies were
already in the process, studies were sometimes conducted simultaneously. The order
of the studies aims at presenting a coherent argument. After extensive discussion
with my supervisors (JP and AA), we decided to present the studies in this order. I
hope the reader can follow the argument of the whole thesis in this manner.
1.5 Structure of the Thesis
The thesis is divided into three main sections: (a) a literature review, (b) the empirical
research and (c) a general discussion synthesising the results of the thesis for the
purpose of proposing practical recommendations. The first section (Chapter 2)
provides a general overview of the relevant literature and the primary theories of
reference, and includes an overview of police training in Germany, research in police
training, sport coaching and its transfer to police training, including an in-depth
discussion of “who-what-how”-model of coaching decision-making and its knowledge
domains that informed!the specific objectives addressed by the empirical work.
In the second section the empirical research is organised in six chapters starting with
a General Methods chapter (Chapter 3), that is followed by five single studies. The
first two studies (Chapters 4 and 5) investigate the wants and needs of police recruits
concerning the practice of police training. Specifically, Chapter 4 focuses on negative
and positive aspects of police training and the wanted competencies of police trainers
and Chapter 5 investigates the perception of graduating police recruits of skill transfer
from the learning to the criterion environment. Given that learners may have a unique
20
perspective of what is needed for conflictual situations on the frontline, the third study
(Chapter 6) aims at investigating the needs of police officers from the perspective of
expert self-defence coaches. While the first three studies focus on the what is wanted
and needed in police training, the next study (Chapter 7) aims at eliciting the reality
of police training with a focus on the structure and delivery of police training and the
planning and reflection of police trainers within this setting. Finally, building on the
actual reality of police training in Chapter 7, the last study (Chapter 8) examines the
source and topic of knowledge police trainers perceive they need, access and apply.
The main body of the empirical work was conducted at the HfPV in
Mühlheim/Germany (Chapter 4, 5 and 7). Additionally, data were collected from police
training coaches from Germany and Austria (Chapter 8) and from an international
group of expert coaches in (physical) conflict management (Chapter 6). In order to
maintain external validity, the samples of the current studies consisted of
professionals working in the domain under investigation making the findings
applicable in the context of policing (Sue, 1999).
Within the empirical work 40 police recruits and four police trainers were interviewed,
64 hours of police training observed, 163 police trainers surveyed and 16 self-defence
coaches participated in three rounds of a Delphi poll. Table 1 displays the different
studies and their participants. All participants gave their informed consent prior to
participating in the study. Depending on the study, participants were based in
Germany (Chapter 4, 5, 7), in German speaking countries (Chapter 8) or from a global
set of countries (Chapter 6).
Table 1: Participants and Data per Study
Study
Chapter
Title
Participants / Data
1
4
Motivation towards police
training;
Role / Importance of the coach
27 police recruits
2
5
Transfer of training; dynamics
of real-world situations
13 police recruits
3
6
Expert coaches’ consensus
about training content
16 self-defence expert coaches
4
7
Observation of police training,
planning and reflecting of police
trainers
2 x 32 hours of training; 24 police
recruits; 4 police training coaches
5
8
Knowledge sources of police
training coaches
163 police training coaches
21
The final section (Chapter 9) summarises and discusses the general findings of the
work, its limitations, and suggestions for further research. Importantly, Chapter 9 also
makes a set of twelve recommendations for optimising coaching in police training.
22
Chapter 2: Literature Review
2 Literature Review
23
The purpose of this review is to provide an in-depth exploration of the literature on
law enforcement training and on coaching in this domain. Thus, this chapter aims to
provide information on the context in which the research presented in this thesis takes
place and the theoretical basis and the rationale for the empirical work conducted.
2.1 Police Training in Germany
2.1.1 The Danger Potential of the Police Profession in Germany
Police officers are asked to put themselves in harm’s way. This includes occupational
hazards, including organisational stressors (e.g., staff shortages, inconsistent
leadership styles) and operational elements (Carleton et al., 2020). Concerning the
latter category, it has been well documented, that violent acts (Ellrich, 2016; Ellrich
and Baier, 2016; Bundeskriminalamt, 2019), accidents (Brandl and Stroshine, 2003)
or regular physical and/or psychological stress (Schmidtke, Fricke and Lester, 1999;
Knesebeck, David and Siegrist, 2005; Violanti, Charles and McCaniels, 2017; Schram
et al., 2019, 2020) have a negative effect on health. have a negative effect on health.
However, it cannot be assumed that the risk potential for every police officer is
similarly high. The variety of tasks conducted by the police service affords different
career paths and different specialisations: from patrolling duties to riot police; from
serving as a service dog handler to a special officer in a special task force or crisis
negotiating group; or from an investigator in economic offences as a "cyber-cop" to a
police trainer. The different fields of activity present different dangers for the health of
the individual. For example, there is an evident increase in the probability of being the
victim of violent acts in field service than is the case in office service (Ellrich and Baier,
2014).
Detailed information on the risk of violence inherent in the police profession in
Germany (Bundeskriminalamt, 2012, 2019) has been captured since 2011 by the
Federal Criminal Police Office on the basis of police crime statistics to produce an
annual Federal Situation Picture on Violence against Law Enforcement Officers. The
recorded acts of violence against police officers (attempts and completed offences)
have shown a slight increase since 2011, which is mainly attributable to the increase
in softer forms of perpetration (deliberate simple bodily harm, threat, coercion) and
resistance to police officers. However, it is not clear if these figures stem from an
increase in the actual frequency of violent acts against police officers or from a more
intensive prosecution and thus, an increased readiness to report such incidents (Derin
and Singelnstein, 2019). In comparison to the increase in violence against police
officers, records of deaths of police officers due to violent acts shows a positive
24
declining, trend (see Figure 1). It is noticeable from the statistics that after 8 deaths in
2000, the number of police officers who have died as a result of violent acts has
remained stable. A possible reason for this could lie in an increasing focus on the idea
of self-protection, which is reflected in the increasing publication of instructions on the
subject (Füllgrabe, 2000, 2002).
Figure 1: Police officers assaulted and killed on duty in Germany (1972 - 2018)
However, police officer’s physical integrity is not only threatened by violent acts
against them in the course of their duty. Data from Hamburg show that in 2011 nine
times more police officers were injured in sports and commuting accidents than in
violence (Behr, 2014). Behr (2014), for example, explicitly doubts the extent to which
the discourse on violence focuses on the actual needs of police officers. Against this
background, the potential dangers must also be taken into account in the training
process. For example, there are risks of injury due to physical interactions in police
training, such as self-defence training (Farkash et al., 2017), due to accidents during
the training of emergency drives (Köhler, 2013) and due to the use of firearms during
training (Schwering et al., 2019). Insofar as the focus of police training is on
maintaining the health of the police officer, training activities should be designed in
such a way that officers and recruits do not suffer more trauma during training focused
on dealing with violence than would be prevented by participating in the training.
25
2.1.2 Police Training: Scope and Training Objectives
Irrespective of the risk to health and safety, the professional handling of the existing
danger potential is part of the daily work of police officers; to the extent that accident
and acts of violence prevention during deployment is regularly referred to as “personal
safety” (“Eigensicherung”) in German regulations (Füllgrabe, 2014). Personal Safety
includes all preventive measures to protect one's own physical integrity during the
performance of one's duties, in particular during deployment. Police training offers the
platform for the development of skills, which is demanded in the law enforcement
guideline 371 (Leitfaden371, 2002): "safety requires constant training" (p. 10). The
continuous improvement of the individual’s personal safety, therefore, is a clear
objective of police training. Other objectives and the subject areas covered by police
training are less strictly defined. While some law enforcement agencies in Germany
refer to this learning setting as “operational training” or “field training”
[“Einsatztraining”], others assign the term “Police training” [“Polizeitraining”] (Staller
and Körner, 2019b; Körner and Staller, 2020b). On an international level there is also
no consensus about the terminology of training programmes enabling police officers
to deal with conflictual situations in the field. Training settings are, for example,
referred to as police training (Isaieva, 2019; Nota and Huhta, 2019), police use of
force training (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Bertram and Körner, 2017), firearms
training (Beighton, Poma and Leonard, 2013), scenario training (Werth, 2011), arrest
and self-defence training (Renden, Savelsbergh and Oudejans, 2016) or officer safety
training (Buttle, 2007; Cushion, 2020). Data from interviews with police trainers show
that there are considerable differences between coaches concerning the definition
and description of these training programmes (Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019d). The
same applies to the organisational embedding in police agencies. The exact
relationship between different training settings, with its associated content and
terminology, does not yet appear to be consented at the present time. For the purpose
of this thesis, police training is considered as a training program that systematically
and purposefully develops skills and capabilities in order to professionally manage
citizen contacts, especially (but not only) in conflict situations, and operational
situations, and to cope with acts of aggression against the police (Staller and Körner,
2019b). The overarching aim of the training is to optimise police officer’s competence
to act in the aforementioned situational settings.
26
2.1.3 Research in police training
Research in the police training domain has a long history. Given the police’s
legitimacy to use (deadly) force, research has intensively focused on police use of
force models (Binder and Scharf, 1980; Bernt and Kuhleber, 1991; Amendola, 1995;
Terrill and Paoline, 2012) and weapons training (Vučković et al., 2008; Nieuwenhuys
and Oudejans, 2011b, 2011a; Shi, 2019). While use of force models try to depict and
describe the decision-making process in police use of force incidents in order help
officers to develop the decision-makings skills needed in an encounter (Boulton,
2014), other avenues of research focus on the effects of distinct training aspects in
order to enhance performance in the field. For example, studies on weapon training
regularly focus on the effects of different weapon and training systems (Kratzig, 2013;
Getty, 2014; Shi, 2019), human performance under pressure (Nieuwenhuys and
Oudejans, 2010; Vickers and Lewinski, 2012; Renden, Landman, et al., 2015) or the
effects of different equipment (MacIntosh and Desmoulin, 2019) or tactics
(Nieuwenhuys et al., 2016).
Another research strand, investigating law enforcement performance in the real world,
suggests, that training does not necessarily transfer to situations when it is needed
(Beehr et al., 2004; M. D. White, 2006; Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden,
Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015). Reports of deficits in skill transfer regularly put forward
recommendations to tackle the observed problem. These include (a) optimising
learning environments (“how skills are taught”) (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013;
Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015; Renden, Savelsbergh and Oudejans, 2016); (b)
refining taught skills (“what skills are taught”) (Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015;
Renden, Savelsbergh and Oudejans, 2016) and (c) optimising underlying
organisational structures (“providing more training”) (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013;
Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015).
Interestingly, discussions around what and how skills are taught are then frequently
negotiated in the context of what (combat) system is taught. For example, in a recent
study by Renden et al. (2016) the existing Arrest and Self-defence Skills (ASDS)
Training has been compared to the Functional Intuitive Replication Scenario Training
(FIRST). Whereas the well-established ASDS contains isolated exercises on impact,
kicking, and control techniques, FIRST includes the training of anticipation,
perception, communication skills, and reflex-based defensive movements. Even
though FIRST stresses the importance of training methodology, the study did not
explicitly focus on pedagogical approaches, instead conveying the notion that ASDS
27
is preferable to FIRST. This theme of comparing different systems in order to find “the
best” system can be observed throughout the literature (Körner and Staller, 2018a).
The training process is being treated as a question of the right (combat) system, with
the assumption that skills transfer best to the real world, if the individual only learned
the right system. Without denying the legitimacy of “system questions” in principle,
the sole concentration on questions about the ‘right system’ for preparing for violent
conflict is the reason for numerous problems in practice and science (Körner and
Staller, 2018a). This is due to a combination of four core reasons, that have been
described by Körner and Staller (2018). First, clarity and orientation for users in a
relativistic world rarely comes from dualistic questions; second, research questions
about the “best system” typically arise from economic questions (what shall we invest
in?) rather than what is best for the practitioner operating in complex environments
(what works for whom in what circumstance and why?); third, dualistic research
blocks the willingness to engage in scientific research; and fourth, dualistic research
with a focus on “the best system” is vulnerable in neglecting questions of pedagogy.
This neglection of coaching science within the domain of police training is evident.
Even though police training is continuously evolving based on new technologies and
information from various sources, a holistic approach to coaching is still missing.
However, inspired by the field of sports coaching, first attempts to optimise learning
environments for (un)armed conflict management training in the context of policing
have recently been made (Staller, 2015a, 2015c, 2015b; Staller and Zaiser, 2015b,
2015a; Staller and Abraham, 2016; Staller, Abraham, et al., 2017; Staller, Zaiser and
Körner, 2017).
2.2 The Complex and Nonlinear Nature of Violent Encounters
Before reviewing literature concerning coaching in sports and police training, it is
important to acknowledge the inherent complexity and nonlinearity of the demands in
the field. Specifically, concerning violent encounters, conceptualising such situations
as complex and nonlinear has a fundamental impact on the coaching process, that
aims at developing the needed skills to cope with such situations.
Complexity and nonlinear dynamics are crucial for the understanding of behavioural
and social phenomena (Schiepek, 2017). In chaos and complexity research, as well
as different types of dynamics systems theory, systems’ behaviour is characterized
by nonlinearity (Simon, 2015). Nonlinear behaviours can be observed in social
systems such as economics, law and politics (Luhmann, 1996), psychotherapy
28
(Schiepek, 2017), violent encounters (Jensen and Wrisberg, 2014), coaching in
general (Cushion, 2007) and self-defence coaching in particular (Körner and Staller,
2018a; Staller, Körner and Abraham, 2020). Within these systems, nonlinearity
appears as a trait of complexity (Körner and Staller, 2018a). These types of systems
are complex because they consist of interdependent parts, that interact with each
other through competitive nonlinear collaboration leading to self-organised, emergent
behaviour (Sengupta, 2006). As such, a complex system cannot be fully explained by
an understanding of its component parts.
Complexity leads to a relativization of the weak and strong assumption of causality,
which are present in the context of linear systems (Simon, 2015). Weak causality
states that the same causes lead to consistent effects. Strong causality states that
similar causes produce similar effects, i.e., weak changes in the initial conditions
result in slight deviations in the results. Both cases are based on the assumption of a
proportionality of cause and effect. In linear systems effects of the changes of the
state of the system are additive and proportional to the magnitude of the changes
(Wilkinson, 1997). Changing multiple parameters simultaneously is simply a
superposition of the change in each individual parameter. Consequently, the different
parameters of the system may each be studied separately due to the additive nature
of changes to the system. As such, linear systems are time-reversible and predictable.
The linear nature ensures, that “past and future may be deduced with arbitrary
precision from the present state” (Wilkinson, 1997, p. 3). The behaviour of such
systems is calculable. In contrast, nonlinear contexts are characterized by a double
nonproportionality (Körner and Staller, 2018a): the nonproportionality of cause and
effect (a) in the sense of strong causality (minimal/maximal changes can cause
maximal/minimal effects) and (b) in the sense of weak causality (state A can be the
cause of effect B, C, or D, etc.). As such, the effects of changing individual parameters
cannot be studied separately as in linear systems. Past and future are not deductible
from the present state of the system. Randomness is part of its mechanics (Wilkinson,
1997). In essence complexity is characterized by a limited predictability (Schiepek,
2017). With regards to the decisions that have to be made in the context of a complex
system (e.g. coaching or physical conflict situation), determining the “right” course of
action is clouded by the level of complexity. The more complex a situation gets, the
harder it gets to determine the “right” decision (Luhmann, 2009).
In his seminal paper about the complexity of decision-making situations, Luhmann
(2009) argues that complexity consists of three dimensions: the factual, the temporal
29
and the social dimension. The dimensions include the type and number of factors to
be taken into account in any given decision situation with factual, temporal or social
impact. With regards to the violent encounters, the factual dimension includes, for
example, biomechanical degrees of freedom of the involved individuals, the number
of involved people or environmental factors (movement space, light and weather
conditions, floor, etc.). The temporal dimension consists of considerations regarding
the immediate results of conflict resolution, the long-term effects and the dynamic of
the situation. For example, in the context of police-citizen interactions an investment
in showing empathy or perspective taking can result in more stable relationships than
immediate use of force. Also, legal assessment of the planned actions may have
consequences in the future. Finally, the social dimension encompasses the context
in which the violent encounter emerges and, for example, the effects on cognition of
involved and uninvolved people. Each dimension contains several attributes that
influence the decision of the individual faced with a self-defence situation. Since – in
contrast to sport situations – real world interactions are not constrained by a rigid set
of agreed rules, there is, theoretically, an indefinite number of possible attributes
influencing decision-making and the outcome of the violent confrontation. Based on
these attributes the individual is faced with different decision options.
In order to formally describe situations of different complexity and the associated
decision options, researchers in the sport domain have proposed using graphs (Raab,
2003) that represent the decision options from the perspective of the acting individual
and the attributes that influence this decision. The complexity of a situation can then
be calculated “by counting the number of components (options and attributes) and the
number of connections between them” (Raab, 2003, p. 409). Hence, the complexity
of a situation increases when (a) the number of options increases and their detectable
differences decrease, and (b) the number of attributes used to define a situation, and
the relation between situations and decisions increases. The capacity to cope with
complex situation varies individually (Schiepek, 2017). As such, in order to cope with
complex situations and to operationalize decision-making, complexity is regularly
reduced (Luhmann, 2009). For example, in pursuance to describe optimal decisions
in sport situations for specific combinations of situational variables, combinations of
the representation of the situation and the possible options can be defined as “if-then”
rules (McPherson and Thomas, 1989; Johnson, 2006). However, there is a major
problem of reducing complexity: Using a reductionist representation of a complex
system, may lead to a reduced understanding of the system in individuals, who use
the reductionist representation (Luhmann, 2009).
30
For example, the underlying logic of “if-then” rules is a linear causality (Schöllhorn,
Hegen and Davids, 2012), an assumption that is not true for complex systems.
Individuals learning to understand a complex system like violent confrontations or
coaching within this context, may lack understanding of the complexity of the system,
if learning only via “if-then” rules. Even though the limits of “if-then” rules have been
accounted for in decision-making in sports (Johnson, 2006), in coaching (Abraham
and Collins, 2011a) and in self-defence training (Körner and Staller, 2018a), the use
of ‘if-then’ rules still appears to be the dominant framework that guides training.
Likewise, conceptualizing violent encounters as linear systems for coaching purposes
has an intuitive appeal. Having certain rules, provides a safety net for individuals
thinking about coping with uncertain situations. Furthermore, this format is easy to
capture on pictures, describe in texts or explain on video: If somebody attacks you
like A, then do X; if somebody attacks you with B, then do Y. The same is true for the
coaching process. The vast amount of availably drill books and online videos about
drills and training activities highlight the prominent status of the “if-then” framework in
self-defence coaching: If your trainees lack A, then do training activity X; if you want
to develop B in your trainee, then practice Y.
Complexity theorist have argued that reducing complexity for short periods in time
within the learning process is not necessarily a bad thing (Luhmann, 2009). For
example, it is argued that many nonlinear systems can be approximated by linear
systems to such a degree that there is no need to solve the more complicated
nonlinear form (Wilkinson, 1997). So using and relying on “if-then” rules in self-
defence training and coaching may have its benefits, as well as its limits.
The “if this, then that” approach is analogous to a recipe book (Abraham and Collins,
2011a). The cook who does not have a large amount of knowledge about why different
ingredients work together and how different approaches to cooking change the final
flavour of the dish, just buys a recipe book and recreates the dish. This only works
under the assumption that (a) the basic situation is the same and (b) nothing goes
wrong in practice (due to own mistakes or a changing situation). If, for example, an
ingredient is out of stock (a) or two more guests confirm their arrival after the cooking
has started, the cook is confronted with new or different problems and does not
necessarily have an effective solution. To complete the analogy, in self-defence or
police training, dependence on drill books (and media) are problematic if you don’t
understand the specific situation and why the technique or training activities work in
that situation (Abraham and Collins, 2011a). The limit described here lies in the
31
difference between declarative and procedural knowledge and the inherent
complexity of violent encounters (Körner and Staller, 2018a; Staller and Körner,
2020a) as well as in the complexity of coaching situations (Bowes and Jones, 2006;
Cushion, 2007) and the associated process of coach decision-making.
2.3 Coaching in Sports
Professional coaching is a goal led Professional Judgement and Decision-
Making [PJDM] process. It requires the application of explicit (formalistic and
substantive) and tacit knowledge in making judgements about setting and
achieving athlete development and performance goals within and while
negotiating socio-political environments. These judgements and decisions are
made using both classical and naturalistic methods drawing on analytical,
recognition primed and intuitive processes. Furthermore, these judgements and
decisions are completed through nested thinking that connects the long-term
strategic goals and plans with everyday practice. PJDM and nested thinking is
a fluid, dynamic feed-forward and feedback process that is regularly monitored
and adapted based on progression towards or the emergence of new goals.
The capacity to operate at this level of coaching performance is dependent on
having a professional knowledge and skill base that emphasises understanding,
perceiving, simulating, diagnosing, solving, planning, situational awareness,
embracing uncertainty, reflecting and self-regulating” (Abraham, 2015, p. 142)
Abraham’s conceptualisation of coaching is the adopted philosophical stance of this
thesis and is consistent with contemporary conceptualisations of coaching (Lyle,
2018a) as a decision-making process at its core (Lyle, 2002; Cushion, Armour and
Jones, 2003; Abraham, Collins and Martindale, 2006; Abraham, 2015). The stance
acknowledges that coaching involves decision-making in complex, dynamic and
unpredictable situations and that coaching is domain specific. What works in one
situation for one performer will not be equally effective elsewhere (Côté et al., 2007;
Abraham and Collins, 2011a). In order to resolve this issue, several models of the
coaching process have been developed. These models have been categorised as
either “for” or “of” coaching (Lyle, 2002; Cushion, Armour and Jones, 2006). Although
models for coaching were generated through critical thinking and review of the
literature, they have not necessarily been tested in practice. In contrast, models of
coaching are grounded in practice, but often lack an empirical and/or theoretical
evidence base. In order to account for the dichotomy, Abraham et al. (2006) proposed
a coaching model that is positioned between models for and of coaching.
32
The proposed “coaching schematic” (see
Figure 2) was validated through a consensus of expert coaches (Gilbert and Trudel,
2004a, 2004b). It presents the ideas that coaching requires (a) knowledge from
several linked domains; (b) higher-order thinking skills; and (c) development of
procedural and declarative knowledge in order to develop optimal learning
environments that achieve the set goals. According to Abraham et al. (2011) the
coaching schematic was built on the premise that “the design of effective coaching
environments is based on an ongoing series of ‘pros and cons’, trade-off decisions
taken at a micro, meso and macro (e.g. activity that minute, versus work in that
session, versus programme for that month) level” (p. 209).
(i.e. drawing knowledge from linked domains, effec-
tive problem solving and decision making, conceptual
competence and/or declarative expertise, etc.) and
including a coach, an athlete, other coaches, other
athletes and the environment within which all these
key people operate. Furthermore, there are signifi-
cant others such as parents and teachers who can fur-
ther impact on the coaching process (see Ch. 4).
Such complexity led some researchers to conclude
that coaching is not as planned and systematic
(e.g. Cushion et al 2006, Saury & Durand 1998)
as others would suggest (e.g. Lyle 2002). In fact,
coaching may well be similar to occupations such
as social work, which have to contend with the
‘swampy lowlands’ of practice – where the random-
ness of human behaviour can lay waste to the best
laid plans (Thompson 2000).
While there is some truth in these interpreta-
tions, we would argue (and do so in the next and
subsequent sections) that (good) coaching is, and
indeed must be, systematic. We just had/have to
get better at identifying and developing the systems
that can and do cope with the ‘swampy lowlands’.
For example, how does an expert coach of youth
athletes keep a session on track when one or two
seem intent on disruption? How does an expert coach
of elite athletes keep a group of headstrong per-
formers focused when jealousy can quickly lead
to confrontation? Expertise research in coaching
would suggest that good coaches will spot these sorts
of problems earlier, understand the problems better
and draw on knowledge to solve them (Abraham &
Collins 1998a, Schempp et al 2006). However, such
descriptions don’t actually describe the DM systems
within each of these stages at both an explicit
and implicit level (Nash & Collins 2006), making
it difficult to pass this vital metacognitive activity
on to less expert or even novice coaches.
Given that the schematic presented was validated
by a group of expert coaches (Abraham et al 2006)
and further pilot testing (Abraham & Collins 2006,
Collins et al 2003) has supported the explanatory
power of the schematic, we would suggest that the
approach of explicitly considering
•the athlete;
•the sport; and
•the learning environment
KNOWLEDGE SOURCE
Declarative
‘OLOGIES
Sport psychology
Organizational psychology
Sociology
Biomechanics
Nutrition
Exercise physiology
Motor control
SPORT-SPECIFIC
KNOWLEDGE
PEDAGOGY
Talent development
Coach behaviour
Motor and cognitive
learning
Metacognition
MAJOR APPLICATIONS
Procedural and Conceptual
Mental skills,
Fitness training
and lifestyle,
Physical skills
Technique and Tactics of…
Planning
Drills, Practices
and Communication
PERFORMANCE
ENVIRONMENT
PREPARATION
and
COMPETITION
ORGANIZATION
TRAINING
GOAL
Skill development/
Enjoyment/
Achievement/
Education/
Medals/Personal
development/
‘Fun’ etc
Fig. 15.1 •The coaching schematic, illustrating the comprehensive and required emphasis to establish and promote
effective coaching practice in performance environments. Arrows indicate level of cross linkage within thinking and DM
processes. Adapted from Abraham et al 2006.
SECTION THREE Practice
210
33
Figure 2: The coaching schematic (in Abraham et al., 2011, p. 209; adapted from
Abraham et al., 2006)
The model articulates the separation of declarative and procedural knowledge.
Declarative knowledge (left-hand column) refers to the accumulation of a
propositional network of facts (Anderson, 1982). It represents the “why” knowledge or
the knowledge of understanding and is also referred to as “conceptual knowledge”
(Byrnes and Wasik, 1991). Procedural knowledge (second column) can be viewed as
the “doing knowledge” or knowing how to do something (Abraham and Collins, 1998).
The separation of these two knowledge structures explains how one can exist without
the other (Abraham and Collins, 2011a). The self-defence practitioner who does
something (procedural) without knowing why (declarative), or the self-defence
researcher, who knows why something works (declarative) but cannot apply that
knowledge practically. Next, the model recognises that coaching knowledge helps the
coach to understand (a) the athlete; (b) the sport; and (c) the learning environment.
The set of arrows displays the need to seek and consider the link between the different
domains of knowledge. The model seeks to provide a systematic approach for
understanding and developing the coaching/skill development process in an
uncertain, dynamic and complex environment.
Using coaching models in these environments have been criticised in general
(Cushion, Armour and Jones, 2006) and with regards to the coaching schematic in
(i.e. drawing knowledge from linked domains, effec-
tive problem solving and decision making, conceptual
competence and/or declarative expertise, etc.) and
including a coach, an athlete, other coaches, other
athletes and the environment within which all these
key people operate. Furthermore, there are signifi-
cant others such as parents and teachers who can fur-
ther impact on the coaching process (see Ch. 4).
Such complexity led some researchers to conclude
that coaching is not as planned and systematic
(e.g. Cushion et al 2006, Saury & Durand 1998)
as others would suggest (e.g. Lyle 2002). In fact,
coaching may well be similar to occupations such
as social work, which have to contend with the
‘swampy lowlands’ of practice – where the random-
ness of human behaviour can lay waste to the best
laid plans (Thompson 2000).
While there is some truth in these interpreta-
tions, we would argue (and do so in the next and
subsequent sections) that (good) coaching is, and
indeed must be, systematic. We just had/have to
get better at identifying and developing the systems
that can and do cope with the ‘swampy lowlands’.
For example, how does an expert coach of youth
athletes keep a session on track when one or two
seem intent on disruption? How does an expert coach
of elite athletes keep a group of headstrong per-
formers focused when jealousy can quickly lead
to confrontation? Expertise research in coaching
would suggest that good coaches will spot these sorts
of problems earlier, understand the problems better
and draw on knowledge to solve them (Abraham &
Collins 1998a, Schempp et al 2006). However, such
descriptions don’t actually describe the DM systems
within each of these stages at both an explicit
and implicit level (Nash & Collins 2006), making
it difficult to pass this vital metacognitive activity
on to less expert or even novice coaches.
Given that the schematic presented was validated
by a group of expert coaches (Abraham et al 2006)
and further pilot testing (Abraham & Collins 2006,
Collins et al 2003) has supported the explanatory
power of the schematic, we would suggest that the
approach of explicitly considering
•the athlete;
•the sport; and
•the learning environment
KNOWLEDGE SOURCE
Declarative
‘OLOGIES
Sport psychology
Organizational psychology
Sociology
Biomechanics
Nutrition
Exercise physiology
Motor control
SPORT-SPECIFIC
KNOWLEDGE
PEDAGOGY
Talent development
Coach behaviour
Motor and cognitive
learning
Metacognition
MAJOR APPLICATIONS
Procedural and Conceptual
Mental skills,
Fitness training
and lifestyle,
Physical skills
Technique and Tactics of…
Planning
Drills, Practices
and Communication
PERFORMANCE
ENVIRONMENT
PREPARATION
and
COMPETITION
ORGANIZATION
TRAINING
GOAL
Skill development/
Enjoyment/
Achievement/
Education/
Medals/Personal
development/
‘Fun’ etc
Fig. 15.1 •The coaching schematic, illustrating the comprehensive and required emphasis to establish and promote
effective coaching practice in performance environments. Arrows indicate level of cross linkage within thinking and DM
processes. Adapted from Abraham et al 2006.
SECTION THREE Practice
210
34
particular (Cushion, 2007), on the grounds that the inherent complexity of coaching
cannot be reflected within these models (Luhmann, 2009). Furthermore, it has been
argued that domain and role specifity makes is hard to develop a general coaching
model (Lyle, 2018a). Moreover, developing, discarding, revisioning and updating
coaching models is itself a complex and dynamic process. That being said, coaching
models – even if discarded at some point in time – present a valuable tool for
stimulating debate (Lyle, 2018a).
Tackling the issue of complexity and how to operationalize decisions in these
environments (or systems), Luhmann (2011) reasoned that complex systems have to
be operationalized through decisions of reductionism in order to solve applied
problems. In defence of the coaching schematic and in line with this argument,
Abraham and Collins (2011) argued that coaches are indeed in need of a systematic
representation allowing them to develop and help them in their decision-making
process, because complexity alone may not account as a valid argument for not
providing a coaching model. Modelling the coaching process may indeed help
coaches to navigate through the complex system of coaching practice (Abraham and
Collins, 2011a; Lyle, 2018a). As such, the coaching schematic was validated by
expert coach consensus (Abraham, Collins and Martindale, 2006) and further pilot
testing as described by Abraham and Collins (2011).
The argument of lack of specifity of coaching models may hold true for the coaching
schematic, however, the argument has been made that the more complex a decision
situation gets, the more abstract decision criteria must be (Luhmann, 2011). As such,
the coaching schematic provides a tool that is abstract enough to tackle the decision-
making process of coaches at its core and simultaneously allows enough room for
specific coaching contexts to make use of it. As such, the model provides a pragmatic
template for modelling specific coaching contexts like, for example, coaching in the
police use of force domain (Staller and Zaiser, 2015a) or in the context of self-defence
coaching and decision-making (Körner and Staller, 2019b).
Bearing the criticisms in mind, but still focused on delivering a practical applicable
model, Abraham and Collins (2011) redrew the coaching schematic (see Figure 3) in
order to further facilitate the theory to practice process and to operationalize the ideas
into an approach that could be used in coaching practice.
35
Figure 3: The redrawn coaching schematic (Abraham & Collins, 2011, p. 215)
Within this redrawn coaching schematic, Abraham and Collins (2011) put emphasis
on the following aspects: First, the coaching process is goal-directed consisting of a
combination of one goal for the total process (session, programme etc.) and the
desired outcome goals that stem from the various options informed by each domain
and their combinations. Second, the behaviour of the coach is based on decisions
that are informed by the blend of three domains of knowledge, who, what and how.
Third, the three domains of knowledge are distinct from each other and as such may
provide different answers to the same problem. Fourth, the science of coaching lies
in knowing and understanding the implication of each domain and their interactions.
Fifth, and finally, developing, refining, and deploying the optimum “blend” from these
knowledge domains is seen as the art of coaching. The centre of this who-what-how
model shows the observable output from the coach decision-making process.
From a practical point of view, the coaching process can, therefore, be viewed as a
series of decisions that are initiated by and the finally checked against a goal, in order
to provide the best-fit option plan for a particular training setting (Abraham and Collins,
2011a). This process is then repeated endlessly adapting to changes in situations
and across different timespans (i.e. micro, meso, macro). To make good decisions
the model identifies the coach’s need for a deep understanding of the learner, the
curriculum, and the learning environment in order to systematically plan, deliver and
review training sessions (Abraham et al., 2015).
•the three are distinct, and may offer different or
differing answers;
•the science of coaching lies in knowing and
understanding the implications of each domain,
and their interactions; and
•the art lies in developing, refining and deploying
the optimum ‘blend’ from these domains.
In fact, redrawing the schematic in this manner is
in keeping with the tone of this chapter in that
Figure 15.3 reflects what research says about effec-
tive problem defining and solving. Anderson (1987)
has described how, as humans, we can rely on a range
of weak problem-solving methods such as trial
and error or heuristic approaches such as working
backwards from the solution in the absence of more
effective and efficient methods. They are termed
weak because these methods lack a coherent strategy
to DM and can lead to people working hard but not
necessarily smartly. In contrast to these approaches,
research in disparate DM environments such as
coaching (Abraham et al 2006) computer program-
ming (Davies 1994, Zeitz & Spoehr 1989) and
medicine (Johnson et al 1981) displays how experts
who are strategic in their thinking take a similar,
breadth-first and hierarchical approach that deliber-
ately draws on knowledge from several interrelated
domains in order to understand and solve a problem.
As eloquently described by one of the coaches in the
Abraham et al (2006) study:
Are you familiar with the move towards synoptic papers at
A level [an optional national examination taken in England
and Wales by 18-year-olds]? Synoptic papers basically
draw knowledge from all areas to answer a central
question. That is what the good coach does. They have to
be good at the synoptic work. They have to be able to draw
things from different sports. They have to be able to bring
different sciences, etc. to answer the central question or
problem. That’s what good coaches can do. You can’t
pigeon-hole things for a coach and if I was looking for an
elite coach that’s what I would be seeing, somebody who
could bring a whole lot of different knowledge to solve
problems.
Team sport coach, Abraham et al 2006, p. 558
Consequently, the redrawn schematic in
Figure 15.3 represents a breadth-first approach to
coach problem solving and DM. There is, however,
one further bonus of drawing the schematic in this
fashion. The centre of the triangle shows the observ-
able output from the DM process. These outputs are
essentially solutions to problems, or specific proce-
dural knowledge. As such, these outputs become a
knowledge source in themselves that can be called
on again in the future to answer similar problems,
a process termed tactical learning by Anderson
(1990). These ‘personal favourite’ solutions are dif-
ferent to the recipe approach we described earlier, as
they are arrived at through critical reflection and are
justifiable against theory. Even here though, regular
revision is important if the coach isn’t to fall into the
Declarative understanding
Conceptual understanding
of performer
and performer’s needs
of ‘ologies
Goal
Declarative understanding Declarative understanding
Observable output from
coach in performance
environments. e.g. goals,
plans, drills, communication
Conceptual understanding
of teaching and
learning environments
Conceptual
understanding of
technique and tactics
of pedagogy, motor and
cognitive skill acquisition
of spor t-specific perceptuo-
decision and technical models
Fig. 15.3 •The redrawn coaching schematic, showing a conceptual view of goal-based coach problem solving and
decision making (for the sake of brevity the term ‘conceptual’ has been used in place of ‘broad procedural’).
CHAPTER 15Effective skill development
215
36
More recently, Abraham and colleagues (Abraham et al., 2015; Muir et al., 2015; Lara-
Bercial et al., 2017; Till et al., 2019) have added further knowledge areas that shape
coach decision-making. These include the coach’s understanding of (a) the context
in which they operate; (b) their existing knowledge, beliefs, values and behaviours;
and (c) the coaching practice process per se, which consists of planning, delivering
and reflecting practices. These six interrelated areas of theoretical and applied
knowledge form the basis for a framework for decision-making within coaching (see
Figure 4)
Figure 4: The who-what-how model of coaching (Lara-Bercial et al., 2017)
2.4 Coaching in Police Training
Even there are practical elements of law enforcement that require coaching by
teaching personal (e.g. police trainers, firearms trainers, self-defence instructors),
research aimed at informing the coach decision-making process, and thus the
development of professional coaches, is scarce. The only coaching model specific to
the context of police training that exists is a direct adaptation and German translation
of the who-what-how model of coaching (Abraham et al., 2015; Staller and Zaiser,
2015a). Figure 5 depicts the English translation of the model, which has been used in
formal coach development courses in the State of Hesse (Staller and Körner, 2019b).
However, this adaptation does not acknowledge the importance of understanding the
context, the self and the plan-do-review reflection process.
39
Coaching Expertise
of coaches’ understanding of how to create a positive and optimal learning envi-
ronment. This model also highlights the relevance of coaches’ understanding
of the cultures and contexts in which they operate and of their own personal
values and philosophy (figure 4.1).
FIGURE 4.1 The who-what-how model of coaching knowledge.
Adapted from Abraham et al., 20156.
1Performance here is understood as the process of coaching, not a win–loss record.
2Dreyfus, H.L., & Dreyfus, S.E. (1986). Mind Over Machine. New York, NY: Free Press.
3Berliner, D.C. (1994). Expertise: The wonders of exemplary performance. In J.N. Mangieri and C.
Collins Block (Eds.), Creating Powerful Thinking in Teachers and Students. Fort Worth, TX: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
4Schempp, P.G., McCullick, B., and Sannen Mason, I. (2006). The development of expert coaching.
In R.L. Jones (Ed.), The Sports Coach as Educator (pp. 145-161). London, UK: Routledge.
5Côté, J., and Gilbert, W. (2009). An integrative definition of coaching effectiveness and expertise.
International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 4(3): 307-323; Gilbert, W., & Côté, J. (2013).
Defining coaching effectiveness: A focus on coaches’ knowledge. In P. Potrac, W. Gilbert, & J. Den-
ison (Eds.), Handbook of Sports Coaching (pp. 147-159). London, UK: Routledge.
U
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
o
f
s
e
l
f
:
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
b
e
l
i
e
f
s
,
v
a
l
u
e
s
a
n
d
b
e
h
a
v
i
o
r
s
E7213/ICCE/fig 04.01/580981/HR/kh-r2
Plan
Do
Review
WHO are you coaching?
Using bio-psycho-social theories
and concepts as thinking tools
to understand your players’
needs and wants
Understanding of culture and context:
Policies, pathways, resources, NGB, player/athlete/participant/other
expectations and constraints
HOW are you coaching?
Using skill acquisition theories
and concepts as thinking tools
to optimise learning and
development opportunities
WHAT are you coaching?
Using technical, tactical and
psycho-motor theories and concepts
as thinking tools to build your sport-
specific performance model
37
Figure 5: The who-what-how model of coaching in police training (Staller et al., 2015;
adapted from Abraham et al., 2015)
Besides this conceptualisation of coaching, research in the police domain is yet to put
the subject of coaching decision-making on the agenda yet. As such, discussions
about coaching practice in police training are still missing. However, some
researchers investigated police training coaches’ behaviour in order to optimise the
learning process in police training settings have attempted to locate the role of police
training or the coach in police training settings. For example, it has repeatedly been
argued to put trainees in the centre of the learning process (Birzer, 2003; Shipton,
2009; Basham, 2014). However, research suggests, that educators in the policing
sector still mainly engage in teacher-centred models of instruction (Shipton, 2012;
Basham, 2014; Cushion, 2020). Pointing out this discrepancy between pedagogical
knowledge in lifelong learning settings and current practice in the policing context,
Basham (2014) argues to abandon the term of police instructors, since educators (that
is, coaches) are needed, who “not only understand the subject and its application in
the operational environment; but also the student, and how to reach those police
students through various approaches” (p. 106).
While these attempts to tackle the issue of pedagogy in police training are valuable
first attempts to bring this issue in the spotlight of researchers and decision-makers
38
in law enforcement agencies alike, the development of coaches and their decision-
making in coaching practice is still left to chance. Current investigations into the
pathway of becoming a police training coach in Germany suggests, that there is a
strong biographical effect in the selection of coaches. Regularly good operators or
individuals with martial arts or shooting background are chosen for this role (Körner,
Staller and Kecke, 2019e). It is automatically assumed that being a good operator or
martial artists equals being a good coach. This understanding of the coaching role
seems prevalent in the policing domain, and my account for the observed teacher-
centred learning settings (Shipton, 2012; Basham, 2014; Cushion, 2020).
In order to professionalize police training, it has recently been argued to
professionalize the role of the coach (Körner and Staller, 2018a; Staller and Körner,
2019b). Short-term goals include (a) focusing on pedagogic competencies in the
recruiting process and (b) the development of police trainers’ decision-making an
understanding. In order to help coaches balance “pros and cons” in their daily
decision-making an understanding of the six different knowledge domains identified
in Abraham and colleagues latest iteration of the model of coach is essential.
However, evidence-based knowledge focusing on police training in each domain is
scarce. Therefore, in order to optimise the learning environment in police training, the
current knowledge in each domain should be reviewed with the express purpose of
identifying the gaps to be filled.
2.4.1 Understanding the “Who“
The development of people is a bio-psycho-social process (Bailey et al., 2010;
MacNamara et al., 2011; Collins et al., 2012) with the individual at its core. The
interactive dynamic of changing biological, psychological and sociological factors
facilitate and constrain the development of the individuum (Abraham, Muir and
Morgan, 2010). The biological development and fitness levels of police officers varies
between individuals (Crawley et al., 2016) and changes over lifetime and the course
of their professional pathways (Orr et al., 2017, 2018; Kukic et al., 2018). This
variance has significant implications for each officer’s psycho-motor development
towards the skill needed for operational duty (Robinson et al., 2018).
Concerning the psycho-social perspective Coté and Gilbert postulated, that effective
coaches develop their learner’s capacities in the areas of competence, confidence,
connection, and character tailored to the individual needs (Côté and Gilbert, 2009).
The key messages for coaches are, that they should (a) individualise competence
39
information that is positive, but that is also realistic in relation to what participants can
observe through peer comparison (competence), (b) enable competence to be
evaluated by participants according to self-referenced improvement and effort
(confidence), (c) promote positive participant-peer, and coach interaction and the
demonstration of pro-social behaviours by encouraging cooperation and recognition
of the needs and abilities of others (connection) and (d) promote moral reasoning and
provide opportunities to demonstrate character and caring (character) (Abraham, Muir
and Morgan, 2010). Focusing on the social aspect, especially concerning connection
and character, research in the sport domain has shown, that throughout the process
learners are not only learning technical or tactical lessons but also developing
attitudes, values and beliefs (Cushion, 2011). Concerning the domain of policing,
officers’ attitudes and beliefs towards police-cititzen interactions are socialised
throughout their career (Behr, 2006; Charman, 2017a) and through their training
(Charman, 2017b; Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019e). Depending on their
experiences and social development different believes, attitudes and competencies
concerning the management of conflict might manifest (Behr, 2002). There is
evidence that beliefs and attitudes that increase the likelihood of the use of coercive
conflict resolution methods are explicitly and implicitly learned. These include the
exaggeration of occupational dangers (Marenin, 2016), a prevalence of learning
coercive conflict resolution techniques compared to cooperative conflict resolution
techniques (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a) and a
police culture that nurtures these beliefs (Klukkert, Ohlemacher and Feltes, 2008;
Lynch, 2017; Branch, 2020). Concerning the use of non-coercive conflict resolution
skills, how they are trained and the extent to which they are trained – especially
compared to the amount of forceful options – further studies investigating the effects
on actual behavioural outcomes are needed (Todak and March, 2021).
Concerning psychological factors, motives of police officers why and to what extent
they participate in police training in what activities varies may change over time
(Pester, Körner and Staller, 2019; Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019b; Wolfe et
al., 2019). As such, understanding the motivational landscape of the individual is
essential in order to design optimal learnings environments for skills development that
are challenging and perceived as motivating (Abraham and Collins, 2011a). In the
context of police training in general and in police use of force training specifically, only
a few studies have investigated the learners wants and needs (Honess, 2016, 2020;
Rajakaruna et al., 2017). In a recent study investigating self-motivation in the context
of mandatory police training in general (Honess, 2016), 809 police officers of England
40
and Wales were asked which factors would have increased their personal motivation
to undertake mandatory training. The results showed that the course content could
be more interesting and more relevant for the police officers. Furthermore, the method
of training delivery has been identified as a major aspect to enhance. To follow up
these results qualitatively, Honess (2016) conducted a focused group interview with
eleven police officers. The results of the interviews indicated that training content is
not considered relevant, when the officer cannot apply it to the working environment.
With regards to how training is delivered, police officers complained about the de-
contextualisation of the course content. One participant of the study stated, that “some
of the subjects are very dry and very sterile and very difficult to deliver, but that doesn’t
mean you can’t make them interesting by bringing in enough aspects of everyday
policing to, to spark that interest” (Honess, 2016, p. 92.).
With regards specifically to police training, Rajakaruna et al. (2017) conducted focus
group interviews with Australian police officers to investigate the question if current
training addresses the required skills and abilities to effectively manage a potentially
dangerous situation and how annual training can foster these skills. Police officers
indicated that current training did not facilitate all needed skills, since scenarios were
brief, unrealistic, predictable and repeated. With regards of designing learning
environments that fulfil the wants and needs of the learners, the authors conclude,
that the employed scenarios must be “relevant, realistic and vary in situational factors
and individual/offender characteristics to enable officers to develop and apply
required skills in scenarios that reflect the reality of their work” (p. 518).
Even though these studies provide first evidence of learners wants and needs, no
study so far has addressed this issue explicitly. Understanding the want and needs of
learners is an important issue in police training with its mandatory format. In such
settings, be it ongoing training or training within the academy, it is not possible to
easily withdraw from the training. However, if training does not meet the wants and
needs for the officer a decrease of motivation may result (Honess, 2016, 2020) with
consequences for skill acquisition (Kanfer, 1996) and behaviour in the field. As such
it is important to know which factors pose a threat to the officers’ motivation and which
factors enhance motivation to participate and fully engage in police training activities.
2.4.2 Understanding the “What“
The content that is taught to the participant connects directly to the Who. The
relevance of any given content should remain high, given the amount of training time
41
police officers can engage in police training (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013;
Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015). Simultaneously the perceived relevance directly
influences the motivation to engage with this content (Abraham and Collins, 2011a).
Besides the motivational aspect of being relevant for performance, it is important to
build the content of a police training curriculum around what is needed for
performance in the criterion environment. The need for a performance model in order
to structure and validate a curriculum in police training in Germany has been
formulated (Bochenek and Staller, 2014). A vast amount of literature from
practitioners does exist, but this draws more from personal experience than from
evidence when it comes to the what (and how) of training. However, little research
has been conducted to provide empirical evidence to validate the content of police
training. Recently, two studies investigated perceptions of trainees (Rajakaruna et al.,
2017) and police trainers (Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019b) about essential
content, that should be covered in police training.
Rajakaruna et al. (2017) recently provided an informative study concerning (a) the
skills and abilities needed for police officers to effectively manage use of force
situations and (b) how these skills should be developed. Specifically, via focus group
interviews with police officers (n = 70), they identified “how training might develop
these skills and abilities” (p. 519). The identified skills and abilities included (a) being
aware of oneself, the partner and the current unfolding situation and assess the
situation adequately, (b) being able to approach the problem with various means
ranging from communicative behaviour to the use of (deadly) force, (c) being able act
automatically and under pressure, (d) being able to remain flexible and to adapt one’s
behaviour according to the situation and (e) reflecting during and after the situation
about the alternative strategies and one’s own behaviour.
When it comes to skill development in the policing context participants perspectives
are an important point of departure for coaches in order to make informed decisions
for designing effective learning environments (Abraham and Collins, 2011a; Staller
and Zaiser, 2015a). However, the study of Rajakaruna et al. (2017) has some
limitations. As a method, focus groups are based on the fundamental assumption that
participants can provide a rich source of information about a topic (Kitzinger, 1995;
Glitz, 1998; Sim, 1998). Ensuring validity of police use of force training via the use of
focus group interviews with police officers that participate in use of force training is
based on the premise that the learner (the police officer) knows what is important to
learn. Rajakaruna et al. (2017) initially state that used methodology was adopted “to
42
explore the perceptions and experiences of operational police officers given their
applied insight into the skills that are required in use of force situations and the skills
that are targeted in current training” (p. 508). However, in the concluding section the
authors state that this “research identified the full range of skills and abilities that are
required to effectively manage potentially dangerous situations in which the use of
force may be required, and considered how training might develop these skills and
abilities” (p. 519). While undoubtedly, police officers can provide perceptions and
personal experiences about operational situations and training settings, it cannot be
inferred that their conclusions and rationales about the needed skills are correct and
complete. This is due to the fact that the professional role of the police use of force
coach is structurally different from the role of the police use of force trainee.
Research from other educational contexts supports a differentiation between the
individual that learns and the one that teaches. For example, a recent meta-analysis
of student ratings about teacher effectiveness has shown no correlation between the
ratings and learning (Uttl, White and Gonzalez, 2017), indicating that the learner partly
lacks the knowledge structures enabling them to know when learning has occurred.
In the light of the relevance that regular physical attacks on police officers have in
other countries (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013), it is conspicuous that the skill of
physically defending oneself is not mentioned as a requisite skill in Rajakaruna’s et
al. (2017) study. Likewise, psycho-cognitive abilities, like mental toughness,
hardiness, determination or normative-ethical attitude have been mentioned as
crucial determinants in other publications (Miller, 2007; Asken and Grossman, 2010;
Bochenek, 2014) but are not mentioned by the participating officers. One explanation
is the operating police officers lack the underlying knowledge structures (including
statistics about common type of attacks, situational constraints and dynamics)
allowing them to identify what performance-governing abilities and skills may be
needed. Althernatively, while Rajakaruna et al. (2017) took several steps to ensure
that the findings in the focus group interviews “adequately represent the reality of
participants” (p. 511), it is debatable if this represents the objective reality.
Socialization within a group – in this case the socialization as a police officer – is likely
to develop similar perspectives on a given topic (Berger and Luckmann, 1967), such
as views about how to cope with potentially dangerous situations (Uttl, White and
Gonzalez, 2017).
The second highly relevant study investigated police trainers (n = 317) perceptions
about cognitive readiness in the context of police-citizen encounters to identify
43
competencies of cognitive readiness deemed essential for preparation and response
to violent encounters (Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019b). Following the initial
questionnaire survey using a modified version of the Dutch Police Officers’ Self-
Perceived Preparation and Skill in Dealing with Physical Violence Questionnaire
(Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015), 15 police trainers were interviewed in a semi-
structured format. Participants were asked to rate competencies of cognitive
readiness according to their relevance and necessity in the context of a violent police–
public encounter: Situational awareness, decision-making, confidence, critical
thinking, problem solving, adaptability, communication, motivation, procedural
knowledge, and pattern recognition were among the top 10 relevant and necessary
competencies of cognitive readiness for violent police–public encounters,
respectively. Since the study only focuses on the construct of cognitive readiness
within potential violent encounters, it does not provide any evidence about technical
or tactical content that should be covered in police training or skills that are needed
beyond violent encounters. However, the study is in line with considerations based
on evidence of violent encounters (Jensen and Simpson, 2014; Jensen and Wrisberg,
2014) and highlights cognitive skills as an essential part of police training.
Even though the two described studies provided some empirical evidence of
structuring a police training curriculum, the evidence base is far from comprehensive.
For example, systematic analysis of video footage or expert views on this matter are
still missing. Furthermore, it has yet to be taken into account that roles within the law
enforcement vary (e.g. cyber-crop, criminal detective, regular officer, special units),
which calls for different associated performance models (see “Understanding the
context”).
2.4.2.1 Different User Groups – Different Performance Models
The diversity of police tasks requires different performance models for different user
groups. Thus, while patrol officers focus on citizen-oriented police-citizen interaction,
special forces or covert operators have a different approach to police-citizen
interaction.
The content training should therefore be structured around the demands of the
criterion environment rather than on the different alternatives to cope with these
demands (e.g. firearms training, empty hand combat, communication). Expertise in
conflict settings is the result of individual information-based interaction between the
learner and the environment (Staller and Körner, 2020b). However, the environment
44
differs depending on the task. The specific characteristics of the police task (e.g.
citizen-oriented police work in patrol duty, interventions in domestic violence, tactical
interventions during hostage-taking) influence the level of complexity of the situation.
Complexity refers to an aggregate consisting of several levels and dimensions
(Luhmann, 2009). The degree of complexity of a situation depends on the type and
number of influencing variables with factual, temporal and social relevance (Staller
and Körner, 2020a). Here it becomes clear that the police-citizen contact is per se
complex and integrates a multitude of different courses of action and interactions
(Reuter, 2014). The more complex the situation, the more difficult it becomes to
determine "the" right action. On a pedagogical level this means: the more complex
the situation, the more principle-based the solution. For practice of police training, this
means that individual and situational "right" actions should be given priority when
considering the design of learning and testing environments. The degree of
complexity of the task accomplishment situation in turn has direct effects on the
functional structuring of representative training programs. It is necessary to reduce
complex situations in phases, but not to convert them into a linearity with isolated
blocks, which then "hopefully" achieve the desired learning result. The frequently
encountered isolation of weapon training, training of self-defence and arrest
techniques and communication/de-escalation training corresponds to a linear
teaching and learning model. At the pedagogical level, the assumption here is that
isolated training of individual skills ultimately synthesizes or at least integrates itself
into the complex performance (Körner and Staller, 2018a). In the context of
performance in complex sporting situations, there are a large number of didactical
concepts that take this circumstance seriously (Davids, Button and Bennett, 2008;
Tan, Chow and Davids, 2012; Chow et al., 2016). These approaches have the
common premise that individual performance takes place in context and should
therefore not be isolated.
The structure of the content has to be based on the performance model for the specific
user group. Furthermore, the available time for training differs across police officers
(e.g. patrol officers vs. officers in special units). This has also to be taken into account
and reflected in the chosen content.
2.4.2.2 Hidden Curricula
In addition to official curricula, so-called "hidden curricula" in law enforcement
educational settings (Prokos and Padavic, 2002; Karp and Stenmark, 2011; Staller,
Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a; Cushion, 2020), which transfer implicit social,
45
institutional and personal values, attitudes and expectations, have to be considered
when planning the content of police training. For police training in Germany a recent
analysis provided evidence for a hidden curriculum (Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke,
2019a). Results revealed predominant gender stereotypes, which overall correspond
to the type of hegemonic masculinity that was also revealed in international analyses
of police culture (Prokos and Padavic, 2002; Hunold, 2019; Cushion, 2020). In
addition, the implicitly transferred attitudes towards dealing with conflicts were
prevalent suggesting an emphasis on physical conflict resolution and a neglect of
communicative conflict resolution. It is known from school research that implicitly
transported attitudes and values influence learners (Dreeben, 1968). Therefore, a
continuous reflection and monitoring on implicitly transported values and attitudes
may appear indispensable for the professionalization of police training.
2.4.3 Understanding the „How“
Besides planning around the Who and What, coaches should also consider a plan for
how they are choosing to engage their participants from a behaviour and task/practice
design perspective (Abraham et al., 2015). This is essential for the development of
(a) relationships between coach and trainees; (b) the expectations and perceptions
that trainees enter the learning environment with; and (c) an effective skill acquisition
environment.
2.4.3.1 Development of Relationship between coach and learner
With regards to forming meaningful relationships with trainees, police training
coaches should focus on behaviours that let their trainees know that they care for,
respect and trust them (Sagar and Jowett, 2012; Abraham et al., 2015). Personal
attributes, especially how trustworthy, hardworking and knowledgeable they are, have
a positive effect on peoples’ willingness to respect that person (Langdon, 2007).
Hence, displaying these attributes along with being caring, displaying equality in
behaviour and having shared goals is important for coaches to form quality
relationships. With regards to police training specifically, no studies have directly
investigating the relationships and the mutual perception of the different roles.
2.4.3.2 Expectations and Perceptions of Learner
Concerning expectations and perceptions of participants, coaches should
acknowledge that the basis for being trustworthy is being predictable (Dirks, 2000). If
trainees can rely on the actions or words of the coach, they will form expectations that
will influence their behaviour (Abraham et al., 2015). Hence, police training coaches
46
who want their programmes to reflect the needs of distinct groups (e.g. patrol officers,
recruits, special forces) need to plan the programme and the accompanying coaching
behaviour to reflect this. The results of Rajakaruna et al. (2017) provided some
evidence of the needs of patrol officers, who suggested that more communicative and
de-escalation skills should be incorporated into police training. Furthermore, and
related to the last aspect of developing an effective skill acquisition environment,
patrol officers stated the need for more realistic training.
2.4.3.3 Effective Environments for Skill Development in Police Training
Defining skill is essential in order to develop and discuss strategies how to develop
skill. Traditionally, definitions of skill focus on the enrichment and acquisition of mental
representations that lead to changes in internal states underpinning the development
of accurate and consistent actions (Araújo and Davids, 2011). Consequently, practice
aims at strengthening motor programmes that can be run on demand (Schmidt and
Lee, 2005). This results in pedagogical approaches where the task is broken down
into its constituent components before being put back together (Williams and Hodges,
2005; Metzler, 2017; Renshaw and Chow, 2019). Even though these approaches are
popular in practice (Moy, Renshaw and Davids, 2014; Moy et al., 2015), a number of
concerns have emerged (Renshaw and Moy, 2018; Renshaw and Chow, 2019).
From a coaching perspective it is noteworthy, that there is no one “best way” do
develop competent police officers. As such, coaches have utilized a wide range of
approaches based on various learning theories to develop individual’s learning and
performance in a given context (Price et al., 2019). Instead, each approach has its
benefits and limitations. Choosing the “right tool” for effective skill development is a
matter of professional judgement and decision-making of the coach depending upon
what is needed for whom in what specific context (Abraham and Collins, 2011a; Price
et al., 2019; Körner and Staller, 2020a). As such, it is important for coaches to
understand “why” a particular approach may be used in a particular situation over
others and what learning theories underpins it.
2.4.3.3.1 Representative Learning Environments
Police training has regularly attested need for optimisation in relation to “realism”
(Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015; Cushion,
2020). However, how exactly this missing reference to reality can be created, and
what constitutes such a reference to reality at all, often remains nebulous in physical
combat training (Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017). Additionally, different conceptions
47
of reality seem to exist depending on the point of view (Heil, Staller and Körner, 2017a,
2019), which further complicates a more "realistic" design of training. The concept of
representative learning design offers a solution here by bringing three relevant
performance environments into focus: the learning environment in which skills are
learned; the test environment in which skills are tested and evaluated; and the
criterion environment in which skills are applied in the real world and whose
characteristic structural and process features are included in the learning and test
environment. The aim of a police training is to train those skills in the learning
environment and to test them in testing environments that meet the functional
requirements of the criterion environment and transfer to it. Transferability thus refers
to the ability to adapt experiences from past performance to successful problem solve
in similar and different contexts (Collard, Oboeuf and Ahmaidi, 2007). Representative
learning designs include conditions and information variables from the criterion
environments in learning environments, enable a dynamic interaction between the
learner and environmental variables, and thus promote the ability to act solution-
oriented under varying conditions (Pinder et al., 2011, 2014; Davids et al., 2012).
The representativeness of a particular task consists of two components: the (a)
functionality of the task and the (b) action fidelity (Pinder et al., 2011). While the
functionality of an exercise activity enables the trainee to meet the tasks, pressure
conditions and constraints expected in the criterion context, action fidelity refers to
behaviour of the practitioner directed towards these. The core element of
representativeness is the relationship between perceptual-cognitive, motor and
emotional conditions (Broadbent, Causer, Williams, et al., 2015; Headrick et al.,
2015), under which police officers act on duty (Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017).
Splitting the representativeness of a learning task into functionality and action fidelity
makes it possible for the police training coach to work as if at a mixing console. In all
the simulations carried out in a training programme, it can thus be ensured that central
elements of the criterion environment are introduced step by step, varied gradually
and acted upon by learners (Körner and Staller, 2017).
The simulation, and thus the interaction between the trainees, is therefore of particular
importance. On the one hand, it is important that the participants enjoy participating
in the interaction but, on the other hand, it should be designed to be representative
with regard to functionality and action fidelity for optimal learning transfer. The recently
proposed "Training Interaction Paradigm" (Staller and Körner, 2018; Staller, Körner
and Heil, 2019) postulates that the irritating person (simulator) and the learner (player)
48
have defined roles, which must be optimally fulfilled for a representative and
motivating simulation. To this end, it seems sensible to define clear rules and, among
other things, to reflect on the desired physical contact level (Staller, Körner, Heil and
Kecke, 2019b).
Another aspect is the use of training systems for the use of firearms. The training
using live ammunition is limited with regard to the representativeness of the
simulation, since there is no functional coupling between criterion context, perception
and action of the trainee (Staller, Bertram and Körner, 2017). Empirical studies show
that intended learning effects can also be achieved with other training systems
(Kratzig, 2013, 2014; Staller, Cole, et al., 2017). Accordingly, the amount of training
spent under live fire conditions in police training appears to be worth reconsidering
for police officers (with the exception of specialized task forces, provided that the
specific criterion environment frequently includes the use of the firearm).
Representative simulations also suggest a departure from isolated forms of training,
such as the training of isolated forms of perception and cognition or so-called "brain
training", which are often promoted by commercial providers (Renshaw et al., 2019).
An example of this is the "coordinative perception training for task forces" (KOWABO),
which is currently offered by commercial providers for special forces and is used within
various police authorities in Germany. The avoidance of training isolated components
refers not only to the isolation of partial aspects of an action, but also to the
possibilities for action within police application contexts. If conflict situations with
citizens represent the criterion context, splitting up the training into communication/de-
escalation, physical coercion and the use weapons seems dysfunctional. If, on the
other hand, the criterion context is fighting against small terrorist groups in urban
areas, there is no need for the integration of de-escalative elements. For police
training, this means that the criterion context must be analysed specifically for each
user group (patrol officer, special units, cybercops, etc.) and designed differently with
regards to the learning environment.
The concept of representativeness is underpinned by several learning theories aiming
at providing the learner with opportunities for developing the needed skills that
transfer into the criterion environment (Robertson et al., 2018; Krause et al., 2019;
Nota and Huhta, 2019; Price et al., 2019). A prominent underlying paradigm is the
ecological dynamics framework (Seifert et al., 2019).
49
2.4.3.3.2 The Ecological Dynamics Framework
An alternate ecological perspective on skill is provided by the ecological dynamics’
framework. Within this framework, skill is not viewed as an entity but rather as the
emergence of an adaptive, functional relationship between an organism and its
environment (Araújo and Davids, 2011). According to this perspective, skill learning
better refers to the process of adapting and attuning to the environment. Adopting this
perspective leads to pedagogical approaches that facilitate the emergence of greater
functional relationship between the learner and the performance environment instead
of pursuing a perfect technique (Körner and Staller, 2018a; Renshaw and Chow,
2019). The ecological dynamics framework provides a useful perspective on skill
development especially with regards to designing practice activities in general (Pinder
et al., 2011; Krause et al., 2017) and for police training in particular (Staller, Zaiser
and Körner, 2017; Körner and Staller, 2018a).
The ecological dynamics framework is predicated upon three main pillars (Seifert et
al., 2019). First, movement coordination patterns are a dynamically functional
relationship that emerge from a set of interacting constraints, consisting of the
environment, the task and the individual (Araújo and Davids, 2011). As such, the
performance-environment coupling in practice activities is essential for skilled
behaviour to emerge. Consequently, training tasks need to be representatively
designed to allow the learner to act upon informational variables that mimic those of
the criterion environment and to complete a response (action or movement) that is
the same as in the field. Empirical data from training observations in police training
(Cushion, 2020) indicated that training tasks that police officer had to perform, were
isolated from the context. Key informational variables such as surprise,
aggressiveness and chaos were missing. Likewise, the learners performed their
solutions under no pressure conditions in a de-contextualised fashion.
Second, the ecological dynamics framework considers performance-environment
coupling as complex adaptive system, in which the perceptual-motor behavioural
organisation exhibits properties of non-linear and non-proportional systems (Chow et
al., 2011). As such, it rejects the strict linear relationship between the amount of
practice time and skill development (Seifert et al., 2019) and the existence of an
optimal movement solution that every learner has to strive for (Körner and Staller,
2018a). As such, variability in movement coordination is seen as a feature of skilled,
goal-directed performance compared to a mistake in reproduction of a technical skill.
Allowing the learner to explore movement solutions and to solve problems in
50
functional ways has been described as an important aspect in police training (Staller
and Zaiser, 2015b; Körner and Staller, 2018a), but was not seen in training activities
in the case study by Cushion (2020). The results suggest that behaviour was isolated
from the goal: Technical reproduction of “one-size-fits-all-solutions” instead of goal-
directed problem-solving behaviour taking into account individual action capabilities.
Third, coordination variability emerges from a continuous co-regulation of perceptual
and motor processes, which is also referred to perception-action coupling (Seifert et
al., 2019). Since the effective use of information requires the learner to pick up
information for affordances based on his/her action capabilities, decoupling these
intertwined processes is not advised for skill development. The delivery of the officer
safety programme observed by Cushion (2020) suggests that learners in police
training predominantly engage in technical drills that isolate action form perception in
large parts.
The neglection of the three pillars of the ecological dynamic’s framework provides a
possible explanation for the encountered problems regarding skill transfer in police
training settings. Furthermore, the concept of representative learning design (Pinder
et al., 2011; Broadbent, Causer, Williams, et al., 2015; Staller, Zaiser and Körner,
2017) that is based upon the ecological dynamics’ paradigm offers a useful lens to
design and reflect on practice activities.
Even though the representative learning design perspective and the ecological
dynamics framework is worth to be considered in practice design, it should not be
considered a one-size-fits-all approach in terms of the development of learning police
officers. As such, the ecological dynamics framework provides no explanation and
avenue for the development of meta-cognitive abilities needed for learning and action
in the performance context (Price et al., 2017; Raab et al., 2019; Ashford, Abraham
and Poolton, 2020). Also, from a practical coaching perspective, there are times and
contexts for learners, where decontextualised practice is needed in order to feel safe
when stabilizing specific techniques (Abraham and Collins, 2011a; Price et al., 2019;
Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2020).
2.4.4 Understanding the context
The practice of coaches is always influenced by the context in which they work (Till
et al., 2019). This includes the social, cultural and political context of their work
environment. In the context of police training, this encompasses resources, logistical
and physical constraints, values of the organisation or institution, legislation and
51
regulations, accepted practices and traditions, and the expectations of others (e.g.
user groups, other police training coaches, learners, superiors, etc.). For example,
the assigned unit of a police officer (e.g. patrol officer vs. undercover operations)
significantly influences the learner and development context with different aims,
resources, abilities, regulations and performance models (see “Different User Groups
– Different Performance Models”).
Furthermore, current values of the institution itself, the acting management and the
immediate superiors will impact the context and culture of the daily practice of the
police training coach. For example, the currently officially transmitted inclination
towards a more robust police force in Germany (Behr, 2018, 2019) may influence
decisions around the taught content in police training. Further, as suggested by Till et
al. (2019), understanding the dynamics of power relationships and how learner and
coach behaviour is shaped by dominant traditions, might be useful in overcoming
flawed approaches to coaching. This could include theories of socialisation with the
police context, like cop culture (Myhill and Bradford, 2013) and mindset concerning
the conduct of policing (Stoughton, 2016; McLean et al., 2019) as well as theories
around ethics in coaching (North, 2013).
2.4.5 Understanding the self
Understanding one’s own beliefs, behaviours and values is considered essential for
continuous personal development and to ensure the quality of one’s own practice
(Buchheit, 2017). As such, the importance of interpersonal and intrapersonal skills
and knowledge have been highlighted often (Côté and Gilbert, 2009; Gilbert and
Baldis, 2014; Abraham and Collins, 2015). Coaches’ interpersonal knowledge refers
to knowledge structures that allow the coach to communicate appropriately and
effectively with their learners, peers, superiors and other people (Bowes and Jones,
2006). Communicating effectively with superiors has been evidenced as an essential,
yet sometimes frustrating aspect of coaching in police training (Körner, Staller and
Kecke, 2019d, 2019e)). As such, developing these interpersonal skills may prove
useful in conveying ideas, discussing problems or negotiating changes within the
organisation.
Coaches’ intrapersonal knowledge refers to the understanding of oneself and enables
introspection and reflection (Côté and Gilbert, 2009). This includes aspects such as
one’s coaching philosophy and values, self-reflection and self-monitoring, lifelong
learning and self-regulation (Till et al., 2019). Research on continuously high
52
performing coaches (Lara-Bercial and Mallett, 2016) identified philosophy, alongside
vision, people and environment, as a central theme framing the coaches day-to-day
work (Lara-Bercial and Mallett, 2016). Coaches had a clear philosophical standpoint
regarding their goals, values and beliefs. This provided them with a strong sense of
purpose and direction. Their philosophy centred around (a) adopting a learner-centred
perspective, (b) espousing high moral values (e.g. loyalty, honesty, respect) and (c)
reaching a work-life balance for athletes and coaches. With regards to life-long
learning, the continuous craving for knowledge and self-improvement have been
identified as essential characteristics in expert coaches (DeMarco and Mccullick,
1997; Grant and Dorgo, 2014) In the specific context of police training, being self-
reflective and seeking knowledge sources for continuous learning, has been proposed
as essential attributes for gaining expertise in coaching in police training (Staller and
Zaiser, 2015a).
2.4.6 Understanding the coaching process
The five previously discussed knowledge domains (who, what, how, context, self)
provide a number of concepts, principles and theories that inform the actual practice
of coaching. Coaches draw from the knowledge structures of these interdependent
domains to inform their decision-making when planning, delivering and reflecting
(Abraham and Collins, 2011a). When planning, a key aspect is knowing what learners
should be able to know and do as a result of coaching (Abraham et al., 2015). The
intended learning objectives arise from the analysis of the learners needs relative to
his/her current context and form the basis for long-, medium- and short-term plans
with specific outcome, performance and process goals. These objectives serve as
reference points from which coaches can monitor and adjust their planning, delivery
and reflection (Abraham et al., 2015). As such, planning provides a “tentative map”
to follow (Till et al., 2019) and clarifies expectations against which development can
be monitored, and on which alternate coaching strategies can be decided upon in
order to accommodate and respond to changing needs of learners and/or contextual
changes (e.g. resources). Coaches can only intervene if the need to act is noticed
within long-, medium- or shortterm planning or within the actual training activity. In
order to notice the need to act, coaches have to be continuously attentive to moments
of importance or disruption. Engaging in deliberate and purposeful planning can help
coaches to detect anomalies by having clear expectations against which current
observations of the reality can be compared against and that might otherwise be
overlooked (Jones, Bailey and Thompson, 2013). The capacity to think in this manner,
while events are happening in the coaching process, is also referred to as reflection-
53
in-action (Schön, 1983; Martindale and Collins, 2012). By increasing the clarity of
expectations before a coaching event increases the opportunity to reflect-in-action,
and thus provides an important stimulus for reflection after the coaching event (i.e.
reflection-on-action). Reflective practice is generally considered as a continuous
interaction between planning and delivering through which one’s own experience can
be appreciated more thoroughly, leading to more skilled practice (Schön, 1983).
Concerning coaching in police training the reflective practitioner has been highlighted
as an objective to strive for in coach education (Körner and Staller, 2018a).
Based on these assumptions about the continuous planning, delivering and reflection
process of coaching, a useful planning strategy for police trainers is not fixed. Instead
it is ongoing, dynamic and adaptive and enables the coach to respond to changes in
the learners and the environment (Kiely, 2012; Abraham et al., 2015; Till et al., 2019).
In order to help coaches to cope with these demands, the Coaching Practice Planning
and Reflective Framework (CPPRF) has been developed (Muir et al., 2011; Till et al.,
2019). It can be understood as a thinking tool to help coaches clarify their expectations
and encourage connections between the desired objectives and the associated
coaching strategies. In particular the CPPRF encourages thinking and reflection
around the (a) intended learning objectives (on a group/individual level); (b) the
structure of learning activities; (c) coach behavioural strategies; and (d) learner
engagement in learning. As a planning tool the CPPRF encourages coaches to think
about their coaching goals and the alignment with learner needs and wants (the who),
the field-specific demands (the what) and the learning environment (the how) in order
to clarify their expectations. Furthermore, coaches are encouraged to consider how
each coaching interaction is nested within the long-, medium- and short-term
objectives of the learners’ development.
Concerning coaching in police training, the complex and on-going process of
planning, delivering and reflecting as the heart of coaching has not been fully
acknowledged. However, first attempts to incorporate practical coaching models
framing coaching as a complex and adaptable process are beginning to emerge
(Körner and Staller, 2018a; Nota and Huhta, 2019).
2.5 Setting the Agenda for the Empirical Section
The “who-what-how” model of coach decision-making (Abraham et al., 2015) and its
adaptation for police training (Staller and Zaiser, 2015a) provides a valuable concept
for police training coaches to reflect their planning and decision-making against.
54
Moreover, it provides a framework to conduct a holistic empirical investigation into
police training. Even though there is some police training specific evidence informing
the six knowledge domains of the model, several questions remain unanswered.
Focusing on the learners, this concerns (1) understanding what police recruits
perceive they want and need from police training, and after having gathered
operational experience, (2) their perception to what extent training transfers to the
field and meets the demands of the operational environment. With an emphasis on
what is needed for coping with the demand in the field, the (3) perspective of experts
in coaching self-defence would add valuable information to the question about the
content of training when preparing individuals for physical conflict settings. In order to
understand the current practice of police training in Germany, (4) the actual coaching
practice in police training and (5) how trainers plan their delivery and reflect on their
training session have to be investigated. Finally, (6) investigating where police trainers
get their knowledge from and which knowledge areas they prefer, and use would be
helpful in order to reach the overall aim of this thesis: to provide evidence that guides
the optimisation of coaching in police training.
55
Chapter 3: General Methods
3 General Methods
56
3.1 Methods Employed in the Thesis
The main body of the current thesis consists of several qualitative studies. These
include two interview studies and an observational study conducted at a German
police academy, where police recruits are prepared for their regular duty in the field
(Study 1, 2, 4). Additionally, data were collected from an expert panel of expert
coaches in conflict management (Study 3) and from an online survey of police trainers
(Study 5). The thesis employed a pragmatist approach (Giacobbi, Poczwardowski and
Hager, 2005; Jenkins, 2017) within a highly contextualised setting of police training in
Germany. As such, the thesis focuses on optimising coaching in police training by
stimulating debate and providing options for optimisation. A general overview of how
the methods employed aim at achieving high-quality will be provided in this chapter.
Precise details on the methods employed in the distinct studies will be provided in the
study chapters (Chapter 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8).
3.2 A Qualitative Research Agenda
Qualitative research is an umbrella term covering a wide range of techniques and
philosophies and as such it is not easy to define (Hennik, Hutter and Bailey, 2010;
Smith and Caddick, 2012). In broad terms Hennik et al. (2010) describe qualitative
research as “an approach that allows you to examine people’s experiences in detail
by using as specific set of research methods” (p. 12). Such methods include in-depth
interviews, focus group discussions, observation content analysis or biographies.
Also, the aforementioned delphi poll is a part of this method set.
The characteristics of qualitative research lies in the focus on subjective meaning and
context. It is interested in multiple meanings that people attach to their subjective
experiences. Qualitative research aims at identifying, describing and interpreting the
social structures, spaces and processes that shape these meanings (Smith and
Caddick, 2012). As such a qualitative research agenda embraces complexity rather
than adhering to a simplistic description of the research object. Qualitative research
can also be described by the paradigmatic assumptions that form the basis for the
inquiry. These assumptions are grounded in questions about ontology and
epistemology. Epistemology refers to theories of knowledge, the nature and sources
of legitimate knowledge and the question if and how individuals can possess
knowledge; ontology refers to the question if an objective reality exists independent
of the researcher (Creswell, 2014).
57
Addressing the ontological question, qualitative researchers generally adhere to a
relativist or internal view of reality. This view considers social reality as humanly
constructed, multiple and subjective. In addition, qualitative researchers generally
propose a subjectivist and constructivist epistemology. From this perspective, there
is no separation of the researcher and the researched. Values mediate and shape
what is understood. Smith and Caddick (2012) describe this as “the knower and the
known are interdependent and fused together in such a way that the ‘findings’ are the
creation of a process of interaction between the two” (p. 61).
These assumptions form the basis of the core concepts that form a qualitative
research agenda: self-reflexivity, context and thick description (Tracy, 2020). Self-
reflexivity refers to people’s careful consideration of the ways in which their past
experiences, points of view, and roles impact their interactions with, and
interpretations of, any particular interaction or context. A such, being a reflexive
researcher means actively adopting a theory of knowledge and being aware of one’s
guiding assumptions (Carter and Little, 2007). Furthermore, context refers to
immersing oneself in a scene or interaction in order to construct meaning. Qualitative
researchers believe that the empirical and theoretical resources that are needed to
comprehend a specific concept are themselves deeply intertwined with the context
(Tracy, 2020). As such, meaning cannot be separated from the thick contextual
description of the study, since the process of interpretation is dependent upon the
particularities of a scene or interaction. Hence being aware of and describing the
context is central for qualitative research.
3.3 Contextualisation of the Research
Ensuring quality in qualitative research is a different endeavour than in the domain of
quantitative research. Whereas the quantitative community has well-established
criteria for validity, reliability, generalisability and objectivity, the qualitative landscape
encompasses a wide variety of concepts and discussions around quality (Tracy and
Hinrichs, 2017). The bandwidth of employed methodological approaches
demonstrates the creative complexity that is inherently linked with the contextual work
of qualitative research. In order to create standards for ensuring quality while
simultaneously acknowledging and fostering the creativity of scientific inquiry, the
“big-tent model” (Tracy, 2010) has been developed, which has been widely accepted
by the scientific (qualitative) community, serving as benchmark for the demonstration
of credibility, rigor, and other criteria in qualitative research (Tracy and Hinrichs,
2017). Tracy`s (2010) model states that high-quality qualitative research is marked by
58
(1) a worthy topic, (2) rich rigor, (3) sincerity, (4) credibility, (5) resonance, (6)
significant contribution, (7) ethics, and (8) meaningful coherence. These criteria of
quality can be reached by a variety of different approaches. The combination of these
means, paths or crafts depends on the specific researcher, the context, the theoretical
affiliation and the question under inquiry (Tracy and Hinrichs, 2017). The research
question of the current project is highly contextualised within the field of police training
in Germany. This influences the relationship between me as the researcher and the
police as an institution and extends to the overall aim to the studies and the used
epistemological approach. By reflecting on these aspects, I will provide grounds for
the approaches taken in the subsequent studies.
3.3.1 Research in the Context of Police Training in Germany
Data collection within the police environment is a difficult endeavour (Fox and
Lundman, 1974; Brewer, 1990; Lee and Renzetti, 1990; Belur, 2019). Specifically,
gaining access to sensitive areas of police practice (Belur, 2019; Jasch, 2019) as well
as collecting data from police officers alongside their operational demands (Roberts,
2012; Boulton, 2014) are challenges to be mastered. Depending on the topics under
inquiry, these challenges have to be balanced against criteria of quality research, like
sample size and data saturation. In the specific context of policing in Germany, the
reluctance of police institutions to grant access for sensitive research questions has
been well documented (Jasch, 2019; Körner and Staller, 2019c, 2020b). It has been
suggested that this may stem from cultural barriers, divergent aims and a lack of trust
(Belur, 2019, 2019; Jasch, 2019; Körner and Staller, 2019c). As such, when
negotiating access researchers have to cope with the hierarchical and rather closed
structure of the organisation and the need for fast results, that are of operational and
tactical relevance. Furthermore, trust can be built by ensuring that results are practical
applicable and that operational recommendations are amenable to implementation
(Engel and Whalen, 2010). Finally, in the case of data collection in the field, German
police institutions have demonstrated to be sensitive towards disruptions of their
regular workflow (Körner and Staller, 2019c). As such, researcher have to design their
study based on these constraints.
The current thesis comprises of the first studies, that investigate coaching in police
training in Germany. Even though by the start of this project, I myself was a police
trainer, my own institution did not agree on investigating coaching in police training.
By the time access to a police institution was gained and the topic of inquiry was
agreed upon (“coaching in police training”), trust between the institution and me has
59
to be established through the distinctive studies. This included adhering to the
constraints that were set by gatekeepers on the management level. These included
completing data collection as long as the daily workflow of participants was not
inhibited. Furthermore, due to the lack of trust in the beginning, the police institution
only allowed for collecting data through interviews with recruits (Study 1 and 2). After
the results of these studies were fed back to the institution, gatekeepers and police
trainers allowed for the observation of their training (Study 4). The establishment of
trust through the series of studies also led to high amounts of responses from police
trainers from that institution in the coaching knowledge study (Study 5). The low
amounts of responses from other institutions, where I was not connected to,
demonstrated that trust is a prerequisite of successfully conducting research on
sensitive topics within the police.
3.3.2 Reflections about being a Practitioner and a Researcher
Reflecting on one’s own role, conduct and assumptions is essential for researchers,
especially in the domain of qualitative research that is carried out in the field (Deggs
and Hernandez, 2018; Braun and Clarke, 2019). This especially holds true for
settings, where individuals are researchers and practitioners (Hendy, 2018).
Inhabiting these two roles provides opportunities and pitfalls alike when conducting
research.
I worked as a police trainer for 11 years when starting the current research project (in
2015). During the time of data collection (2015 - 2019) my role within the institution of
police changed: From a full-time police trainer I subsequently transferred to a full-time
academic working at an University of Applied Sciences mainly researching the
domain of police training. As such, my own role relative towards the questions under
study as well as towards the participating recruits, trainers and institution changed.
As Hendy (2018) noted for the domain of policing, the practitioner-researcher “can
have an advantage over the non-practitioner researcher” (p. 13), which is mainly
attributed to aspects, that they are part of the culture that they are researching. In my
case this provided me with an inherent connection towards the recruits and police
trainers, since a was perceived as one of them. Related to the interviews this may
proved fruitful for building rapport, which in turn positively influenced the accounts of
the interviewees. Furthermore, the “insider-perspective” provided me with insights
about the culture and the problems associated with police training. Especially with
60
regards to the aspects that are important for police trainers from a practical
perspective.
While on the one hand my experience with the subject matter provided me with
insights from the field it might also hinder me from taking a more neutral perspective
on my observations and the research plan. Specifically, this might include
assumptions about what is important to investigate from a practical coaching
perspective in police training and the epistemological foundation of the studies.
Establishing a clear epistemological foundation in the light of the confused
epistemological and ontological processes found in the policing system may
challenge the practitioner-researcher in the police domain (Hendy, 2018). In order to
avoid these pitfalls and mitigate potential biases it is essential to constantly reflect
and examine one’s own assumptions and have processes in place that allow for a
systematic reflection of one’s own decisions (Dror, 2009; Zapf and Dror, 2017).
Concerning the bias mitigating processes, I implemented several points of reflection,
where decisions were systematically reflected upon with other researchers. These
included reflections about (a) the aims of the next study, (b) the methods of data
collection and analysis and (c) the interpretation of the results. In order to allow for a
variety of different perspectives, researchers from various backgrounds were involved
in these reflective processes. These included two researchers from a sports coaching
background (AA and JP), two researchers from a practical police and conflict
management background (VH and IK) and one researcher with experience in both
areas (SK).
Regarding my own underlying assumptions that informed the decision within this
thesis, the next paragraph aims at examining my epistemological and ontological
approach in relation to the studies conducted within this thesis.
3.3.3 Epistemological and Ontological Approach to the Thesis
As a coaching practitioner in the policing context, my epistemological perspective is
largely shaped by a pragmatic approach. Building on points made by Jenkins (2017)
pragmatism in based on the notion that the value of new knowledge is determined by
the difference that it makes to the actual practice (Giacobbi, Poczwardowski and
Hager, 2005; Cruickshank and Collins, 2017; Jenkins, 2017). Pragmatists deny that
there is a single reality, which has led them to abandon discussions regarding the
correspondence of theory and reality in favour of dialogues where different types of
knowledge are viewed as tools to navigate within their environment (Rorty, 1991). As
61
such, pragmatists typically use one or more methods that seem appropriate to the
specific research question while simultaneously considering the practical
consequences of the investigation (Howe, 1988; Cherryholmes, 1992; Giacobbi,
Poczwardowski and Hager, 2005).
The strength and flexibility afforded by the pragmatic research tradition, relates to its
location on the continuum between the two relatively dichotomous paradigmatic
research philosophies of positivism and constructivism. The major philosophical
assumptions concern the epistemology and ontology of these approaches. While
positivistic researchers adopt epistemological and ontological views that assume the
existence of a real and true reality that can be investigated with scientific methods
void of subjective bias and context, constructivist researchers often embrace a
subjective view of knowledge that is individualized and context specific (Lincoln and
Guba, 2000). Pragmatists locate themselves between these two extremes, arguing
that a continuum between subjective and objective viewpoints exists, that has to be
adopted depending on the research question and the particular time and context of
the research process (Giacobbi, Poczwardowski and Hager, 2005; Creswell, 2014).
It also allows the researcher to adopt, what might appear to be conflicting theories or
concepts, e.g. Professional Judgement and Decision-Making and Ecological
Dynamics, in order to take an informed stance on a topic. In this instance, I make the
judgement that PJDM offers a view of examining and influencing coaches‘ practice.
Ecological Dynamics is used as a theory to understand what does and/or does not
inform their judgements of practice design. Since knowledge construction is
contextual in nature and influences the specific cultural, political and historical
conditions of the time the research was undertaken, the pragmatist researcher
equates objectivity which agreement that occurs through discourse and transaction
within and between communities of people (James, 1907). As such, a pragmatist
research philosophy tests the veracity of facts through continuous dialogue between
the involved communities (researchers and practitioners) and the practical
applicability of the generated knowledge (Giacobbi, Poczwardowski and Hager,
2005). With regards to the methods employed Giacobbi et al. (2005) state, that
“pragmatists will often use multiple and/or mixed method designs within single
investigations and in an iterative programmatic manner over several investigations”
(p. 23).
The current work adopts that pragmatist approach. With coaching of police training
being in need of investigation and potentially optimisation based on the identified lack
62
of transfer from training to the field (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden,
Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015), the current thesis aims at providing a practical impact on
the current practice of police training through a set of studies. As such, the current
studies consider the problems under study as more important than the underlying
philosophical assumptions of the specific method employed.
3.4 Ensuring Quality in the Research Process
Concerning the quality of the scientific process, a pragmatist approach does not
mean, that criteria of “good science” do not exist. Indeed, they are open to dialogue
and debate and have to be negotiated and reflected upon depending on the specific
researcher, the context, the specific question under inquiry (Cruickshank and Collins,
2017; Jenkins, 2017). Taking this approach of ensuring high quality in the scientific
process compliments the big tent model of (qualitative) research (Tracy and Hinrichs,
2017) that was introduced earlier. The current thesis builds on these criteria of quality
research comprising of eight criteria.
3.4.1 Worthy Topic
A worthy topic is relevant, timely, significant, and compelling (Tracy and Hinrichs,
2017). Such a topic may grow from timely societal and personal events (Tracy, 2010)
and challenge readers assumptions of practices. As such, studies of little-known
phenomena are considered intrinsically interesting. The significance of the current
body of work has been laid out in Chapter 1. Focusing on the pragmatist approach of
the thesis, the current work grew from building evidence that police officers may
benefit in the field from improved training (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden,
Landman, et al., 2015; Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015; Körner and Staller, 2018a,
2020b; Staller and Körner, 2020c). Simultaneously German police officers questioned
their training strategies and asked for advice in revising their training processes
(Körner et al., 2018). In this specific timely context, the current body aims at helping
what practitioners (and agencies / institutions) in what they have asked for: providing
evidence for optimising police training in Germany.
3.4.2 Rich Rigor
Rigor in qualitative research is demonstrated through careful attention to detail,
methodological thoroughness, precision of evaluation and the generation of requisite
variety concerning data richness and complexity (Tracy and Hinrichs, 2017). Reflexive
variety refers to the employed research instrument to be at least as complex, flexible,
and multifaceted as the concepts, situations, interactions or individuals being studied.
63
The demonstration of rigor in the current thesis occurs in the methodology section of
each specific study, providing the reader with information about the amount of data
collected in the field, the different kinds of data contributing to the study and the
process of analysis of the data. However, on a general note, it is important to note
that the demonstration of rigor may vary depending on the topic under investigation.
(Tracy and Hinrichs, 2017). For example, if the phenomenon under investigation is
rare or if there is limited access or availability of data upon which the analysis can be
built, questions about how much data is appropriate to answer the research question
have to be answered differently compared to a phenomenon, where occurrence,
access and availability of data are not problematic issues.
Concerning the collection of data within the current thesis, access and availability of
data were largely restricted by the specific context of police training in Germany.
Specifically, the interview studies (Study 1 and 2) and the observational study (Study
4) were limited by the access to data in the field.
3.4.3 Sincerity
Sincerity in qualitative research is achieved through self-reflexivity, vulnerability,
honesty and transparency. It refers to conveying honesty about the researcher’s
background and biases and how these factors impact the execution of data collection
and analysis (Tracy and Hinrichs, 2017). As such, as a part of the self-reflexive
practice, accounting for my own assumptions and my role in the research process is
central. Besides the reported introspective accounts before stepping into the field, a
reflection of the research process after the studies will provide the reader with further
information about the validity of the claims based on the data.
Furthermore, relating to the transparency of the research, contributions of other
supporting researchers within the studies chapters will be acknowledged. Unexpected
twist and turns that have led to the compilation of current set of studies resulting in
the final thesis. Specifically, the opportunity to collect data within the police allowed
for a specific focus on police training at the academy level (Studies 1, 2 and 4),
whereas Study 3 – being chronologically the first study –focused more on conflict
management in a more general setting. However, being aware of these distinct – yet
similar – contexts is important when reflecting on compiled results of the distinct
studies.
64
3.4.4 Credibility
Credibility refers to the trustworthiness, verisimilitude, and plausibility of the research
findings. It is achieved through research practices including thick description,
triangulation (or crystallization), multivocality and engaging in member reflections
(Tracy, 2010). Tracy (2010) describes thick description especially important, since it
contributes to credibility through extensive accounts and depictions of the interactions
and communicative processes as they occur in the field. As such, the subsequent
studies will focus on providing sufficient detail to allow the reader to understand the
interactions and situations as they occurred.
Crystallization and triangulation encompass the inclusion of multiple data points,
peoples and points of views. By employing various methods, multiple researchers and
various theoretical frameworks findings can be solidified and explored in-depth. This
aspect is relevant for each specific study, but also refers to the composition of the
thesis in general. By providing multiple data points (distinct studies) form various
perspectives, ways to improve practice in police training can be solidified by providing
a comprehensive picture.
Multivocality refers to including several voices evident in the research context and
attending to viewpoints that differ with the majority or with the author. As such,
differing opinions of participants will be accounted for, and – concerning theories and
perspectives – helping researchers are put in place (JP, AA, SK) as quality ensuring
process factors in order to provide me with alternative viewpoints and opportunities
for reflection. As such, various theoretical perspectives that are employed in the thesis
are considered as criteria of quality adding credibility.
Finally, member reflections refer to sharing (preliminary) findings with the participants.
By providing opportunities for questions, critique, feedback and affirmation, member
reflections help the researcher to find out when members find the research
comprehensible and meaningful. In the context of a pragmatist research agenda this
seems especially important. As such, the results of the distinct studies have been
regularly fed back to the participating coaches and agencies, in order to discuss the
meaningfulness and to agree on the next studies. Furthermore, preliminary and final
results were regularly presented at conferences, where police trainers and scholars
were present in order to receive feedback of the studies (Staller, Abraham, et al.,
2018; Körner and Staller, 2019a; Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a; Staller,
Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2019a)
65
3.4.5 Resonance
Resonance refers to the extent to which a report meaningfully impacts and audience
(Tracy and Hinrichs, 2017). Optimally, the reader can make connections between the
findings of a study and generalises those trends to his/her practice or other areas of
research. By conducting in-depth, situated analyses of contexts and situations,
readers can appreciate the study’s findings and then intuitively apply those findings
or transfer those findings to their own situations.
3.4.6 Significant Contribution
The significance of a study’s contribution is largely judged by weather or not the
findings extend or transform knowledge, theories or practices. Given the pragmatist
approach to the current thesis, the current body of work aims at mainly providing a
practical contribution to the field of coaching in police training. As such, the thesis
should help practitioners and decision-makers within the policing domain to engage
in practices and behaviours in a more informed manner based on the findings of the
thesis.
3.4.7 Ethics
Ethical research is in an overarching aspect of high-quality qualitative research and
includes procedural, situations, relational and exiting ethics. Procedural ethics refers
to the standards set by an institutional review board aiming at protecting participants
against unnecessary risk from their involvement in the study. It includes participant’s
right to confidentiality, anonymity, and the protection of participants’ identity and
privacy. As such, prior to any data collection ethical approval was attained. Since the
study at the police training academy for recruits was possible due to a contract
between the German Sports University Cologne and the respective training academy,
ethical approval was obtained via the German Sports University. The expert
consensus study (i.e. delphi poll) was ethically approved by Leeds Beckett University.
Approval for attending training days and conducting research within the police was
given by the head of the Police Academy. Access was granted based on the
agreement of certain criteria. Emphasis was put on the sensitivity of the field of police
use of force and the importance of police officer anonymity. Since everything
discussed in the current thesis is available in the public domain, the anonymity of
participating officers was paramount. In order to make the identification of participants
impossible the demographic information collected was kept to a minimum. Sometimes
this means, that even requesting minimal information, such as years of experience,
66
was difficult, since identification of participants would be possible in small units.
Collected data were stored on encrypted devices and identifying information was
redacted from printed material. Only the supervisors and the author have access to
the collected data. Participants were provided with a detailed information and a
consent form prior to data collection. In the “Expert Consensus Study”, which was
conducted online, an information page occurred, and consent has to be provided by
the participant before data collection started via the software used. Since training
sessions in the observational study included attending the use of firearms (live and
simulated), an additional risk assessment and specific precautionary step were
necessary. This included a full risk assessment of the planned research when
observing live firearms trainings and reality-based scenario settings. Potential risks to
researchers were considered. All helping researcher had considerable amount of
experience in the police domain with the attendance of several hours of live-fire
training and scenario training. All reasonable steps were taken to ensure health and
safety of the involved personal, such as exactly following the standard operational
procedures and wearing appropriate personal protection equipment (e.g. high
visibility vests, ear protection, eye protection). Participants were informed that they
could withdraw their agreed participation from a study at any time.
Situational ethics refer to upholding of rules and standards of ethical behaviour in-the-
moment. Hence, researchers must continually reflect upon, critique and question their
ethical decisions in the process. For example, because data collection was conducted
in and around regular training sessions, participants were informed that their
performance and accounts would not been reported to any superiors or colleagues.
Relational ethics refer to researchers being aware of the impact they have on people
within the research site, and to treat participants with dignity, acknowledging them as
people with values, voices, and beliefs, rather than merely as subjects of observation
(Ellis, 2007; Tracy and Hinrichs, 2017). By regularly feeding back the results to the
police trainers and recruits and discussing findings and future avenues of research,
participants were treated at eye-level.
Finally, exiting ethics encompass the carful and thoughtful process of leaving the
research site and sharing the results with the scholarly community. This includes
considering how the results can be presented best to avoid unjust or unintended
consequences for the participants. As with other aspects before, regular reflexive
breaks in the writing-up process will allow for the systematic consideration of this
aspect.
67
3.4.8 Coherence
Meaningful coherence refers to the overall consistency, soundness, and rationality of
a study (Tracy and Hinrichs, 2017). Therefore, the reviewed literature should give rise
to and establish a fitting context for related research questions. In turn, the research
questions should be addressed by appropriate methods that fit the underlying – in the
case of the current thesis – pragmatist approach. By regularly cross-checking and
reflecting with my supervisors (JP and AA) as well as helping researchers (SK) I aim
for achieving coherence throughout the studies and the thesis in general.
3.5 Reflections after the Studies
As laid out before, self-reflexivity is a core concept of any qualitative research project
(Tracy, 2020). This reflexive stance has been adopted throughout the current body of
work. However, it is important to provide the reader with detailed information about
this stance, in order to judge the trustworthiness of the provided argument by
him/herself. Whereas the structures and processes that have been set in place in
order to help me being self-reflexive over the course of the project have been
described before, the current section is concerned with reflecting on these structures
and processes after all the studies were conducted. This hopefully will help the reader
(a) to understand the pragmatist approach taken, (b) to judge the trustworthiness of
the data and (c) to understand and acknowledge the composition of the current thesis.
Concerning the structures and processes that aimed at helping to mitigate potential
negative influences, being self-aware about my double role in the process helped a
lot. However, backing off from the practitioner role as a police trainer was not easy in
the beginning. Especially in the interview studies I caught myself being focused on
the negative aspects of the practice of police training. This was obvious after the first
rounds of familiarising myself with the transcripts. I was immediately drawn to aspects,
that showed why students were not motivated for specific activities. At this point, the
structure of the research team conducting the specific studies proofed to be beneficial.
One experienced researcher (SK), who did not have this double role of being a
(former) police trainer and researcher, was always on the research site with me. This
allowed for a continuous reflection about the data collection process. Also, this
colleague regularly reflected with me during the subsequent data analysis process.
My supervisors (JP and AA) also provided additional perspectives on the data and
constantly reminded me of my role and how my perspective might be influenced from
former experiences as a police trainer. With the studies of the thesis building up, these
reminders became less, indicating a rise of my self-awareness about potential
68
influences of my role. Reflecting on this development, I started to more easily
recognize the positive aspects of the actual practice of police training and the
constraining aspects that police trainers are subjected to in their coaching practice.
This development of focusing on aspects that I felt that had to be optimised based on
my previous experience, successively were replaced by aspects that I did not see
before or I was not aware about before starting this PhD project. For example,
concerning the actual practice of conflict management I initially was more concerned
about the specific strategies (and techniques) of solving the actual (physical) conflict
when it unfolds. As such the expert coach consensus (Chapter 6) was the first study
that was conducted. I was initially surprised, when the experts pointed towards
communication and de-escalation before the conflict started.
I also realised that the underpinning theories were affected over the course of the
project. While the set-up of the project – helping police trainers to optimise their
coaching – was clear in the beginning, the theories underpinning this endeavour
shifted. Initially I focused on the design of learning environments and what police
trainers should consider when designing practice activities. Over time it became clear
that the actual problem for police trainers pointed towards professional judgement and
decision-making within the complex situation of police training. As such, the who-
what-how model of coaching became the central underpinning model of the thesis.
Synthesizing the data of the studies a coherent picture emerged, that finally points
towards aspects that should be considered in coach education of police trainers.
However, the initial focus of the thesis was not to optimise coach education in the
context of police training; the findings seem to point in this direction, which may be
another endeavour.
Concerning the problems of police trainers that have to be addressed (and that shifted
of the course of the studies) another structural aspect that was implemented from the
start proofed to be beneficial: The results of the specific studies were continuously
and timely feed back to the police trainers of the research site. Also, the relevance of
the studies, the practical impact as well as the impact on further research were
regularly discussed together with SK and several police trainers and decision-makers.
This on the one hand, confirmed the pragmatist approach towards the project, since
the results impacted the actual practice it was aimed to influence. On the other hand,
this allowed for distilling the prevalent problems of police trainers and taking steps to
address and further understand these aspects.
69
As such, the choice of the studies may seem arbitrary in the beginning; however, the
studies follow the logic of a pragmatist approach: helping police trainers to understand
their coaching practice in order to optimise police training. When synthesizing the
studies for the final thesis, the respective chapters were ordered to provide a coherent
argument about the different aspects of the coaching model. Given the change in the
underpinning concepts and theories (from content and practice design to professional
judgement and decision-making as a coach), the composition of the thesis changed.
As such, the order to the studies does not reflect the chronology in which they were
conducted.
3.6 Concluding Remarks
Taken together, the current PhD project is highly contextualised in the setting of police
training in Germany, especially in the institution, where the majority of the studies
were conducted. By aiming at helping to optimise coaching in police training within
this specific setting and in order to capture the particularities of the context, the thesis
employed a qualitative research agenda with a pragmatist approach concerning the
methods employed (Giacobbi, Poczwardowski and Hager, 2005; Jenkins, 2017).
70
Chapter 4: Police recruits ‘wants and subjective needs in
mandatory police training
4 Police recruits ‘wants and subjective needs in mandatory
police training
71
4.1 Abstract
Police recruits ‘wants and needs in mandatory police training
by
Mario S. Staller, Swen Körner, Valentina Heil,
Andrew Abraham, Jamie Poolton
Prepared for Submission
Abstract:
The current study investigated the wants and subjective needs of police recruits
concerning mandatory training programmes that prepare officers for conflictual
situations. Twenty-seven recruits of a German police force were interviewed to
identify both positive and negative aspects of police training, and the characteristics
of a competent police trainer. The qualitative data were analysed using content
analysis. Higher order themes consisted of (a) the relevance of police training, (b)
motivating aspects of police training, (c) negative aspects of police training and (d)
characteristics of a competent police trainer. Recruits expressed that police training
is an important part of their education, which they perceived as relevant in preparing
them for their duty and with regards for upcoming performance tests. A prominent
motivating aspect was the perception of becoming more competent and being
challenged holistically. De-contextualised practice and static repetitions are perceived
as demotivating factors. The police training coach is perceived to play a prominent
role in learning. Recruits want police trainers to be competent in the taught content,
in teaching and concerning the understanding of the learners. Taken together, the
current study provides further insight in the wants and needs of the learners in police
training, providing police trainers with important information for their coaching
practice.
Keywords: learner motivation, police training, coaching practice
72
4.2 Author’s Contribution
All authors substantially contributed to the current study and the final manuscript. The
study was designed by MS and SK. Data in the field was collected by MS, SK, VH;
Data analysis was performed by MS, VH and SK. MS wrote the first draft of the
manuscript. SK, AA and JP provided substantial feedback to the manuscript and
helped to reach the manuscript reach its final form.
4.3 Introduction
The overarching aim of police training is to develop the requisite skills for officers to
cope with the operational demands of the field (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Nota and
Huhta, 2019). In Germany, police training refers to the development of practical front-
line skills, such as self-defence and arrest skills, firearms, tactical skills and
communication, in order to safely and effectively cope with operational and conflictual
scenarios (Isaieva, 2019; Staller and Körner, 2019b) that are a regularly part of police
work (Ellrich and Baier, 2016). Police training is particularly important for young police
officers in preparation for the regular duties (Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a).
A critical determinant of general training effectiveness is the participants motivation
to learn (Tannenbaum and Yukl, 1992; Mathieu and Martineau, 1997; Salas and
Cannon-Bowers, 2001; Aguinis and Kraiger, 2009). As such, increasing the
motivation of the learner to actively engage in police training is an essential part of
the police trainers’ role. In order to raise motivation, it has been suggested that the
trainer needs to first understand what is driving the trainee to engage in police training
(Abraham, Muir and Morgan, 2010). The trainer can then design activities that align
with what the learner wants:
“‘wants’ are what the (trainee) wishes to get out of a course; ‘needs are what the
educator thinks the (trainee) should get out of the course. It obviously helps, therefore,
if wants and needs are closely matched.” (Abraham et al., 2010, p. 53)
In the context of police training, only a few studies have provided knowledge about
the wants and needs of learners (Honess, 2016, 2020; Rajakaruna et al., 2017).
Rajakaruna et al. (2017) reported that trainees perceived the content of police training
(the need) to be irrelevant if officers cannot apply it to the working environment.
Honess (2016) found that trainees viewed that course content in mandatory training
settings (the need) could be made both more interesting and more relevant for police
officers (the want). Even though these studies provide initial evidence of the
73
disconnect between the wants and the needs of police trainees, the current study is
the first to explicitly explore the motivating and demotivating characteristics of police
trainers from the perspective of police recruits.
It has been suggested that besides the ability to acquire and apply new skill, the
volition to do so is a critical determinant of training effectiveness(Noe, 1986;
Tannenbaum and Yukl, 1992). Even if participants possess the ability to learn the
content of the training programme, they may fail to benefit from training because of
low motivation (Tsai and Tai, 2003). Trainee motivation can be defined as the
direction, effort, interest, and persistence that trainees put forth in learning before,
during and after training (Tannenbaum and Yukl, 1992). The motivation to learn “is a
function of individual characteristics, the work environment, and the training itself”
(Salas et al., 2012, p. 84). It is a complex construct that is influenced by many
variables. In a meta-analytic review, Colquitt et al. (2000) concluded that training
motivation was significantly predicted by individual characteristics, such as locus of
control, conscientiousness, anxiety, age, cognitive ability, self-efficacy, valence of
training and job involvement. Furthermore, situational characteristics, such as
organisational climate, were found to be important (Colquitt, LePine and Noe, 2000).
With regard to individual characteristics, research has shown that pre-training
motivation is affected by training reputation (Switzer and Nagy, 2005) and prior
training experiences (Sitzmann et al., 2009). Specific individual experiences during
training can also bolster motivation (Salas et al., 2012). For example, trainees tend to
have higher motivations to learn when they see the content of training relates to the
demands of their job (Knowles, Holton and Swanson, 2005).
With regard to situational characteristics, the training climate itself can have positive
or negative effects on the motivation to engage in training activities (Ryan and Deci,
2000; Bartholomew et al., 2011; Gunnell et al., 2013). The training climate is heavily
influenced by the coach, who can contribute to the thwarting or satisfaction of
psychological needs like autonomy, competence and relatedness (Mageau and
Vallerand, 2003). As such, coaches play an important part in the skill development
process (Muir et al., 2011; Till et al., 2019). They can design stimulating learning
environments through coaching practice principles (e.g. task design, recognition and
evaluation of performance, time structure) that positively support a motivational
climate in physical learning settings (Morgan, 2016).
74
Besides having a profound impact on the training climate, coaches also play a
significant role in fostering personal and social development (Gould et al., 2007;
Draper and Coalter, 2014; Turnnidge, Cote and Hancock, 2014; Lara-Bercial and
McKenna, 2017). Whereas, on the one hand coach behaviour influences the actual
learning design (through coach decision-making), the role of the coach and how he
or she is been perceived also influences motivation. Research in athlete-coach
relationships has shown, that the competence of the coach is an important source for
influence and relates to trainees’ satisfaction (Turman, 2006). Likewise, in teacher-
learner settings, instructors being perceived as competent were labelled as more
credible, which in turn leads to higher motivation (Martin, Chesebro and Mottet, 1997).
In sum, training effectiveness is the “bottom line” for most organisational training
programmes (Noe, 1986). Given that police training is mandatory, understanding the
wants and the needs of learners is important as a failure to align wants and needs
may decrease motivation (Honess, 2016, 2020), and, in turn, may impede skill
acquisition (Kanfer, 1996).
The current study aimed to garner police recruits wants with regard to police training.
As such, a focus was put on positive and negative aspects of police training affecting
their motivation, as well as the characteristics of a competent police trainer. Armed
with this knowledge, police trainers may be better placed to plan engaging and
effective training programmes.
4.4 Methods
The study was set up to collect data about participants perceptions of police training
and the coaches within these settings. As such a methodology reflecting the
objectives of the investigation was adopted. In order to capture participants
perceptions, it seems reasonable to directly interview participants of police training.
However, there are some problems associated with the data collection via interviews
that have to be considered (Deppermann, 2014). In relation to the current study social
desirability (Crowne and Marlowe, 1960) and impression management (Leary and
Kowalski, 1990) may pose a threat to the validity of the interviews. On the other hand,
communicating with participants in an interactive way provides the opportunity to
clarify interesting and relevant issues raise by the respondents (Hutchinson and
Wilson, 1992; Barriball and While, 1994) and is a generally good fit for the exploration
of attitudes, values, beliefs and motives (Smith, 1992). Balancing the drawbacks and
benefits of the interviews, we decided in favour of collecting data via this methodology.
75
Hence, in order to investigate the research question, police recruits of a German
police force were interviewed in a semi-structured way. Open-ended and
subsequently more direct questions to address issues regarding recruits’ motivation
and engagement in police training and recruits’ perception of the coaching role were
used.
4.4.1 Participants
Past research documents the difficulty of gaining access to participants of police
training in Germany on an institutional level (Staller, 2016). Furthermore, operational
and institutional demands (Roberts, 2012) as well as a general scepticism to take part
in scientific studies (Jasch, 2019; Körner and Staller, 2019c) may further restrict data
collection within this context. As such, data collection was bound by the time frames
that were available by the Police academy for data collection and by the number of
recruits that volunteered to take part in the interviews.
Twenty-seven recruits (n = 19 male; n = 8 female) of a German state police force took
part in the study. On average, the recruits had almost 2 years police academy training
experience (M = 1.92: SD = 0.61) and over half a year’s work as a police officer as
personal contact by a police trainer who is involved in a research collaboration
concerning the professionalization of police training. The study received ethical
approval from the German Sports University, Cologne. All participants provided
informed consent to take part in the study.
4.4.2 Interview Procedures
Each recruit was interviewed by one member of the research team (MS and VH),
lasting between 10 and 29 minutes. The interviews took place at a police academy in
Germany. Participants were interviewed during breaks during their normal duty days.
All interviews were conducted in German. The original set of questions were
deliberately broad so to not lead the response and to allow the full scope of each
participant’s conceptions to emerge. Follow-up probes and prompts were used to
ensure that a complete description was given. The original broad set of questions is
outlined below (translated from German to English):
• Do you like police training?
• Could you please tell me about any situations in police training that you like in
particular?
76
• Could you please tell me about your feelings and emotions when participating
in police training?
• Could you please tell me if you enjoyed participating in police training
sessions?
• Could you please tell me about your reasons for taking part in police training?
• Could you please tell me if and how you think about the content of police
training besides the mandatory training?
• Could you please tell me if and how you apply learned skills in contexts outside
the training setting?
• In your opinion, what are the characteristics of a competent police trainer?
Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim by a paid and trained
research assistant and resulted in 135 pages of single-spaced type written data.
4.4.3 Data Analysis
As a first phase of analysis and a check for accuracy, members of the research team
(MS, VH) listened to the audible interviews as they read over the transcripts,
occasionally making corrections and filling in missing words. The data were analysed
using qualitative content analysis (Kuckartz, 2016; Graneheim, Lindgren and
Lundman, 2017). In order to ensure scientific rigor, themes were systematically
developed in a deductive and inductive manner employing the structuring content
analysis technique (Schreier, 2014; Mayring, 2015). The deductive analysis was
based on the research question; that is, motivating and demotivating factors, and
characteristics of a competent coach. The analysis was open to inductively emerging
(sub-)themes (Schreier, 2014). This approach was justified by the specificity of the
different material as well as the possibility of irritation of the theory by empiricism. The
second phase of analysis involved the identification raw data themes and lower order
themes based on the data. Raw data themes were derived from the data based on
reviewing the material in small steps with regard to new aspects of the topic of interest
(Schreier, 2012). For each new aspect, a new raw data theme was created, while
aspects already covered by another raw data theme in the category system was
subsumed under the already existing theme. In a next step, raw data themes were
build-up into meaningful lower order themes. This emergent category system was
then re-examined and discussed with another member of the research team (SK)
77
leading to modifications of the coding system. The third phase of analysis involved a
final round of focused coding using NVivo 11 data analysis software based on the
modified coding system. Having used both inductive and deductive analyses to
interpret the data into raw, lower and higher order themes, the final phase of analysis
involved gaining triangular consensus between the lead (MS) and second researcher
(SK) along with two additional researchers (AA and JP) who acted as a “critical friend”
(Faulkner and Biddle, 2002; Kelly et al., 2018). The additional researchers were not
involved with the data collection or analysis and were required to confirm, or
otherwise, the placement of raw data themes into lower and higher order themes.
4.4.4 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis
Using guidelines relating to qualitative methods (Tracy, 2010; Tracy and Hinrichs,
2017), checks were made to ensure eight criteria of high-quality qualitative research
(worthy topic, rich rigour, sincerity, credibility, resonance, significant contribution,
ethics and meaningful coherence) were met. Exploring police recruits wants was
perceived to be a worthy topic. With regards to rich rigour, data collection and analysis
procedures were carried out systematically following established guidelines. The
process of analysis is described in detail in order to be transparent concerning the
process of sorting, choosing and organising the data. Sincerity was observed via two
“critical friends” who confirmed accuracy in the tracking of the data to interview
transcripts, and ensured coherence between the data and the presented themes. This
helped maximise the trustworthiness of the analysis process. To ensure credibility,
we ensured that emergent themes were logically traced back to participant quotations.
Furthermore, we highlighted direct quotations to support findings, which we argue
demonstrated resonance in that it allowed for visual representations of participants
experiences. In terms of contributing to the literature, we argue the study has
theoretical (e.g., conceptual understanding) and practical (e.g., professional training
programmes and applied practice) implications that develop this area of study.
Institutional ethical clearance was obtained. Situational (e.g., the keeping of reflexive
field notes by the lead and second researcher to capture the analysis process and
reflect on data worth exposing), relational (e.g., reflection on researcher actions and
potential consequences of data analysis) and exiting (e.g., avoiding unjust or
unintended consequences of findings presented) obligations were also adhered to.
Finally, in terms of meaningful coherence, the study used methods consistent with
and comparable to earlier studies of coaching in performance contexts.
78
4.4.5 Overview of the Results
The themes and the hierarchy that emerged from the analysis are presented in Table
2. The higher order themes included perceived (a) relevance of police training (b)
motivating and (c) negative aspects of police training, and (d) characteristics of a
competent police trainer.
79
Table 2: Results of qualitative analysis of interviews displaying hierarchical themes. Numbers in brackets denote number of participants
contributing to the raw data theme)
Raw data theme
Lower order theme
Higher order theme
Taught content is practically relevant (27)
Relevant for regular police duty
Relevance of police training
Police training is more practical-oriented than other subjects during academy training (15)
Scenario training helpful in developing duty-related competencies (17)
Arresting and tactical skills needed/employed during practical training (20)
Helpful in learning to cope with stress (7)
Lessons concerning safety of oneself and others (4)
Motivated by upcoming tests (15)
Relevant for upcoming tests
Perception of becoming more competent (17)
Process of learning is motivating
Motivating aspects of police training
Process of learning is motivating (4)
Challenge through combination of physical and cognitive work (14)
Challenging training is motivating
Training is physically demanding (14)
Motivating behaviour of coach (14)
Training climate is motivating
Motivated by teamwork (1)
Long periods of idle time (9)
Problems with organisation of training sessions
Negative aspects of police training
No variation in training facilities (3)
Demotivating choreographed self-defence exercises (4)
Demotivating training activities
Numerous repetitions of simple drills (10)
Difficulties applying arresting and tactical concepts in practical training due to the lack of
knowledge of colleagues (5)
Lack of representativeness in training
Taught techniques not applicable in the real world (1)
Low training frequency (18)
Timetabling of police training sessions within academy training curriculum
Training on only one day per week compared to dispersed training (2)
Long periods of intermission between training blocks (1)
Demotivation by early start of training session (3)
Knowledge of taught content (19)
Competence regarding the taught content (What)
Characteristics of a competent police trainer
Experience on the street (27)
Good performers themselves (4)
Knows how to teach (19)
Competence regarding teaching (How)
Has patience with students (1)
Responds to students (3)
Competence regarding understanding the learner (Who)
Knows the student well (2)
Is open to students’ individual solutions (5)
80
4.4.6 Relevance of Police Training
All recruits perceive police training as very important in preparation for their role as a
police officer. Police recruits unanimously state that they would prefer taking part in
police training more often, because of its relevance. A recruit explained that police
training is important,
“[…] because it is needed later. It simulates the thing you do later“.
Compared to other subjects taught at the academy, police training is of particular
importance to the recruits due to its direct applicable to their front-line work.
“I think it is very important for the work of policing. Especially in contrast to other
subjects we have. e.g. business management or such things. In my opinion,
these subjects are important as well, but you don’t need them to have them in
your timetable for eight or nine months. Instead, I would like to have more police
training, which we unfortunately do not have very much, and […] police training
I think is very important for the streets.”
Police training helps the recruits in feeling more secure when they work as a police
officer in their field training and after graduation. The recruits describe scenario-based
training as very helpful in developing the competencies needed as a police officer.
Even though participants refer to the experience of a variety of different situations in
police training, they acknowledge that situations, that they will experience in the
criterion environment differ from the situations in the learning environment. The
following quote displays the relevance for a recruit to gain adaptive skills for coping
with operational situations:
“If you get into a situation later, it's most likely that you probably haven't trained
it in exactly the same way before, but in a similar way, and then you're not so
helpless […]”
In line with being important for the role as police officer, many recruits mentioned that
they often use the skills acquired in police training outside of the police training
context; especially tactical skills, such as movement in buildings, approaching a
vehicle, general awareness, ensuring the weapon hand is not blocked when opening
doors:
81
“For example, with us it is like that the door will never be opened with the
shooting hand and that when I am off-duty I now open my car door, then I do
this also with the left hand. So that's as I said, that's ingrained now with time.”
Even though the majority of police recruits emphasize the importance of the police
training content for their regular duty and report transferring the skills learnt in their
practical training, the motivation to think about, reflect on or engage in police training
skills outside the training setting appears to be limited, and strategic. For many
recruits, upcoming testing of police training skills were reported as being the main
motivation to re-engage with training content. A police recruits puts it the following
way:
“[I reflect on the learned skills] not so much, actually. When I'm in police training,
I'm there and then I try to do my best. Well, before the exam you think about it
and go through it again and discuss it with your partner what to focus on and
what not to focus on. But you don’t think about the training content actually.”
Taken together, police recruits clearly appreciate the relevance to their regular duties
as a police officer of the skills developed by police training. However, it seems that
extrinsic motivators, such as upcoming performance tests, were needed to re-engage
trainees with the police training content outside of the taught sessions.
4.4.7 Motivating Aspects of Police Training
The recruits reported that the challenge of police training, the process of learning and
the training climate to be motivating aspects of police training. The challenges of
police training are fundamentally different to other modules of the training academy
curriculum. Whereas other subjects are primarily taught in classroom settings and
focus on cognitive skill, police training challenges trainees physically as well.
“Yes, it's just a good balance between siting all day in the academy while being
taught theoretical stuff and finally being able to something physically, too”
According to the recruits, it is not just the alternation of mainly theoretical classroom
lessons and the practical training formats in police training that is motivating. The
holistic test of concurrently challenging the body and mind is inherently enjoyed by
the recruits:
“Sometimes it is that we have a lot of sport and that's just fun. I don't like to go
to the gym, but I like to do it in combination with other things. If, for example,
82
you go for a run before and then you go to training, where you sweat again and
also have to use your brain, which is a certain effort again, I enjoy this more
than just standing clumsy in the gym.”
Recruits reported a feeling of increased competence afforded by police training.
Secondly, the process of learning experienced in police training, especially, the active
and independent resolution of wide-ranging scenarios, appeared to be a motivating
factor:
Yes, especially the practical part, when we play through the scenarios, and best
play through them and then say afterwards, ok, this and that didn't fit and they
let you do it yourself first, so that you might also see the mistakes yourself”
Finally, recruits highlighted the importance of the training climate created by the
trainer, particularly, the balance and blend of problem solving and problem setting that
the trainer employs:
"I actually think the mix is quite good that we get shown a lot and then in the
end we can try to apply what we have learned or just trying our own things.”
In sum, recruits identified a number of motivating factors associated with police
training. Specifically, the holistic problem-based challenge created by police trainers
was appreciated by recruits, as was the perception of increased competence afforded
by the training activities.
4.4.8 Negative Aspects of Police Training
The negative aspects of police training reported by recruits were primarily associated
with the timetabling of training sessions, and the organisation and design of the
training activities.
On a macro level, recruits admonish the block structure of police training. Over the
course of the year, there are blocks with weekly one day training days followed by
several months of no police training. The interviewed recruits would prefer having
more short sessions of police training, but on a regular basis:
“It's just a pity that we only have police training a few weeks and only once a
week, because you take a lot with you, but you forget it after a certain time and
every semester the instructors say "Uh, we did that last year". [laughs] And then
83
you think yes, but with the field training and all the exams, then you really forget
it partly and you don't get any written material on the subject.”
Within the training day, recruits reported substantial time “off task”, because of waiting
for other recruits to complete a conflict scenario or shooting practice. As such, active
learning time is reduced:
“[I don’t like,] when I have a break. Well, that's when you have to wait a long
time. But maybe I'm a little too impatient there, too. But I can only say that you
notice it again and again. […] Well, I'll give you an example. [In scenario-
training] you just have to go into a house, search it and you have one position,
your partner has the other position. That's how you do it through the whole
scenario. One has one task, the other has the other task. Stick to your task is
what they always say, and then it is the case that in the next scenario perhaps
it happens the same way or you switch once. So, in principle you have only
completed one task once on this day.”
With regards to the design of the training activities, the recruits identified isolated and
simple tasks as demotivating. A young police recruit stated about technical training in
the context of self-defence:
“[I don’t like it], right at the beginning these isolated self-defence techniques in
the Dojo […], I found that quite terrible. I think a lot of people have already said
that.”
According to the recruits, these isolated drills lack practical applicability. A recruit
explicitly wishes for the contextualisation of isolated techniques:
"I don't even know why I didn’t enjoy it so much. But it's like you're standing
there with your baton and then hitting a cushion or a stack of tires. These
exercises are very dry, without any practical applicability, not at all. It would be
cool, if you could use it somehow in a situation, in a scenario for example.”
Similarly, self-defence exercises, described as “choreography”, were viewed as not
readily transferable to the real-world context:
“In the first semester I still had an older coach who did self-defence with us and
I didn't find that applicable, it was more like a choreography that you can't
actually use.”
84
Overall, recruits were critical of timetabling of police training sessions with the wider
academy curriculum and aspects of police training delivery. Notably, recruits want
more regular sessions that make better use of training time by designing sessions
that increase time on task and include learning activities that are representative of
real-world operational and conflictual scenarios.
4.4.9 Characteristics of a Competent Police Trainer
Recruits reported wanting police trainers to demonstrate competence with regards to
(a) the taught content, (b) teaching, and, (c) understanding the learner.
Recruits want the police trainer to have deep-level knowledge of the content being
delivered, which has been acquired by context-specific experience of policing “the
streets”:
“If he has experience, practical experience, if he has definitely been outside on
the streets, I find it very helpful, if he throws his own scenarios into the study
group and tells us what he has experienced, what he has done well and what
he has done wrong. You learn from it and you're already very interested in it,
and, yes, as I said, the practical experience and be it in self-defence, if our
lecturer has years of experience in such martial arts, I definitely think it's better
than, yes, as someone who didn't do it, I would say.“
Furthermore, the police trainer should be able to effectively model the skills being
taught:
“[The police trainer] does not only know theoretically how it is being done, but
he also shows it to you practically. As I said earlier, he demonstrates it to you
so you can see, ok, he is good, he can solve this situation.”
Recruits reported wanting to be sure that the taught content works in the field. As a
test of police trainer competence, some recruits compare the taught content to their
early field training experiences.
“[The coach is competent], if he conveys what he conveys in a credible way.
We have already been in field internships and you take something with you,
even if they do it differently there. But then you […] compare the situation you
had during your field training with those we're doing now. And you notice
relatively quickly whether the coach is competent or not. “
85
Besides being competent in the specific content of police training, recruits reported
wanting police trainers to be competent teachers:
"The police trainer must also be able to deliver the content. There are often
coaches who know the content, but cannot convey the knowledge.”
One recruit remarked that a marker of an effective teaching was one:
"[...] who can give me the knowledge that I can use later."
Another recruit stated patience as an important factor for police trainers:
"When police training takes rarely place in the semester, then you forget things
and then the coaches think, ok, I may have already explained this to them in the
last and penultimate semester and now I just explain it again. Sometimes there
is no other way, so patience is also an important factor. “
Finally, recruits want the police trainers to understand the learners. It is important for
recruits that the police trainer is capable of identifying within a group each individual’s
strengths and weaknesses, and to adapt:
“[…] that they observe a lot, perceive a lot, somehow the people just don’t only
see the whole course, but also really get to know the people a little bit and
emphasize their strengths and weaknesses and focus specifically on that. “
Specifically, the recruits recognized that some trainees struggle with police training
and do not feel very competent when it comes to use of physical force. The police
trainer needs to act accordingly:
“It is important, that the coaches are socially competent. I would say, that police
training isn't everyone's favorite activity. I would say, some people find it difficult.
[It is important that the coach says] ok good, I'm going to take a look at you, that
you might be able to do it better. But I have to say, here it absolutely works like
that, I've never had any bad experiences like being left alone.”
The recruits also recognized the value of police trainers being open to different
solutions to technical or tactical problems that emerge when different learners are
confronted with a scenario:
“If I solve a situation differently than they advise me to solve it, that they then
say, well, that can work this way. [They] often do not insist on their opinion, but
86
nevertheless also give an enormous number of many action alternatives. [They]
do not say, yes, this is the optimal solution, like you go in there and immediately
take the weapon from the suspect. They say you have to pay attention to the
weapon, you can do this, do that, or move away from the weapon or anything
else, they give you action alternatives and I think it's enormously important that
they keep leeway there, yes, that you don't just end up with a strategy that
doesn't work somehow.”
Finally, recruits pointed out the benefits of relatively young police training coaches
whose perspective is more aligned to that of the recruits and who are more motivated
to coach than relatively older trainers:
“I think there are also many coaches who now have very little experience
outside on the streets and still do it very well. You also have to say that you
profit as a student especially at a young age from a young trainer who has not
been stuck in a fixed path, […] who is also a bit hungry and ambitious, so that's
a bonus to have someone younger, who perhaps also understands how you
feel as a student, because the studies are not so far away.”
Taken together, the interviewed police recruits described a variety of characteristics
of competent police trainers. Recruits want police trainers to be competent in three
main areas, specifically (a) the content of their training sessions, (b) teaching and
instructing in a way that recruits develop their skills and (c) understanding the
individual learner.
87
4.5 Discussion
The current study aimed at answering the question about the wants and subjective
needs of learners in police training. Specifically, the purpose of the study was (a) to
investigate positive and negative aspects of police training that affect learners’
motivation and (b) to elicit characteristics of competent police trainers from the
perspective of police recruits.
4.5.1 Positive and Negative Aspects in Police Training
All interviewed recruits stated that they are motivated to participate in police training.
In their view, they learn the skills that are necessary for their job as a police office.
Therefore, there was an acknowledgement that the content of the training sessions is
relevant to them. Congruently, they perceive that the police training coach has an
important role to play in preparing them for the job.
In general, recruits seem to be convinced that what they learn in police training reflects
the skills needed for policing. However, there are some doubts when it comes to
specific technical skills, especially in the self-defence context. The interviewed
recruits were critical of the de-contextualisation of the learning environment and the
technical drilling (many repetitions of the same movement in linear, predictable
contexts). Interestingly, the same critique was not directed at shooting practice, which
also seems to be drill-based in a sterile setting (Staller, Bertram and Körner, 2017).
During their recruit training, young officers spend blocks of time out in the field working
alongside an experienced police officer (field training), before coming back into the
academy training setting. During these periods, no recruit experienced a situation
requiring the use of firearms for conflict resolution, whereas physical force and
restraint techniques had to be applied regularly. As such, the recruits had
accumulated a repertoire of experiences that fundamentally differed from the sterile
and linear learning activities experienced in self-defence training. Since these recruits
did not experience use of firearms in a real incident, it is possible, that participants did
not critique the firearms training because they did not have any experiences to use
as a point of reference. This interpretation is supported by results of Rajakaruna et al.
(2017), who conducted focus group interviews with experienced police officers with
the goal of ensuring validity of police training. Experienced officers advocated for
more communication and de-escalation skill to be incorporated in police training,
since these situations mainly reflect their working reality over many years. Since the
recruits in the current study did not have this vast amount of experience on duty, it
can be assumed that their conception of reality (Heil, Staller and Körner, 2017a)
88
differed from the more experienced ones. As such, the current results mainly reflect
the wants and subjective needs of recruits without accounting for sources that may
provide information about what recruits do need in preparation for frontline police
work. Besides holding different conceptions about what works and what not, learner
may be especially vulnerable to be overconfident regarding their judgement in the
beginning of their learning journey (Sanchez and Dunning, 2018). However, regarding
the design of the learning environment, the statements of the recruits matched
perception of experiences officers, indicating that variation of situational factors and
individual characteristics is a key element, allowing for developing the adaptive skills
needed for their daily work (Rajakaruna et al., 2017). Recruits in the current study
point out having problems in identifying the relevance of isolated, clean and sterile
technical training for their working environment. This aspect has also been brought
up in several studies aiming at investigating the effectiveness of self-defence training
in the police training context (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden, Landman, et
al., 2015). In order to further clarify the differences between real word duty and police
training, future studies have to further investigate differences focusing on the
situational constraints and the dynamics of such situations.
There is a sense from the interviews that the recruits want to be challenged
holistically. Police training activities that are not intellectually stimulating, such as
isolated, repetitive, motoric drills are not wanted by the recruits. Put differently,
participants want more representatively designed tasks that mimic the constraints and
information variables that are prevalent in real incidents (Staller, Zaiser and Körner,
2017) and allow the learners to attune their skills to the specific information sources
that are prevalent in real world incidents (Pinder et al., 2011). This explains their
positive attitude towards scenario training, where police trainers are used to role-play
various types of encounters ranging from violent offenders to domestic disputes and
individuals in psychological crisis (Nota and Huhta, 2019).
Because of the representativeness of scenario training, it is considered as the gold
standard of police training (Murray, 2004; Lindgren, 2012; Andersen et al., 2016; Nota
and Huhta, 2019). The challenge then for police trainers is to design practice tasks
across the sub-disciplines of police training (self-defence and arrest, shooting
communication, etc.) that are representative. Even though, initial attempts have been
made to provide a framework for designing such environments (Staller, Zaiser and
Körner, 2017; Körner and Staller, 2018a), future work needs to investigate the
effectiveness of representatively designed learning tasks in police training.
89
Representative training activities are likely to challenge the learner; however, the
recruits express a want for learning tasks to be 'pitched’ at the right level. The
importance of appropriately challenging individuals has been argued with respect to
skill acquisition (Guadagnoli and Lee, 2004; Guadagnoli, Morin and Dubrowski, 2012)
and motivation (Nakamura and Csikszentmihalyi, 2014). In order to be challenged,
some recruits indicated, that they like solving different scenarios on their own.
However, it can be assumed that this is true for problems that are challenging on an
optimal level. If the challenge is to high or too low, this could result in demotivation
(Nakamura and Csikszentmihalyi, 2014), as evidenced by accounts of students,
disliking being put into “cold water” in the beginning.
The recruits were particularly critical of training components that created long wait
times between tasks, such as shooting and scenario training. Extended periods of
inactivity without direction to reflect on performance of the skills significantly reduces
es the efficiency of training. Moreover, long waiting times reduce the motivation for
participating in police training. Possible solutions might be to include students in the
design and delivery of training tasks, creating the feeling of autonomy and ownership
of the training (Hastie, Martinez and Calderón, 2011; Staller, Bertram, et al., 2018).
Delegating responsibility to police recruits has been shown to be an effective and
efficient measure in the context of skill development within scenario training (Sjöberg,
Karp and Rantatalo, 2016; Rantatalo, Sjöberg and Karp, 2018). For firearms training,
recruits active involvement in checking and maintaining safety on the firearms range
(Schwering et al., 2019) might help to deepen understanding while minimising risk.
Finally, recruits expressed a subjective need for more regular, less blocked delivery
of police training to stave off perceived declines in competence. The want for more
and regular training time seems to be recurrent issue in the police training context,
when performance in the field was not perceived as sufficient (Jager, Klatt and
Bliesener, 2013; Renden, Landman, et al., 2015). However, a focus on the employed
pedagogical practices in police training and the optimisation of these without investing
more training time seems to be a fruitful avenue to enhance skill transfer and reducing
a decline in competence of periods of no police training (Staller and Zaiser, 2015b;
Körner and Staller, 2018a).
4.5.2 Characteristics of Competent Police Trainers
Concerning the characteristics of a competent police trainer, recruits want (a)
competence regarding the taught content, (b) effective delivery of the training content
90
and (c) consideration of individual learners. All recruits stated that “real world
experience” is a crucial characteristic for a police trainer. It seems that experience on
the street is seen by recruits as proof that the police trainer has a deep understanding
of the content; and is consistent with the idea that in the law enforcement domain
perceived competence is mainly related to the years of experience, as well as the
unit served in (Behr, 2017). However, given the inherent complexity of competence
development pathways in the police force, reducing competence of a coach to
experience and affiliation to a specific job misses the true nature of competence
(Abraham and Collins, 2011a; Staller and Körner, 2020b). For example, it has been
shown that years of experience on the streets does not correlate with operational
competence (Schmalzl, 2008).
With regard to the delivery of the training content, police recruits want the coach to
have a deep understanding of how to teach. Several recruits value a sense of humour
with the coach. While humour can be helpful in sport coaching settings (Aggerholm
and Ronglan, 2012; Ronglan and Aggerholm, 2014), its value may become even more
prominent in police training, where the seriousness of the content (death, injury,
violence, etc.) is balanced through the use of humour. This balancing act and its
relieving effect has been documented in the law enforcement domain (Holdaway,
1988; Charman, 2013; Spence and Millott, 2014).
Finally, some participants stated the want for the individual consideration of the coach.
This aspect of being approachable and caring has recently been shown to be a
contributing factor to the credibility of police trainers, positively influencing learning
and development of learners in the police sector (Hawkins, 2019). However,
compared to the subject matter knowledge contributing to the “street credibility” an
understanding of the learner seems not that important for the recruits. This is line with
notions that social oriented coaches – without explicitly displaying competence in the
taught content – are rated less competent compared to those only focusing on
displaying competent behaviour (Sutcliffe, Benson and Bruner, 2019). Interestingly,
technical expertise was downplayed as an indicator of high levels of competence by
special forces members (Lindberg and Rantatalo, 2014), indicating an overestimation
of the content knowledge compared to the other domains.
4.5.3 Further Research
Emerging from the current study are several directions for further research in the area
of pedagogical practice in police training. Given that the de-contextualisation of skill
91
practice negatively influences motivation and skill transfer, future studies could
evaluate, develop and test the ecological validity of practice activities designed with
the principle of representativeness in mind (Krause et al., 2017; Staller, Cole, et al.,
2017; Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017). Alongside this, the role of the coach as
designer of representative problems or provider of solutions should be considered
(Muir et al., 2011, 2015; Abraham et al., 2015). Levels of learner engagement should
also be monitored as a marker of the quality of the task design. The results indicate
that recruits spent considerable time “off-task” on certain activities. This needs
monitoring. Activity profiles of learning would provide a proxy measure of recruit
engagement (Cushion, 2020). Furthermore, since in the current study recruits in the
midst of their three years of police education were interviewed and results indicated
an immediate relevance of police training mainly due to upcoming performance tests,
it would be advisable to further interview recruits at the end of their academy training.
These could be explicitly asked about perceived differences between operational
situations and trained situations. It may be possible, that a stricter alignment of
learning tasks with the situational constraints of real-world performance may enhance
the perceived relevance of the training content.
4.5.4 Limitations
It is important to acknowledge that the perception of police training presented in this
study is limited to the training programme for young police officers adopted by a single
German state. These views require validation. Furthermore, the views presented are
of a sample of young police recruits with limited field experience. Incorporation of the
views of experienced police officers would provide a more complete evaluation of the
wants and needs of participants in academy settings and the appropriateness of
police training delivery. It is possible that the perceived relevance of and motivation
for police training changes depending on the experiences of real-world incidents
(Rajakaruna et al., 2017). Finally, it is important to emphasise the point that the results
reflect the wants of young recruits, which are not necessarily congruent with what
recruits actually need to prepare for frontline duty. There is a need to know what is
needed.
4.6 Conclusion
The current study investigated the wants and subjective needs of recruits concerning
the mandatory training format of police training. The lines of questioning were on the
positive and negative aspects of police training and the characteristics of a competent
coach. The recruits clearly expressed that police training is an important part of their
92
training and were highly motivated to take part in this training. In general, recruits
perceive police training as relevant in preparing them for their duty. Immediate
relevance of the content is mainly seen with regards to upcoming performance test of
police training skills. A prominent motivating aspect was the perception of becoming
more competent and being challenged holistically. De-contextualised practice and
static repetitions are perceived as demotivating factors. The police training coach is
perceived to play a prominent role in learning. Recruits want police trainers to be
competent in the taught content, in teaching and concerning the understanding of the
learners. Taken together, the current study provides further insight in the wants and
subjective needs of the learners in police training. Thus, it provides police trainers
with important information about how to motivate learners by tailoring the design of
training programmes to the wants and needs of young police recruits. However, there
is a need for further research investigating specific aspects of pedagogical practices
in police, training as well as the perspective of experts and trainers on what police
recruits need from police training.
93
Chapter 5: Police recruits’ perception of skill transfer from
training to the field
5 Police recruits’ perception of skill transfer from training to
the field
94
5.1 Abstract
Police recruits’ perception of skill transfer from training to the field
by
Mario S. Staller, Swen Körner, Valentina Heil,
Andrew Abraham, Jamie Poolton
Prepared for Submission
Abstract:
The current study investigated if police training meets the demands of the field of
police officers based on the perspective of police recruits. Thirteen recruits of a
German police force were interviews in a semi-structured way to identify possible
discrepancies between training and the field. The qualitative data were analysed
using content analysis. The results revealed that recruits valued police training very
positively, since they were able to apply learned skills and tactics in the field. However,
results also indicated, that (a) key informational variables present in the field were
missing in training, namely chaotic, highly-dynamic situations and that (b) police
officers need to be adaptable and flexible in the field in order to cope with the demands
in the field. Finally, the results suggested that police training narrowly focuses on
dealing with extreme threats, which (a) differs from the experiences recruits had in
the field and that (b) may have drawbacks, since continuously perceiving social
situations as threatening and dangerous is a risk factor for aggressive behaviour.
Taken together, the current study provides further insights into the wants and needs
of recruits in police training.
Keywords: police training, operational demands, field-training-gap
95
5.2 Author’s Contribution
All authors substantially contributed to the current study and the final manuscript. The
study was designed by MS and SK. Data in the field were collected by MS, SK, VH;
Data analysis was performed by MS, VH and SK. MS wrote the first draft of the
manuscript. SK, AA and JP provided substantial feedback to the manuscript and
helped to reach the manuscript reach its final form.
5.3 Introduction
Police training is generally perceived as a very important part of police officer’s
education for operational situations (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Nota and Huhta, 2019).
In Germany, police training refers to the development of practical front-line skills, such
as self-defence and arrest skills, firearms, tactical skills and communication, in order
to safely and effectively cope with operational and conflictual scenarios (Isaieva,
2019). However, research has consistently shown that skill transfer does not occur
from the training environment to the field (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden,
Landman, et al., 2015). In order to tackle this issue, the level of representativeness of
learning tasks has been considered a fruitful avenue to optimise police training
(Körner and Staller, 2018a; Cushion, 2020). The paradigm of representative learning
design (Pinder et al., 2011) asserts that information variables on which the individual
has to act upon in training have to be similar to the ones encountered in the field if
skills are to readily transfer from the training to the criterion environment. For example,
if conflict situations present themselves as ambiguous, chaotic or surprising, these
features have to be reflected within the training settings, in order to allow the learner
to attune his/her skills to these informational variables. Furthermore, the learner
should be provided the opportunity to respond to these variables in the same way
they would (should) in the field. However, evidence from observations of police
training (Cushion, 2020) and interviews of police recruits (Chapter 4) is critical of the
representativeness of many police training activities. Besides the drawback of sub-
optimal skill transfer, a discrepancy between the learning and the testing environment
may negatively affect motivation to engage in the current (Frymier and Shulman,
1995; Simons, Dewitte and Lens, 2003) and subsequent training programmes
(Sitzmann et al., 2009).
Discrepancies between the learning environment in police training and policing in the
field have been regularly identified in observational (Cushion, 2020) and interview
studies (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019b): (a) a
96
lack of representative learning design (Cushion, 2020) and (b) a lack of focus on non-
violent conflict resolution (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke,
2019a).
Representative learning design refers to the degree to which a learner is able to use
the same information sources (i.e. visual cues) present during a real world police-
citizen encounter to contextualise their decisions and movements and the degree to
which a learners behaviour during practice replicates performance in the field (Pinder
et al., 2011; Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017). As such, replicating the situational
parameters of real-world encounter is essential in order to ensure transfer from
training to the field. Concerning the situational parameters of (physical) conflict
situations, research (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Jensen and Wrisberg, 2014)
demonstrates the chaotic, highly dynamic, surprising and complex nature of real-
world encounters. For example, Jensen and Wrisberg (2014) conducted interviews
with soldiers investigating their experiences of hand-to-hand combat. The soldiers’
comments reinforced the notion of surprise, reflecting the uncertain aspect
(ambiguity) of a combat situation. Furthermore, they commented on the fast nature of
these conflict situations based on the perception of the brevity and rapidity of the
unfolding event. The highly dynamic and chaotic nature of a real-world conflict
situation is also projected by German police officers as they reflected on their
experience of physical conflict situations (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013),
concluding that “it looks different” (p. 346) out there. This notion of discrepancy refers
to a lack of adequate sampling of informational variables of the performance
environment to training settings, that was also evidenced in work by Rajakaruna et al.
(2017). In order to investigate the question if current training addresses the required
skills and abilities to effectively manage a potentially dangerous situation and how
annual training can foster these skills, the authors conducted focus group interviews
with Australian police officers. The results indicated that current training was not
representatively designed, since scenarios were brief, unrealistic, predictable and
repeated. With regards of designing learning environments, that fulfil the wants and
subjective needs of the learners, the authors conclude, that the employed scenarios
must be “relevant, realistic and vary in situational factors and individual/offender
characteristics to enable officers to develop and apply required skills in scenarios that
reflect the reality of their work” (p. 518).
Furthermore, the results of Rajakaruna et al. (2017) also provide evidence for the
second discrepancy between training and the field that research in the domain of
97
policing regularly points out: the lack of focus on non-violent conflict resolution.
Concerning this issue, recent research (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil
and Kecke, 2019a) suggests that taught conflict management skills in police training
heavily focus on the use of force at the expense of communicative and de-escalative
conflict management skills. Conflict is widely regarded as a highly complex
phenomenon (Allen, Anderson and Bushman, 2018; Finkel and Hall, 2018) with
individuals involved influencing the interactional dynamics of the conflict situation
(Klukkert, Ohlemacher and Feltes, 2008; Collins, 2009; Reuter, 2014)In an
exploratory study investigating the emergence of aggressive behaviour in police-
citizen encounters Reuter (2014) found that conflict situations are influenced by a
variety of factors, including the officer’s mindset towards conflict situations, the way
they communicate and operational behaviour. The prevalence and the effects of a
warrior and guardian mindset have been considered as (Stoughton, 2015, 2016;
McLean et al., 2019) and shown to be a predictor of operational behaviour on the
street (Reuter, 2014; McLean et al., 2019). The warrior emphasises officer safety and
prioritises crime fighting as a police officer’s primary mission, whereas, the guardian
focuses on building relationships between the police and the community through
positive, non-enforcement contacts prioritising service over crime fighting.
Concerning the way police officers communicate in conflict situations, the
demonstration of power, a lack of politeness when speaking and the display of
uncertainty has been suggested to promote violence in police-citizen encounters
(Reuter, 2014). On the other hand, violence can be avoided by self-reflection, active
listening, respect towards the citizen (Todak and James, 2018) and taking him/her
seriously, as well as the use of explanatory communication (Reuter, 2014; Zaiser and
Staller, 2015; Todak and James, 2018). Finally, the operational behaviour itself has
an effect on the likelihood of violence to occur. For example, unauthorized physical
contact, pushing the citizen or unreflective solidarity with the police partner seems to
promote violence, whereas taking ones time and being in a state of “relaxed
readiness” can support non-violent outcomes (Reuter, 2014). It is of note therefore,
that research has identified a lack of opportunities to practice communicative and de-
escalative behaviours in police training (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil
and Kecke, 2019a). The complexity of the conflict phenomenon demands that various
options (communication, use of force, etc.) are at the disposal of the acting police
officers, yet education and training may not be facilitating the development of these
options.
98
Taken together, effective training for conflictual situations has to minimize potential
discrepancies between the training environment and the field. This concerns the
representative design of learning tasks and the focus on all available conflict
management tools at the disposal of the police officer. To promote positive transfer
of skills learned in training to the criterion environment, it will be helpful for police
trainers to know if the situational parameters of the criterion environment are
adequately sampled in police training and if the needed tools and skills for conflict
resolution are adequately practiced. To provide insight, the current study acquired the
views of police recruits graduating from a German police academy. After periods of
operating in the field as part of their training, the graduating recruits were uniquely
placed to comment on the effectiveness of police training and discrepancies between
police training and the demands of the field.
5.4 Method
5.4.1 Participants
The decision on sample size was guided by (a) information power (Malterud, Siersma
and Guassora, 2016), which argues that the more information the sample holds that
is relevant to the research question the lower the number of participants that is
needed, and (b) the access to participants. Based on the relatively narrow focus of
the study at hand and the strong dialogue developed by the researcher with the
recruits, it was deemed that a small sample size would hold sufficient information
power. As such, and in line with recommendations based on data saturation an initial
sample size of at least 10 participants was set (Francis et al., 2010).
A setting of a rather small sample size was necessary because of the limited access
to police recruits on the research site. Past research documented the difficulty of
gaining access to participants of police training in Germany on an institutional level
(Staller, 2016) due to operational and institutional demands (Roberts, 2012) as well
as a general scepticism to take part in scientific studies (Jasch, 2019; Körner and
Staller, 2019c). As such, data collection was bound by the time frames that were
available by the Police academy for data collection and by the number of recruits that
volunteered to take part in the interviews.
The final sample included 13 recruits of a German state police force with a mean age
of 27.35 years (SD = 4.32) including 8 males (M = 29.52, SD = 4.10) and 5 females
(M = 23.91, SD = 1.44). Participants were about to graduate from their three years of
99
academy training
1
. As such, participants had experienced several blocks of police
training and several months of practical field training working alongside experienced
police officers. All participants were recruited through personal contact by a research
collaborator and police trainer. After an explanation of the purpose of the research,
and assurances of anonymity, all participants consented to take part in the study,
which was approved by the institutional ethics committee of the German Sports
University Cologne.
5.4.2 Interview Procedures
Each recruit was interviewed by one member of the research team (MS and VH),
lasting between 35 and 67 minutes. The interviews took place at a police academy in
Germany. Participants were interviewed during breaks during their normal duty days.
All interviews were conducted in German. The original set of questions was
deliberately broad so that the original answer given to each question was not led in
any way. Taking this approach allowed for the scope of each participant’s conceptions
with the knowledge object to emerge. Following this original question and answer,
follow-up probes and prompts were used to ensure that a complete description was
given. The original broad set of questions is outlined below (translated from German
to English):
• Can you please tell me about your experiences of conflict situations during
your practical field training?
• Can you explain to me what extent exercises in police training have prepared
you for this?
Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim by a paid and trained
research assistant and resulted in 247 pages of single-spaced type written data.
5.4.3 Data Analysis
As a first phase of analysis and a check for accuracy, members of the research team
(MS, VH) listened to the audible interviews as they read over the transcripts,
occasionally making corrections and filling in missing words. The data were analysed
1
Participants differed from participants in Chapter 3 insofar, that the current recruits were at
the end of their academy training having gathered enough practical experience to contrast
the training environment with the field, whereas recruits in Chapter 3 were in year 2 of their
studies (of 3).
100
using qualitative content analysis (Kuckartz, 2016; Graneheim, Lindgren and
Lundman, 2017). In order to ensure scientific rigor, themes were systematically
developed in a deductive and inductive manner employing the structuring content
analysis technique (Schreier, 2014; Mayring, 2015). The deductive analysis was
based on the research question (experience of conflict situations and preparation
through police training). The analysis was open to inductively emerging (sub-)themes
(Schreier, 2014). This approach was justified by the specificity of the different material
as well as the possibility of irritation of the theory by empiricism. The second phase
of analysis involved the identification raw data themes and lower order themes based
on the data. Raw data themes were derived from the data based on reviewing the
material in small steps with regard to new aspects of the topic of interest (Schreier,
2012). For each new aspect, a new raw data theme was created, while aspects
already covered by another raw data theme in the category system was subsumed
under the already existing theme. In a next step, raw data themes were build-up into
meaningful lower order themes. This emergent category system was then re-
examined and discussed with another member of the research team (SK) leading to
modifications of the coding system. The third phase of analysis involved a final round
of focused coding using MAXQDA data analysis software (Version 18.2.0) based on
the modified coding system. Having used both inductive and deductive analyses to
interpret the data into raw, lower and higher order themes, the final phase of analysis
involved gaining triangular consensus between the lead (MS) and second researcher
(SK) along with two additional researchers (AA and JP) who acted as a “critical friend”
(Faulkner and Biddle, 2002; Kelly et al., 2018). The additional researchers were not
involved with the data collection or analysis and were required to confirm, or
otherwise, the placement of raw data themes into lower and higher order themes.
5.4.4 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis
Using guidelines relating to qualitative methods (Tracy, 2010; Tracy and Hinrichs,
2017), checks were made to ensure eight criteria of high-quality qualitative research
(worthy topic, rich rigour, sincerity, credibility, resonance, significant contribution,
ethics and meaningful coherence) were met. Exploring the effectiveness of police
training and eliciting potential discrepancies between police training and the demands
of the field was perceived to be a worthy topic. With regards to rich rigour, data
collection and analysis procedures were carried out systematically following
established guidelines. The process of analysis is described in detail in order to be
transparent concerning the process of sorting, choosing and organising the data.
Sincerity was observed via two “critical friends” who confirmed accuracy in the
101
tracking of the data to interview transcripts, and ensured coherence between the data
and the presented themes. This helped maximise the trustworthiness of the analysis
process. To ensure credibility, we ensured that emergent themes were logically traced
back to participant quotations. Furthermore, we highlighted direct quotations to
support findings, which we argue demonstrated resonance in that it allowed for visual
representations of participants experiences. In terms of contributing to the literature,
we argue the study has theoretical (e.g., conceptual understanding) and practical
(e.g., professional training programmes and applied practice) implications that
develop this area of study. Institutional ethical clearance was obtained. Situational
(e.g., the keeping of reflexive field notes by the lead and second researcher to capture
the analysis process and reflect on data worth exposing), relational (e.g., reflection
on researcher actions and potential consequences of data analysis) and exiting (e.g.,
avoiding unjust or unintended consequences of findings presented) obligations were
also adhered to. Finally, in terms of meaningful coherence, the study used methods
consistent with and comparable to earlier studies of coaching in performance
contexts.
5.5 Results
5.5.1 Overview of the Results
Three higher order themes emerged from the data analysis that is presented in Table
3.
102
Table 3: Results of qualitative analysis of interviews displaying hierarchical themes (Numbers in brackets display how many participants
contributed to the raw data).
Raw data theme
Lower order theme
Higher order theme
Difficult assessment (role / mood of citizen) (2)
Citizen behaviour
Differences between training and the field
More aggressive than in training (4)
More peaceful than in training (4)
Spitting (1)
Less communication between partners (1)
Operational behaviour
Other technical / tactical behaviour (4)
Function instead of form in the center (1)
More timid use of coercion(1)
More intuitive decision-making (1)
Ambiguity (1)
Overall situation
More frequent in darkness (2)
More complex / more chaotic (4)
Different (2)
Unknow / new situations (5)
Radio equipment (1)
Prerequisites
Competences of colleagues (3)
Higher stress level (1)
Resilience against provocations (2)
Necessary operational competences
Necessary operational competences
Attention (1)
Flexibility / Adaptivity (5)
Coaches say that civilians are a danger in encounters (2)
Transmission of a grim world schema
Evaluation of police training
Frequent simulations of extreme situations (2)
Gain in competence / reliability of action (4)
Perceived Improvements through training
Prepares well for standard situations (3)
Predominantly meaningful training (3)
Good design of the learning environment
Good design of training activities (3)
Learned skills / competences (2)
Application of learned training content in the field
Operational tactics (4)
Techniques (6)
103
5.5.2 Differences between Training and the Field
The differences between training and the field fell under the umbrella of citizen
behaviour, operational behaviour of the acting police officers, characteristics of the
overall situation, and prerequisites of operational situations in the field.
5.5.2.1 Citizen Behaviour
Police recruits stated that they experienced different citizen behaviour on the street
then in the training environment. They perceive it as problematic, that the role of the
citizen is not as clear as in training settings.
“[…] you don’ know the other person, you are uncertain from the beginning
whether it is the perpetrator, whether it is the victim […]. I know that nothing can
happen to me in here, maybe a little injury, I have to expect worse things
outside. Yes, you don't know the attitude of the other person.” (TN 12)
Besides the ambiguity of the role of the civilian, this statement also shows that recruits
know, that in learning settings the role of the civilian/suspect is constrained by safety
protocols. They know that purposeful pain or injury will not happen to them in the
training settings, making the role of the simulator in learning settings more predictable.
With regards to the actual behaviour of the citizen encountered; some police recruits
experience a heavy shift in mood that was not experienced in police training.
Furthermore, recruit’s reported experiences of citizens acting much more
aggressively towards them than feigned by peers in training settings. The following
two statements describe this difference in aggressive behaviour:
“[The difference is] quite simply the intensity and also the consideration for
colleagues. You practice with each other and not against each other. And it’s
completely different out there. It's relatively easy to bring one person down with
your partner in training. But out there in the field, there were also four of us, five
of us fighting with one person” (TN 12).
“The only difference was that the [suspect] defended himself extremely different
during field training, i.e. he kicked with his feet, hit around with his hands and
everything. This is not the case in here, of course. Here you lie on your stomach,
the hands under your chest and then you stiffen yourself as good as you can.
But out there it was a bit more extreme. You had to pay a attention where he
104
kicks and strikes when you lie on him, but it came very close to reality what we
have learned here.“ (TN08)
While some recruits described a more aggressive behaviour of the citizen in police-
citizen encounters, others pointed out that generally citizen behaviours are more
peaceful than simulated training.
“Yes, they were mostly much more peaceful than in training, so we always train
here under extreme conditions, there is usually a weapon or something similar
in the game and they are not cooperative. But outside It is relatively rarely like
that. Most people are very cooperative, they provoke a bit, but then they see
that it does not work.” (TN10)
The different perception of citizen behaviour seems to relate to different situations.
Whereas more aggressive behaviour was described in physical conflict situations
(more kicking, punching, spitting, etc.), more peaceful experiences where gathered in
general police-citizen encounters. These accounts suggest that in general encounters
are more peaceful, and less extreme, than conveyed in learning settings. However, if
physical conflict arises in the field, the situations seem to present themselves as more
dynamic and aggressive than training due to the behaviour of the citizen.
5.5.2.2 Operational Behaviour
Police recruits noted that the operational behaviour sometimes differed as well.
Especially when it comes to tactical behaviour concerning searching buildings and
apartments the tactical approaches used by the officers differed to those advocated
by police trainers.
“One time, when we entered and searched an apartment, the field training
officer simply went alone in the apartment. You can see this happening a lot
outside, so sometimes you can see that the people outside also have a low
opinion of what is taught here. Perhaps sometimes there is also a little lack of
transfer to the outside […].” (TN10)
Related to the application of tactical approaches, was the account of one officer who
noted that in the criterion environment police officers communicated less between
each other compared to simulated operations in the learning environment.
“Well, outside in the field, you just do it. Although you could have taken a minute
more to talk something through, to discuss something. You just do it.” (TN13)
105
It was the view of the same recruit that in the field intuitive decision-making is more
common than in training settings.
“Basically, it is the case with me that I also act very instinctively outside. So,
here [in the learning environment] I'm thinking about it, I'm doing the right thing,
like the coaches want it to be, because in the background there's someone
looking. And outside I act very instinctively because of what I've learned in
training.” (TN13)
This statement indicates, that police recruits are concerned about reproducing the
behaviour that is wanted by the coaches in training settings. However, they look for
functional solutions by themselves on the street.
5.5.2.3 Overall Situation
Conflict situations in the field were regarded as generally more complex and novel
than those simulated in training.
“The situations were a lot more complex.” (TN09)
This complexity is attributed to the chaotic and messy nature of conflict situations in
the real world. One police recruit explained it as follows.
“The person resisted passively after driving drunk and did not want to be tied
up, not searched and not be taken into custody. Yes, we broke the passive
resistance, tied him up and brought him into custody. And yes, in here, in the
area where you are safe, in training everything works smoothly and wonderfully.
And outside it's getting messy, because of the greater hecticness, the greater
stress factor, because of another patrol officer, who perhaps has a different
training status […]. So [here] everything is cleaner. And outside you just make
sure that it works somehow.” (TN13)
This difference may also account for the experienced ambiguity in conflict situations.
If conflict situations are practiced in a clean, prescribed way, the training simulations
may lack of the ambiguity recruits experience on the street. There behaviours of the
citizen may be interpreted in different ways, depending on the context in which they
take place.
Furthermore, recruits indicate that the novelty of encountered situational parameters
makes it hard for them to apply everything that is learned in the same manner it has
106
been taught. For example, darkness has been stated as a situational parameter, that
regularly differs from the training environment, where officers usually practice in good
light conditions. The experienced differences are summed up by the following
statement.
“What is taught here just isn’t always applicable to all the situations out there.”
(TN12)
5.5.2.4 Prerequisites
Three recruits discussed the issue of working with officers with differing knowledge
and training status.
“A difference has been that my fellow officer didn’t know the concept [of
searching and clearing an apartment] by heart, so I had to compensate for it.”
(TN10)
While this recruit tried to compensate for differing knowledge in action, another
mentioned an attempt to discuss tactical approaches with their fellow officer. They
described an attitude of stubbornness in some older and more experienced officers,
when it came to adopting knowledge from recent police training sessions.
“Most of the time they are so stubborn and then they still don't do it.” (TN11)
5.5.3 Necessary Operational Competencies
The differences between the learning and criterion environment identified by the
police recruits are reflected in the operational competencies that recruits deem as
necessary for coping with the demands on the street.
Participants’ accounts regularly included the need of adaptivity and flexibility during
police operations.
“I have to be clear: Depending on who I had in front of me, I adjusted my
behaviour.” (TN05)
Furthermore, recruits pointed out the further need to be flexible when choosing a
course of action in police-citizen encounters. A participant described the experience
of variability between interactions. Whereas in some situations well-trained
operational procedures could be executed, other situations demanded the flexibility
to adapt to solve the problem at hand.
107
“You have to be flexible in your mind! Repetitions give you the confidence in
your actions. That you are confident in what you are doing, but you don't want
to remain fixated on it. You always want to be open, that if […] things don't go
that way, you can act differently somehow.” (TN01)
Two accounts included the positive effects of, and, therefore, need for resilience
against provocations.
“For example, we had somebody who was drunk, who was under the influence
of drugs, and was ranting in the anteroom of our police station. […] So he was
screaming and was aggressive. But we said we're not going to do anything for
now and hope that he'll be out [of the police station] in ten minutes. I'm not really
a fan of that, but maybe it wasn't a wrong strategy at that moment.” (TN01)
The same recruits recounted older, more experienced officers relaxed manner in
response to provocations by citizens. The young recruits initially seemed to be
surprised by this reaction, since it seemed to contradict their intuitive response to use
force. However, upon reflection the recruits rated this course of action as positive in
the specific situations.
“Well, I was in [removed for anonymity purposes], it's a bit in the neighbourhood
there, at a precinct where the average age of colleagues is very high. They don’t
let themselves be provoked any more […] and there, they usually pull back a
little and cope with the situation in very defensive way… I think this isn’t that
bad.” (TN11)
Finally, one recruit explicitly addressed the need for situational awareness in the field.
Compared to the training settings, it was stated that the environment while on duty is
continuously changing, making it necessary to be situational aware when entering
new premises.
“Well, I have to scan entire premises I've never seen before. What kind of
premises? Are there weapons there? Which people and what kind of dangerous
objects?“ (TN13)
Even though participants were not directly questioned about necessary competencies
for operational situations, their accounts included direct and indirect notions about the
competencies needed on duty. In sum, the statements included the need for flexibility
108
and adaptability, the need to be calm and relaxed when provoked, and the need to be
situationally aware while on duty.
5.5.4 Evaluation of Police Training
Police recruits’ perceptions of the value of police training included positive
observations about the transfer of skills, perceived competence and the design of the
learning environment. The major critique was that police training transmits a grim
world scheme.
5.5.4.1 Application of the Learned Training Content in the Field
Police recruits reported a capability to apply various skills acquired in training to the
context of the criterion environment. Successful skill transfer of isolated techniques
was noted:
“The thing, that brought me a lot, was the skill of apprehending a person. We
practiced this a lot. I really think we practiced this up to point of vomiting in the
second semester. For example, putting on the handcuffs”. (TN08)
“So, the one situation I can actually remember was the palm strike. That was
almost identical [to training].” (TN11)
Furthermore, recruits reported the application of tactical concepts they had learned.
This included principles of entering and searching rooms and apartments and to know
about the strengths and limits of one’s competencies in specific situations. For
example, a female police officer described the concept of retreat as a valuable tool
for her.
“There was a drunken [football] fan, who was apparently also under drugs, who
had rioted at home because he had lost his key to his apartment or had not
found it, whatever. He didn't get into his apartment and just went on a rampage.
We were then called because of this disturbance, then we went there, I was
there with my [field training officer] and yes, there we applied what we have
often been told in the training. That is, that retreat is also every now and then
the right measure to take, because that was a big, strong guy. Good, I am 1.70
meters tall. Not the tallest now, but my colleague was also 1.70 meters and did
not weigh 70 kilos like me, but probably 50 or 55 kilos. If we had been two men,
we would have had to do something, because the guy was very aggressive,
spit, indicated blows and so on. In this case we withdrew and waited for an
109
additionally called patrol car to arrive. Then the four of us solved the situation.
That's where I was able to apply something that I have taken with me [from
training].” (TN07)
Besides being able to apply learned content in police training in the field, police
recruits also reported, that police training left was important since the training format
improved important competencies in their perception
5.5.4.2 Perceived Improvements
Participants reported that they felt they improved through police training with regards
to their competence as evidenced by the following statement.
“It worked. Not just working pairs [with you partner], but to work together with a
second patrol team, to coordinate four of them, to coordinate six of them. That
worked out really well. We have also noticed that after the week [of intensive
training] our communication with each other has improved considerably.”
(TN09)
Furthermore, they felt well prepared for standard situations that regularly occur in
policing, such as identify checks of civilians, vehicle stops, tactical behaviour when
entering rooms and buildings or apprehending a person.
“[What works] is that talking to a person that you want to control. That is much
practiced here in the third or fourth semester. That is actually the most common
[situation].” (TN06).
5.5.4.3 Good design of the learning environment
A few recruits explicitly reported police training as being meaningful to their practice
on duty.
“But what is taught [in police training] makes sense to me and 80 percent of it
can also be used outside.” (TN12)
Concerning the training of apprehension techniques recruits stated, that the chaotic
situations in the field resembled training situations. A recruit described the training
fights on the ground with the goal of apprehending the partner as a valuable training
activity, that resembled situations during practical field training.
110
“In self-defence training we practiced exactly this situation. […] There is one
person on the ground and defends himself extremely against an arrest and this
goes on for one, two to three minutes and then you see who the winner is: the
two [officers] or the perpetrator on the ground, who doesn't want to be
apprehended. And this happens very often, for example. So in my field training
we also had two or three situations where it was like that.” (TN08)
Furthermore, some recruits praised the use and design of particular training activities.
For example, a recruit pointed out that the immediate feedback in tactical training
exercises with simulation weapons that fired coloured soap cartridges was important
for his learning
“ [It is good to get hit] because then you can think about such things as cover or
how to put yourself better behind cover. Maybe I can come up with another
solution without putting my body in danger? […] Well, I think that worked out
very well when you got a hit because you didn't want the pain.” (TN12).
Other accounts of a good design of training activities included training in novel
premises and scenario-based trainings. Taken together, several recruits valued the
design of the learning environments in police training because of the taught content
as well as certain training activities.
5.5.4.4 Transmission of a Grim World Scheme
Several participants mentioned that police training coaches teach the principle, that
“everybody is dangerous”.
“I believe that this is exactly what [police training] here is intended to achieve,
to learn that out of situations that are supposed to be completely peaceful, a
situation can quickly develop that is no longer peaceful. And that's a point you
definitely always have in mind when you're out and you are doing traffic stops,
so even if you want to hug [the civilian] because everything is so beautiful, you
still have in mind that he could still flip or something else. You're definitely
focused on that and on the edge that something could happen. So accordingly,
I think it's very good, because you are a bit prepared for it, as far as you can
prepare someone for something like that.” (TN04)
While this recruit seemed to appreciate this approach, other recruits perceived the
continuous training of extreme situations as a negative exaggeration of the reality of
police duty.
111
“[…] we like to complain about the fact that these horror scenarios are always
done here.” (TN09)
While there is a perception that police training content and the delivery of the content
can transmit a grim world scene, how this is received is different between recruits.
112
5.6 Discussion
The current study aimed at further answering questions about the needs and wants
of learners in police training by exploring perceived differences between training and
the field observed by police recruits at the end of training. The interviews covered a
variety of themes and revealed several key findings. First, differences between
training and the field discussed mainly related to the relative complexity of operational
situations and the prevalence and characteristics of conflict situations. Second, police
training is valued by the recruits due to the perceived transferability of taught content
and the design of learning environments.
5.6.1 Differences Between Training and the Field
The study identified discrepancies in citizen behaviour, officer operational behaviour,
and shared knowledge and capabilities of partners between the training and the
criterion environment. Furthermore, the overall situation was described as more
complex and chaotic than presented in training, and recruits reported experiences of
encounters that were new or unknown to them.
The characteristics of the overall situation was in line with physical conflict research
in military operations (Jensen and Wrisberg, 2014) and accounts of police officers
describing physical conflict situations (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013). However,
besides observations of complexity, chaos and novelty in the field, recruits also
acknowledged there are a considerable number of situations that can be handled in
a standardised way. This holds especially true for situations that do not involve any
opposing force by the citizen, such as handcuffing a compliant citizen. Using standard
operating procedures (SOPs) has been shown to be a successful strategy in standard
situations in the law enforcement domain(Heuvel, Alison and Power, 2012; Boulton
and Cole, 2016; Schakel, Fenema and Faraj, 2016), since they require little
monitoring, are fast and efficient and free cognitive resources to consider other
aspects of the operational situation (Boulton and Cole, 2016). However, when the
operational situation changes its nature (e.g. traffic stop turning into an attack against
the police officer) or novel situational parameters present themselves (e.g. never
before seen attacking behaviour of citizen), SOPs have to be abandoned and
behaviour has to be adapted according to the situation (Boulton and Cole, 2016;
Schakel, Fenema and Faraj, 2016). As such the skill to adapt to changing
circumstances has been described as a core competency in police field work,
especially in the context of conflict (Staller and Zaiser, 2015b; Boulton and Cole, 2016;
Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019a). Likewise accounts of the recruits in the
113
current study also included the need for flexibility and adaptivity as operational
competencies in police work. In order to promote the development of adaptive
expertise within police training, Boulton and Cole (2016) suggested emphasis on the
development of mental models. Once built, training should focus on sense-making
skills to recognise differences between mental models and the current situational cues
and the capability to revise and reject mental models according to the situational
assessment. Experiences facilitate these ongoing sensemaking and metacognitive
abilities by providing the grounds for the application and reflection. As such, learning
environments that offer representative scenarios that challenge formative versions of
police recruits mental models add value to police training.
Being able to practice tasks that are representatively designed has been identified as
a central factor ensuring skill transfer to the criterion environment (Krause et al., 2017;
Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017; Körner and Staller, 2018a; Seifert et al., 2019). As
such, training tasks should allow the trainees to act upon the information variables,
that will be encountered in the field (Pinder et al., 2011, 2014). The results of the
current study indicate, that the information variables that recruits act upon in police
training are representative in so far as they concern standard situations, that can be
described as non-chaotic and not highly dynamic and that do not need the
competence to rapidly adapt and find appropriate solutions for the given context.
Concerning operational situations that need problem solving instead of the production
of a standard response, the informational variables allowing for practicing problem
solving, flexibility and adaptation do not appear to be sufficiently present to prepare
police officers for such scenarios. However, further research is needed to clarify this
assumption. This can include video data analysis (Nassauer and Legewie, 2018) in
order to identify situational characteristics and dynamics of conflictual situations.
Finally, recruits’ accounts included perceived differences regarding the prevalence of
situation involving high levels of violence (e.g. physical attack against officer)
compared to less violent conflict situations, such as verbal assaults or passive
resistance between training settings and the field. The focus on coping with extreme
threats was recurrent in police training but experienced infrequently in the field. While
the rationale for this approach is likely rooted in the argument that training has to
prominently focus on extreme situations, since situations with low levels of violence
present themselves on a regular basis – and are therefore not needed to be trained
to such a great extent. However, this unidimensional focus on extreme threats comes
at an expense. Continuously focusing on potential threats in training settings in the
114
context of conflict management implicitly conveys a picture of a world, where police
officers a constantly in danger (Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a), which
research has identified as a risk factor for aggressive behaviour (Huesmann, 2018a,
2018b; Baier, 2020). The current accounts of the interviewees provide backup for this
perspective. Recruits stated that in some conflict situations they were initially driven
toward robust forms of conflict resolution (e.g. applying the use of force), while their
more experienced colleagues successfully applied non-physical conflict resolution
strategies. As such, it might be the case that police training implicitly develops and
bolsters a warrior mindset, compared to the guardian mindset (Rahr and Rice, 2015;
McLean et al., 2019).
Despite the focus on extreme threats, police training lacks the opportunities to
practice de-escalation tactics and to diffuse conflict situation without the use of force
(Zaiser and Staller, 2015; Todak and James, 2018; Todak and White, 2019). Training
of de-escalation necessitates representative environments in order to facilitate the
transferability of skills (Staller and Körner, 2018). The need for being able to cope with
conflict in a holistic way and hence, being able to practice the needed skills in police
training has been formulated by officers in the study by Rajakaruna et al., (2017) and
is backed up by current results (Wolfe et al., 2020). By employing a randomized
controlled trial, Wolfe et al. (2020) provided evidence, that if police officers receive
regular training that views all police-citizen encounters as social interactions that can
either escalate or de-escalate away from the use of force, conflict situations are less
solved with the use of force. This shows that a widening of the focus from the use of
force training to more general conflict management can efficiently reduce the number
of police use of force incidents.
5.6.2 Positive Evaluation of Police Training
Police recruits generally evaluated police training positively. This was mainly due to
experiences of successful application of taught content in the field. Having practiced
recurring operational situations in the learning environment (e.g. traffic stops,
handcuffing, interviewing citizens, searching buildings) were empowered in the field,
as long as the practices situational parameters matched the criterion environment
(Perry, 2011; Werth, 2011). In non-chaotic ‘standard’ situations, the match of
informational variables between the learning and the criterion environment is easier
to achieve, than for chaotic, highly dynamic and complex situations(Staller, Zaiser and
Körner, 2017). The more regular occurrence of standard situation in the field also
allows for the accumulation of trials to either apply SOP’s or adapt without the
115
pressure of existential threat under time constraints (Staller and Körner, 2019b).
However, non-standard situations, by nature, occur less frequently and exemplify
significant the discrepancies between the learning and criterion environment. This
may explain the discrepancy between a positive evaluation of police training on the
one hand, while, on the other hand, simultaneously differences between the learning
and the criterion environment within these training settings have been identified.
5.6.3 Further Research
The police recruits interviewed suggested that police training primarily focuses on
conflict situations that include high levels of violence. As such, young officers are
presented with a grim world scheme consisting of danger and threat to police officers.
Of interest is how exposure to this perspective shapes the mindset of police recruits
as they enter the field. Second, since the results indicated a perceived lack of
representativeness in training tasks with regards to problem solving and adaptive
behaviour, it would be beneficial to know how police training is structured with regards
to different training activities. For example, the relationship between the amount of
time spent with reproducing standard techniques and tactics compared to time spend
with practice tasks that require problem solving and adaptation skills may provide
further insights.
5.6.4 Limitations
While recruits’ provided insights into their perspectives, it is important to note that this
is not necessarily an accurate portrayal of police training or the real world. In order to
validate these perspective, observational studies of police training (Cushion, 2020)
and the field are needed. For the latter, video data analysis (Nassauer, 2018;
Nassauer and Legewie, 2018) may provide a useful framework to extract prevalent
informational variables and to disentangle violence dynamics in conflict situations. It
is important to acknowledge that learners struggle to evaluate the effectiveness of
their learning environment (Uttl, White and Gonzalez, 2017); that is, if and what they
actually learned. However, the perception of how they perceive differences between
training and the field, infers information about what has been learned.
Finally, the sample interviewed (N = 13) is marginally smaller than the 15 – 30
participants recommended for single case studies (Marshall et al., 2015).
Furthermore, the concept of data saturation (Francis et al., 2010; Mason, 2010;
Marshall et al., 2015) could not be applied, since data had to be collected on one day,
due to the recruits schedule. As such the concept of information power (Malterud,
116
Siersma and Guassora, 2016) was chosen to guide sample size approximation.
Based on a minimum sample size approximation of n = 10, the final sample was
bigger (N = 13). Since the presented results yielded adequate information for the
research question posed, it can be concluded that information power of the study was
sufficient (Malterud, Siersma and Guassora, 2016).
5.7 Conclusion
The current study investigated if police training meets the demands of the field of
police officers based on the perspective of police recruits. Recruits valued police
training very positively, since they were able to apply learned skills and tactics in the
field. However, results also indicated, that (a) key informational variables present in
the field were missing in training, namely chaotic, highly dynamic situations and that
(b) police officers need to be adaptable and flexible in the field in order to cope with
the demands in the field. Finally, the results suggested that police training narrowly
focuses on dealing with extreme threats, which (a) differs from the experiences
recruits had in the field and that (b) may have drawbacks, since continuously
perceiving social situations as threatening and dangerous is a risk factor for
aggressive behaviour. Taken together, the current study provides further insights into
the wants and needs of recruits in police training. Specifically, police training may
benefit from (a) widening the focus from dealing with extreme threats to managing
conflict in a more broader perspective including the use of communicative and de-
escalate means and (b) incorporate training tasks that allow for experiencing the
chaotic and highly-dynamic nature of conflict situations and allowing police recruits to
practice adaptable and flexible solutions to encountered problems.
117
Chapter 6: Preparing for Physical Conflict Situations - An
Expert Consensus
6 Preparing for Physical Conflict Situations - An Expert
Consensus
118
6.1 Abstract
Preparing for Physical Conflict Situations - An Expert Consensus
by
Mario S. Staller, Swen Körner,
Andrew Abraham, Jamie Poolton
Prepared for Submission
Abstract:
The current study aims investigating what should be taught in training settings
preparing individuals for coping with physical conflict situations. In order to answer
this research question, we asked a final panel of international self-defence expert
coaches (N = 16) about (a) what expertise in self-defence looks like and (b) what
training content is needed most in order to prepare for violent conflict. The study
findings yielded that expert performance in self-defence relies heavily on situational
awareness in order to avoid being assaulted and de-escalatory behaviour. When it
comes to the confrontation itself, decision-making skills and the ability to attack
effectively play an important role. Concerning the training, situational awareness,
communication and de-escalation, decision-making and attack techniques were
reported as the most important elements of self-defence training from the perspective
of the expert panel. The synthesis of the study findings indicated that training content
in training settings for physical conflict management should focus on situational
awareness and de-escalatory behaviour, aggressive and explosive attacks when
needed and decision-making under the demands of the field. These results provide
valuable information for Curriculum designers, trainers, Instructors and coaches in the
professional or civilian domain.
Keywords: self-defence training, conflict management training, conflict expertise
119
6.2 Author’s Contribution
All authors substantially contributed to the current study and the final manuscript. The
study was designed by MS and AA. Data were collected and analysed by MS. MS
wrote the first draft of the manuscript. SK, AA and JP provided substantial feedback
to the manuscript and helped to reach the manuscript reach its final form.
6.3 Introduction
Coping with violent conflict on an individual basis is a recurrent issue throughout
society (Reddy et al., 2013; Boyle and Wallis, 2016; Ellrich and Baier, 2016). Civilians,
security professionals and professionals working in conflict prone occupations
develop their ability to cope with such events through curriculized programs (Jensen
and Simpson, 2014; Renden, Landman, et al., 2015; Körner and Staller, 2018a;
Koedijk et al., 2019). These programs vary in their terminology, ranging from hand-
to-hand combat training and aggression management training to self-defence
training. Trainers, coaches and instructors around the world have to decide on the
specific content that is needed in developing their clientele’s ability to cope with violent
conflict. However, to date there is a scarcity of research providing curriculum
designers and trainers with evidenced-based information about what should be
trained (Körner and Staller, 2020b). For example, in the law enforcement community,
there is no consensus about what should be taught in police training (Staller and
Körner, 2019b). With regards to what is actually needed in police training, recent
studies indicated that communicative and de-escalative approaches maybe
underrepresented with regards to conflict resolution (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller,
Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021). Also,
observational studies of police self-defence training found large amounts of technical
training to be present within these learning settings (Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner,
Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021) which raises questions from a pedagogical and conflict
resolution perspective if this is what is actually needed in order to solve a potentially
dangerous situations (Körner and Staller, 2018b). As such, the current study aims at
investigating what is actually needed in order to be prepared for violent conflict
situations. Having in mind, that violent conflict may be domain specific and therefore
develop through a variety of different ways, we focus on the actual physical conflict
situation irrespective of its specific development. By setting this focus, we hope to
provide a basis for discussion regarding the content of self-defence training for
civilians as well as for specific occupations like the law enforcement sector.
120
When planning effective training programs for dealing with potentially violent conflict
situations, trainers and instructors need to know what trainees should be able to know
and do as the result of coaching (Abraham et al., 2015). The intended learning
objectives arise from the analysis of what learners need relative to his/her current
context forming the basis for long-, medium- and short-terms plans with specific
outcome, performance and process goals. These objectives serve as a key reference
point from which trainers can deliver, monitor and adjust their programs. As such,
knowing what is needed is essential in designing and aligning training programs in
order to be effective.
This goal relates to two related, yet distinct aspects. On the one hand, coaches need
to know which skills and abilities are needed in order to successfully cope with
physical conflict. For example, are communicative skills needed in an unfolding
conflict situation and which fighting techniques do practitioners need? On the other
hand, coaches need knowledge about the prioritization of training content that
develops the aforementioned skills and abilities. Given that especially in professional
training settings, training time is scarce (Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015; Koedijk
et al., 2019; Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021), coaches
would benefit from reference points when balancing and negotiating the available
training time against the to-be-learnt training content.
There is an epistemological point of view that suggests that data about effective skills
in violent situations could easily be gathered by observing expert performers in the
field (Williams, 2017). However, due to the possibility of serious injury and death, the
deliberate testing of self-defence performance in the field is ethically impermissible
(Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017). As such, this aspect is much more open to debate.
This is documented by the lack of consensus concerning what to teach in self-defence
training programs, which seems to stem from the question: What does effective self-
defence look like? Self-defence providers, curriculum designers in professional
settings, and scholars offer answers to this question. However, the knowledge
sources that are referenced in order to justify their answers are often questionable,
especially if they are built upon anecdotal evidence and myths, that are regularly
communicated in the domain of martial arts (Bowman, 2017). Anecdotal evidence and
myths do not qualify for building the foundation of curricular decisions due to the lack
of generalisability (anecdotal evidence) and truth (myths). As such, empirical research
findings provide a more solid basis for curricular development by validating the
121
building blocks of performance in a specific context and thus facilitating coach
planning decisions (Abraham et al., 2015).
With regards to effective behaviour in violent confrontations, empirical findings are
scarce. There are only a few studies aiming at identifying essential training content in
the context of violent confrontations (Boulton and Cole, 2016; Rajakaruna et al., 2017;
Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019b; Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019b; Staller,
Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a). When it comes to dealing with violent
confrontations, the following capabilities have regularly been identified: being aware
of oneself, the current unfolding situation and to assess the situation adequately
(Boulton and Cole, 2016; Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis,
2019a); being able to remain flexible and to adapt one’s behaviour according to the
situation (Boulton and Cole, 2016; Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019b; Preddy,
Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019b; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a);
being able to approach the problem with various means ranging from communicative
behaviour to physical fighting and force (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Abraham, et al., 2021a); being able to act automatically (Preddy, Stefaniak and
Katsioloudis, 2019b)under pressure (Rajakaruna et al., 2017); and being during and
after the situation about the alternative strategies and one’s own behaviour
(Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019b).
Even though these studies provide first empirical evidence about what needs to be
trained, the empirical base is not comprehensive, for two main reasons. First, the
perspectives must be seen in the light of subjectivity. Data in these studies were
collected either from participants (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Abraham, et al., 2021a) or from trainers and instructors delivering the training program
(Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019b; Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019b). While
both perspectives (participants, coaches) provide valuable insights regarding the
optimal training content, they are limited insofar that they are prone to not take into
account what is actually needed based on empirical data from conflict situations.
Second, while coaches provide information about what they think is needed to
develop competence conflict situations, it is not clear to what extent these skills align
with what they think skilled performance looks like. Focusing on what is needed
without having a clear conception on what the end results looks like is a case of
developing a solution without fully understanding the problem. Ideally the identification
of the needs (i.e. the training content) aligns with the long-term development objective
(i.e. skilled performance); however, current evidence suggests, that coaches in the
122
domain of conflict management are influenced by other aspects than the focus on
learners long-term development towards skilled performance in conflict management.
For example, a recent study in the context of police training found that coaches mainly
chose or were appointed to their role based on their own biographical background,
which was mainly in the area of combat sports, self-defence systems or firearms
sports (Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019e). Körner and colleagues reported that
specific training content sometimes chosen based on the personal preference of the
police trainer toward a specific content subject. Furthermore, a study investigating
103 self-defence systems in Germany (Staller et al., 2016) suggested that economic
reasons seem to drive the promotion of specific techniques or systems. As such, it
may be possible, that some coaches construct their argument about what is needed
and what should be prioritized in training according to their motivation to teach specific
content (Körner and Staller, 2018a).
In sum, personal preferences may consciously or unconsciously influence coaches’
decisions about training content to prepare for conflict situations. In order to efficiently
use the available training time and to reduce potential biases in the identification and
prioritization of training content, coaches and curriculum designers would benefit from
a clearer view of what skilled performance in conflict situations looks like and
guidance on what skills should be prioritized in the training curriculum. Having a
clearer view of skilled performance allows for a reverse engineering process to be
completed and inform the development of well defined, staged concept thresholds of
a curriculum (Bruner, 1960). Prioritization of what is important allows coaches to make
informed planning and delivery decisions.
The aim of the current study is to further investigate what is needed for conflict
settings, by (a) explicitly asking what expert performance in physical conflict situations
looks like and (b) asking about the content and the value of different training elements
in self-defence training. In order to answer these questions, we choose to tap into the
knowledge of the individuals in charge, when it comes to designing curriculums for
coping with physical conflict: expert self-defence coaches. Since self-defence
systems are highly likely to behave competitively among each other due to economic
interests (Staller et al., 2016; Körner and Staller, 2018a) and we already encountered
reluctance of gateway keepers of self-defence systems to take part in self-defence
research (Heil, Staller and Körner, 2017b), we choose the Delphi method with its
anonymous format to reduce competitiveness and reluctance to take part in the study.
Data about effective skills in coping with violence against police officers
123
6.4 Method
The Delphi method (Linstone and Turoff, 2002) was chosen as a preferred approach
to collating and aggregating the views on self-defence training of expert coaches
because it is useful for situations where individual opinions and knowledge are
selected, compared, and combined in order to address a lack of agreement or an
incomplete state of knowledge (Keeney, Hasson and McKenna, 2001; Powell, 2003).
Compared to traditional group opinion based on direct interaction, it allows for
eliminating undesirable psychological effects among participants (e.g. dominant
personalities, inhibition) or selective feedback of relevant information (Landeta, 2006).
Furthermore, since the aim of the study was to establish consensus among
international expert coaches in self-defence, the Delphi methods allows for forming
group opinion in a simple manner with experts around the globe.
The Delphi method is considered a valid instrument (Meyrick, 2003), despite concerns
about the reliability of the method (Hasson, Keeney and McKenna, 2008). By adhering
to clear guidelines, by recruiting participants that have knowledge and interest in the
topic, and by using successive rounds to gain and verify agreement, the validity of the
method is enhanced (Goodman, 1987; Hasson, Keeney and McKenna, 2008). The
current survey invited expert international self-defence coaches and consisted of
three successive rounds - two to three rounds are typical (Boulkedid et al., 2011) -
interspersed with feedback, which were designed and distributed using an online
survey programme (www.soscisurvey.de, SoSci Survey GmbH, Munich, Germany).
The project received ethical approval in line with the Research Ethics Policy and
Procedures of Leeds Beckett University.
6.4.1 Identification and Invitation of Expert Coaches
Heterogeneity within the expert panel is an important quality criterion of the Delphi
method (Powell, 2003). Therefore, we sought to include international self-defence
expert coaches from different self-defence systems and with diverse backgrounds.
Figure 6 provides an overview of the process of how experts were identified for
invitation onto the expert panel. Similar to Kleynen et al. (2014), experts were
identified through a search of peer-reviewed literature in the domain of self-defence
(route A) or by using scientific networks; specifically in this case, two networks
specialised in research on martial arts, combat sports and self-defence: the “Martial
Arts Studies Research Network” and the “Committee for martial arts studies in the
German Association for Sports sciences” (route B). Both routes formed the first layer
of identification.
124
Figure 6: Identification and recruitment of the expert panel
Criteria for the classification of expert coaches were applied as recommended (Nash
et al., 2012). According to these criteria an expert coach (a) utilizes a large declarative
knowledge base to the application of problem solving and decision-making, (b) utilizes
perceptual skills, mental models, sense of typicality and associations, and routines,
(c) demonstrates the ability to work independently, and is capable of producing novel
and innovative solutions, (d) demonstrates effective reflection skills and lifelong
learning attitude to their development, (e) takes their own strengths and limitations
into account and (f) manages complex training processes. The above qualities were
125
evaluated through behavioural observation of training sessions, informal interviews,
evaluation of produced media in the domain of self-defence and through peer
recommendation. All eligible experts were given a comprehensive introduction to the
aims of the research, informed of the expected amount of time necessary to complete
each survey, provided with a personal link to the online survey program and invited
to participate. Once informed consent was obtained, the experts were asked to
provide personal information (e.g., background, years of experience, special
interests) and, importantly, to recommend other experts in the field. This formed the
second layer of identification (Figure 1) and limited the extent to which the sample of
experts was biased by the influence of the two research networks.
There are no clear guidelines regarding the optimal size of a Delphi poll panel (Powell,
2003; Skulmoski, Hartman and Krahn, 2007). Therefore, in keeping with previous
research using the Delphi method (Haines, Baker and Donaldson, 2013) a final panel
size of at least 10 experts was considered appropriate. Based on data of a web-based
Delphi study (Kleynen et al., 2014), it was expected that 50% of the invited experts
will agree to participate and that 80% of the participating experts will complete the
entire survey. Therefore, we initially aimed to invite at least 30 experts to participate
but did not impose an upper limit. Experts who did not respond to the invitation were
reminded twice to do so. Experts who agreed to participate but did not respond to one
of the questionnaires were sent two reminders. As long as experts did not explicitly
withdraw from participation, they were considered part of the panel and received an
invitation for each round.
6.4.2 The Expert Panel
In total, 45 experts were invited to participate. The recruitment process is shown in
Figure 7. Nine experts were identified through literature search, 8 experts through
networks (first layer of identification) and 28 experts were recommended by other
experts who participated in the study (second layer of identification). Twenty experts
agreed initially, thus forming the definitive expert panel. However, 4 experts did not
respond to any of the three rounds of the survey.
126
Figure 7: Recruitment and compilation of expert coaches
Characteristics of the remaining 16 expert coaches are shown in Table 4. Experts
were all male and heterogeneous with regard to age, background and current working
situation. Although the expert panel was internationally diverse, most were based in
Europe.
127
Table 4: Characteristics of expert coaches (n = 16)
Category
Results
Gender
Male
16
Female
0
Country
France
1
Germany
7
Israel
3
United States
5
Teaching Experience
More than 20 years
5
Between 15 and 19 years
6
Between 10 and 14 years
2
Between 5 and 9 years
3
Less than 5 years
0
System*
Canne de Combat
1
Chiron Training
1
FAST Defence
1
Filipino Martial Arts
3
Integrated problem-solving
1
Ju-Jitsu
1
Krav Maga
9
Savate
1
Tactical CQC Training
1
TRICOM
1
“Not a system per se”
1
Who do you teach?*
Civilians
16
Police Officers
16
Military
8
Where do you teach?*
Africa
1
Asia
6
Australia
2
Europe
13
North America
7
South America
1
Note: *several answers were possible
6.4.3 Content of the Survey Rounds and Analysis
The design of the survey rounds followed a stepwise progression to gaining more
detail relating to the content of training programs for coping with physical conflict
situations. Initially questions were posed openly to allow experts to articulate their
views in their own words. Each survey round had two parts that were aligned with the
research questions (i.e. expert performance in self-defence and important training
content). As detailed in Table 2, Round 1 and 2 of the survey was divided into parts.
Part 1 of Round 1 was focused on eliciting the key characteristics of expert
performance in self-defence. All mentioned characteristics were put forward to Round
2, aiming at reaching consensus. Part 2 of Round 1 aimed at identifying the most
important elements of self-defence training. Questions in Part 2 (important training
elements) of Round 2 and 3 were used to reach consensus and to elaborate on issues
identified by the expert panel.
128
Analysis of the data was blind to the identities of the experts. The data of each round
were split according to meaning units and reported back to all members of the panel.
For example, when sentences with two or more meaning units were provided (e.g.
“An expert hits hard and fast”), two statements were provided for the second round
(e.g. “An expert hits hard” and “An expert hits fast”). In these feedback reports, the
results were clustered in meaning units but not analysed or interpreted. Consensus
was considered to be reached when more than 80% of the experts (13 out of 16)
agreed on a certain aspect (Green et al., 1999; Hasson, Keeney and McKenna, 2008).
If consensus was achieved, final descriptions and rankings were formulated.
129
Table 5: Content and structure of the survey rounds
Round
Content
Questions
Answering options
1
Characteristics of expert performance in self-defence
situations (Part 1):
Experts were asked to provide a description of expert
performance in real world self-defence situations:
If somebody is an expert performer in self-defence, how would you
recognise this in his/her performance in a real violent encounter?
Open comment box
Identification of most important elements in training (Part 2):
Experts were asked:
In your opinion as a self-defence coach, what are the most important
things that should be trained in self-defence training? Please rank
from 1 to 5, with 1 being the most important thing.
Open comment box
2
Confirmation of results of Part 1 from Round 1:
Based on the results of Part 1, characteristics of expert
performance in self-defence situations were provided. The
experts were asked:
In the following sections you will find different statements. Please
answer for each question separately, if you, in general, agree that
expert performers in self-defence display the stated characteristic /
element.
Please state any comments or additional information in the box.
Dichotomous choice: yes/no
Open comment box
Confirmation of results of Part 2 from Round 1
Based on the results of Part 2, the ranking of the elements that
should be trained on in self-defence according to their
importance were provided. The experts were asked:
You as an expert group have been asked in Round 1 of the survey,
to state the five most important elements that should be trained on in
self-defence training. The following elements have been named by
you the most: [list of elements with descriptions was provided]
Please rank these elements according to their importance in self-
defence training.
Please state any comments or additional information in the box.
Ranking of the provided items
Open comment box
3
Confirmation of results of Part 2 from Round 2:
Based on the results of Part 2 from Round 2, the ranking of the
importance of different training elements was provided. The
experts were asked:
Do you, in general, agree with the ranking of the described elements
according to their importance in self-defence training? Please state
any comments or additional information in the box.
Dichotomous choice: yes/no
Open comment box
130
6.4.4 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis
Using guidelines relating to qualitative methods (Tracy, 2010; Tracy and Hinrichs,
2017), checks were made to ensure eight criteria of high-quality qualitative research
(worthy topic, rich rigour, sincerity, credibility, resonance, significant contribution,
ethics and meaningful coherence) were met. Investigating what is needed for physical
conflict settings was perceived to be a worthy topic. With regards to rich rigour, data
collection and analysis procedures were carried out systematically following
established guidelines. The process of analysis is described in detail in order to be
transparent concerning the process of reaching consensus. Sincerity was observed
via a “critical friend” who was not part of the research team (Faulkner and Biddle,
2002). He confirmed accuracy in the tracking of the data to interview transcripts and
ensured coherence between the data and the presented feedback to the expert panel.
This helped maximise the trustworthiness of the analysis process. To ensure
credibility, we ensured that consented aspects were traced back to the expert’s panels
statements. Furthermore, we highlighted direct quotations to support findings, which
we argue demonstrated resonance in that it allowed for visual representations of
participants thoughts. In terms of contributing to the literature, we argue the study has
theoretical (e.g., conceptual understanding) and practical (e.g., professional training
programmes and applied practice) implications that develop this area of study.
Institutional ethical clearance was obtained. Situational (e.g., reflectively discussing
the analysis process with the critical friend and reflect on data worth exposing),
relational (e.g., reflection on researcher actions and potential consequences of data
analysis) and exiting (e.g., avoiding unjust or unintended consequences of findings
presented) obligations were also adhered to. Finally, in terms of meaningful
coherence, the study used methods consistent with and comparable to earlier studies
of needed skills in performance settings.
6.5 Results
6.5.1 Characteristics of Expert Performance in Self-Defence
The expert coaches initially provided a variety of statements concerning the
characteristics of expert performance in physical conflict situations. Since all experts
described specific behaviour with regards to the temporal structure of a physical
conflict, the results reported back for Round 2 were organised into characteristics
associated with performance before, during or after the violent encounter, or general
characteristics. All mentioned characteristics were reported back. Table 6 shows the
131
characteristics of expert performance that reached a consensus over 80% after
completion of Round 2. According to this consensus, expert performers in physical
conflict situations generally display a defensive mind-set, avoid violence and only
engage in violence when the aim of protecting oneself or others from harm is not
achieved by any other means. They are not driven by their ego in their decision to
engage in violence and are highly self-reflective in self-defence situations. Before
violence happens, experts in conflict situations are situationally aware of potentially
threatening situations and try to avoid the situation. They try to prevent violence from
happening and display de-escalative behaviour. If possible, experts prepare
themselves before a potential conflict situation unfolds: This may include positioning
themselves to their advantage, scanning the area for further threats, advantages and
disadvantages and manipulating the ‘threat’ to their advantage without the threat
being aware of it. When violence happens, experts are effective in their behaviour.
They do not give up in the case of setbacks or if it seems that they will not succeed.
They show minimal signs of panic during a violent encounter. If expert performers hit
the aggressor in a self-defence situation, these hits are effective, strong, hard and
fast. Once assaulted, expert performers in self-defence react immediately once the
attack has been started by the aggressor. Once the self-defence situation is resolved,
expert performers in self-defence check the overall situation, including themselves for
possible injuries and are able to describe detail of the event.
132
Table 6: Expert consensus (n = 16) on the characteristics of expert performance in
self-defence situations
Characteristic
% agreement
Before a potential violent encounter, the expert performer...
displays situational awareness
100.00%
prepares him/herself by by not allowing someone to get behind them
93.75%
prepares him/herself by scanning the area
93.75%
prepares him/herself by manipulating the threat without the threat being aware of it
93.75%
prepares him/herself by positioning him/herself
100.00%
displays de-escalating behaviour
100.00%
tries to prevent violence from happening!
100.00%
tries to avoid the situation if possible
100.00%
does not ignore the threat / confrontation
87.50%
remains calm
93.75%
During the violent encounter, the expert performer hits…
Effectively
93.75%
Efficiently
81.25%
Strong
100.00%
Hard
100.00%
Fast
100.00%
Almost-immediately after being assaulted
93.75%
During the violent encounter, the expert performer…
is effective in his/her behaviour
93.75%
is efficient in his/her behaviour
81.25%
reacts immediately after assaulted
87.50%
performs quick take-outs (leaving no chance for the aggressor)
81.25%
During the violent encounter, the expert performer displays the following tactical behaviour:
lets no one get behind them
87.50%
directs attention to the surrounding in order to get a tactical advantage by scanning for
barricade objects
93.75%
directs attention to the surrounding in order to get a tactical advantage scanning to common
objects to use
93.75%
optimal positioning in the encounter (escape routes)
87.50%
During the violent encounter, the decision-making process of the expert performer is
characterized by…
efficient problem-solving
87.50%
effective problem-solving
87.50%
making the right decisions
100.00%
fast processing (without hesitation, without delays)
81.25%
During the violent encounter, the expert performer displays a certain mind-set, which is
displayed by the following behaviour:
very decisive
100.00%
does not give up in case of set-backs / losing
100.00%
does not give up, when goal seems not reachable anymore
87.50%
After the violent encounter, the expert performer…
checks the overall situation
100.00%
checks himself for possible injuries
93.75%
is able to describe details of the event to authorities
87.50%
In general, the expert performer…
displays a defensive mind-set (avoids violence; engages in violence only when necessary
with the aim of protecting him/herself or others and not for other reasons)
100.00%
is highly self-reflective: evaluates the ability to deal with the current threat/situation
100.00%
is not driven by ego
100.00%
is not driven by emotions
87.50%
Several expert coaches mentioned additional characteristics, that not all participants
consented with in Round 2. According to these accounts the expert performer
“prepares him/herself by maintaining distance from the (lead) aggressor” (75.00%),
“does not hide from the confrontation” (62.50%), “displays authoritative behaviour“
(68.75%) and “is not screaming/yelling” (62.50%). With regards to the characteristics
of the performed hits executed by the expert performer during a violent confrontation,
some experts agreed that the “performer hits first” (50.00%) and “hits safely (not
133
injuring one-self)” (75.00%). Additionally, according to some expert coaches, the
expert performer during a violent encounter “executes well-timed techniques”
(62.50%) and “uses effective cover techniques” (75.00%). Regarding the tactical
behaviour, 75.00% of the experts agreed that the expert performer “circles around the
aggressors (if there are more than 1 aggressor)” during a violent encounter.
Furthermore, 68.75% of the expert coaches stated that the decision-making process
of expert performers during a violent encounter is characterised by “solving the
situation, the best way possible adapting to the situation” (68.75%). Furthermore, four
experts (25.00%) further commented on the characteristic of “making the right
decision”. They added that expert performers aim at making the right decision, but
that it will not always be clear what the best course of action will be. This can only be
judged by hindsight: “What was right or wrong will only be shown in the future. Of
course, all experts try their best to make right decisions”. With regards to the mind-
set of expert performers during the violent encounter, some experts agreed on the
characteristics of behaviour that included: being “very aggressive” (43.75%); being
the “first man to charge in case of immediate life danger” (56.25%); and “helps other
first” (37.50%). Of the experts, 37.75% commented on the characteristic of being very
aggressive. According to their views, expert performers have to be in control of their
aggression; however, they have to be able to be aggressive, when the situation
demands it: “I prefer the term 'controlled aggression' as too much uncontrolled
aggression can be a liability (legally and otherwise).”
6.5.2 Content of Training
Regarding the content of training in self-defence programs experts initially named the
five most important elements in training according to their view. Across the panel, 11
elements were mentioned in total and reported back to the panel for ranking
according to their importance in Round 2. The order of importance is depicted in Table
7. In Round 3, 93.75% of the experts agreed with the ranking.
The findings show that behaviour before the violent encounter starts to happen is
considered as very important by the expert coaches. This includes situational
awareness (Ranked 1st) as well as communicative and de-escalative behaviour
(Ranked 2nd). Furthermore, the ability to make good decisions (Ranked 3rd) has been
considered as being very important in training. Developing the ability to perform
defence techniques against specific attacks was considered as less important in
training (Ranked 8th) than being able to respond to an attack with attack techniques
by the performer (Ranked 4th) and being explosively aggressive (Ranked 5th).
134
In the last round, two experts (12.5%) commented that “there is no right answer” to
the question of importance, as the separation of training elements was “an artefact of
poor training methodologies”.
Table 7: Ranking of the Content that should be trained on in Self-Defence Training
Ranking
Content
M (
±
SD)
Mdn
1
Situational Awareness
1.69 (±
1.54)
1
Developing the ability to recognize the cues in the current situation
(especially before the potential violent encounter); making sense out
of them on prior knowledge (i.e. violence dynamics) and prediction of
future events based on that information.
2
Communication / De-escalation
4.50 (±
2.78)
3
Developing the ability to de-escalate a situation and prevent a
situation from escalating by the means of communication (verbal and
non-verbal)
3
Decision-Making
5.25 (±
2.49)
5
Developing the ability make fast and correct decisions in the context
of violent encounters: i.e. "what" to do and "when" to do it
4
Attack Techniques
5.69 (±
2.55)
6
Developing the ability to perform effective punches and kicks; hard,
fast and powerful; hitting with everything that is possible; hitting
vulnerable parts; ability to attack in all directions from every position
5
Explosive aggression (“from 0 to 100”)
6.13 (±
2.81)
6
Developing the ability to switch from defence to offense very quickly
and aggressively
6
Tactical Skills
6.19 (±
2.93)
6,5
Developing structures that guide decision-making in violent
encounters; i.e. managing distance, position and stance; how to use
common objects
7
Coping with stress
6.25 (±
2.57)
6,5
Developing the ability to cope with the demands / arousal posed by a
violent confrontation and being able to act under these
circumstances
8
Defence Techniques
7.31 (±
2.30)
7
Developing the ability to perform defence techniques against specific
attacks (i.e. defence against choking, defence against punches) in
specific situation (i.e. ground)
9
Fighting Ability
7.25 (±
3.21)
8
Developing the ability to fight, i.e. winning when the opponent /
aggressor wants equally to win
10
Physical Conditioning
8.19 (±
2.48)
8,5
Developing physical strength, speed and power, aerobic and
anaerobic capacity!
11
Ethical-Normative Attitude
7.56 (±
3.79)
9
Developing moral structures, that guide the behavior in violent
encounters (self-defence law, defensive mind-set; doing what is
necessary. etc.)
Note: Results are ranked according to the Median (1st order of ranking) and the Mean (2nd order of ranking); columns
3 and 4 display average values of the ranking with “1” being the most important element of training, “2” being the
second important element of training and so on.
135
6.6 Discussion
The overarching aim of the current study was to inform coaches and curriculum
developers about what is needed for coping with physical conflict settings. An
heterogeneous international group of expert coaches in self-defence provided
insights into this question by consenting (a) the characteristics of expert performance
in self-defence, and (b) the perceived importance of different training content.
6.6.1 Situational Awareness and De-escalatory Behaviour
The consensus shows that situational awareness and de-escalatory behaviour is
considered as a crucial component in self-defence expertise and that it is important
training content. In this instance, what expert coaches perceive is important in training
aligns with agreed characteristics of skilled performance. The importance of being
skilled in the diffusion of conflict is in line with research showing that skilled police
officers employ a variety of de-escalation tactics and communication skills in order to
diffuse conflictual situations (Todak and James, 2018; Todak and White, 2019).
Furthermore, situational awareness has been consistently suggested as a crucial
characteristic of expertise to deal with the complex demands of a violent conflict
(Endsley and Robertson, 2000; Saus et al., 2006; Johnson et al., 2016; Endsley,
2018) and as an important training content for professionals that regular encounter
conflict settings (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019a,
2019b; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a). The dominance of
characteristics that increase the likelihood of a violent interaction not eventuating
(situational awareness, communication and de-escalation) broadens the perspective
of traditional self-defence or personal protection training that focuses solely on
situations in which physical conflict has been initiated. Therefore, it is interesting that
the expert self-defence coaches explicitly state that the most important training
content is the development of situational awareness, and then the acquisition of
communication/de-escalation skills. This is diametric to the training content of most
available self-defence systems. For example, in an analysis of the self-description of
103 self-defence systems in Germany (Staller et al., 2016), only 34% of the systems
regularly train on non-physical solutions (communication, de-escalation) to potential
violent encounters. Moreover, recent results from the observation of police trainings
(Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021) show that there is greater
focus on physical force options, while other research has noted the lack of emphasis
and the need for communicative and de-escalative behaviour skills training (Dayley,
2016; Rajakaruna et al., 2017). In this light, professional trainers and curriculum
136
designer should be aware of this potential bias in existing programs that aim at
developing the skills underpinning effective conflict management. Greater focus
should be aimed at developing situational awareness and communication and de-
escalation skills in order to prevent the conflict situation evolving into a violent physical
interaction. As such, trainers may consider regularly and carefully tasking learners
with representative situations that sharpen situational awareness and can be resolved
without violence. A mixed methods approach to preparing individuals for potential
conflict scenarios may reduce the risk of learners implicitly adhering to a specific set
of potentially harmful conflict resolution strategies (Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke,
2019b).
6.6.2 Attacking Aggressively
If physical violence is unpreventable, experts agreed that the capaability to attack
aggressively is an essential characteristic of skilled performance. In keeping with this
view the experts identified attacking techniques and explosive aggression as
important training elements. This element of highly aggressive behaviour towards the
aggressor has also been reported as an important performance characteristic by
soldiers being interviewed about their real-world hand-to-hand combat experience
(Jensen and Wrisberg, 2014). According to the experts, expert performance during
violent encounters is displayed via effective and efficient behaviour and fast, hard and
strong attacks (“hitting”) being performed. The experts consented that training specific
defence techniques (e.g. defence against a choke from the front) are less important
than the ability to attack. An emphasis on technical skills in an if-this-then-that format
has been observed in self-defence training (Staller, Körner and Abraham, 2020).
Likewise, training settings in the policing domain encompass high amounts of
technical training (Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021). The
current results provide an empirical basis for a shift from technical oriented training
towards a principles- or concepts-based training approach (Renden, Savelsbergh and
Oudejans, 2016; Staller, Körner and Abraham, 2020). According to these approaches,
general principles to combat a broad catalogue of attacks should be practiced.
However, the experts also agreed that expertise is denoted by technical efficiency.
As such technical-focused training activities seems beneficial, especially concerning
attacking techniques, like punching and striking. Moreover, the sense of competence
that technical training promotes may have a positive impact on learner motivation for
police self-defence training (Koerner, Staller and Kecke, 2020). Therefore, technical-
focused training activities seem to have a prominent place within physical conflict
management training.
137
Taken together, it seems that while technical skills, especially concerning attacks, are
needed and should be trained upon, emphasis should be put on the contextualisation
of skills, by solving the problem at hand. This is line with current research advocating
the contextualisation of self-defence practice through representative learning tasks
(Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017; Staller and Körner, 2019a) and focusing on goal
directed behaviour rather than pre-described movement patterns (Körner and Staller,
2018a).
6.6.3 Decision-Making Under the Representative Demands
According to the expert panel, decision-making skills play an important role in the
context of physical conflict situations. The ability to anticipate, to react and to decide
quickly and effectively are important performance characteristics that have well been
documented and investigated in sports (Williams and Ford, 2008; Roca et al., 2013;
Roca and Williams, 2016), in the security domain (Klein, Calderwood and Clinton-
Cirocco, 1986; Boulton and Cole, 2016; Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Preddy, Stefaniak
and Katsioloudis, 2019a, 2019b) and in civilian settings (Staller and Abraham,
2016).Similarly , being able to adapt to the current situation at hand has been
consistently identified as an important skill for conflict management (Boulton and
Cole, 2016; Staller and Abraham, 2016; Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Körner, Staller and
Kecke, 2019b; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a). As such, and in line with
the current results, scholarly recommendations for training programs involve
developing the skills needed in order to cope with the complexity and unpredictability
of violent encounters (Jensen and Wrisberg, 2014; Körner and Staller, 2018a; Staller
and Körner, 2020a). Such skills involve developing the structures, that guide decision-
making within the specific context (e.g. tactical skills) and actually allow learners to
use these structures in representative training tasks (e.g. under stress) (Staller and
Zaiser, 2015b). At this point, it should be noted that the reported and ranked elements
of training are deeply intertwined with each other; a feature of self-defence expressed
by two participants of the panel. Developing guiding decision-making frameworks
involves the coaching of situational awareness and developing the learners capability
to resolve conflict in different ways, ranging from de-escalative and communicative
strategies to very aggressive and highly technical behaviours . Also, the ethical-
normative attitude, which was agreed as an expert characteristic and an important
element of training, influences decision-making in a given conflict situation (McLean
et al., 2019). This is in line with research indicating that conflict situations may
sometimes be resolved without physical aggression if the situations allows for it, and
the individual choses to (Jaeckle, Benoliel and Nickel, 2019).
138
The current results state that experts perform well under pressure, that they remain
calm and that they control their emotions. In the context of de-escalation, this adds to
evidence of Todak and White (2019) reporting, that being calm and in control of one’s
emotion is an important characteristic of a skilled de-escalator. Consequently, when
developing training programs ability to cope with the perceived demands was
identified as an important factor. In a similar vein, research investigating the
representativeness of training tasks has pointed out the need for incorporating the
affective load of the real-world situations into training in order to optimally prepare
learners for these demands (Headrick et al., 2015; Maloney et al., 2018). As such,
training in the context of conflict management should adequately simulate these
demands in order to allow learner to develop the needed skills for coping with these
situations (Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017; Nota and Huhta, 2019). However, results
from observational studies in police training (Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Klemmer, et al., 2021) suggest a lack of training time allowing for an effective
development of these skills. For example, a case study reported less than 7% of the
total training time allowed for the development of decision-making competence under
representative tasks in police training (Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021).
As such, the actual conflict management training delivered does not mirror what
expert coaches in this study, and previous research, recommend. In that light,
coaches and curriculum developers should be aware of the need of designing
representative learning environments in training (Pinder et al., 2011; Staller, Zaiser
and Körner, 2017; Körner and Staller, 2018a) that allow for the development of the
needed decision-making skills under the demands that are likely to be encountered
in the field. This may involve designing training tasks that allow the learner to be
surprised (Jensen and Wrisberg, 2014), experience emotions (Nieuwenhuys and
Oudejans, 2017; Maloney et al., 2018) and the dynamics and complexity of an
unfolding physical conflict situation (Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a).
6.6.4 Limitations
The current study is the first one utilizing a Delphi method in the field of self-defence
training. The generated and summarized results are based on knowledge, opinions
and practical experiences on an international expert panel. Hence, the results should
be interpreted tentatively. Even though the expert coaches reached some degree of
consensus this does not mean that all of the experts, or indeed the authors, agree
with the final descriptions or rankings. For example, the final ranking of the training
content suggests, that “physical conditioning” is far less important than learning
“attack techniques” and the ability of “explosive aggression”, but it is obvious that
139
attacking with punches and kicks in an explosive, aggressive way is related to the
ability to generate power and speed quickly (Loturco et al., 2014, 2016). This also
indicates that there is a significant overlap between the stated training content and
that the provided definitions of the concepts were not clear cut. However, we opted
for keeping the terms provided by the expert and only clarify the used terms with the
statements of the expert in order to inform the other coaches about the extension of
the terms.
Although the Delphi method is a well-accepted method for investigating opinions
(Kleynen et al., 2014), there is no agreement on the criteria for consensus at the
moment (Boulkedid et al., 2011). In the current study, we regarded consensus as 80%
agreement or greater, based on current recommendations (Green et al., 1999;
Hasson, Keeney and McKenna, 2008). The lack of consensus in cases of less than
80% agreement does not necessarily imply that a certain viewpoint was invalid.
The quality of the results from a Delphi study is strongly connected to the
heterogeneity and representativeness of the expert panel (Linstone and Turoff, 2002).
Although the response rate in our study was low, the experts who participated can be
described as heterogeneous with regard to their backgrounds and working
experience. Furthermore, different self-defence systems are represented by the
expert panel. We tried to overcome selection bias within the sample by relying on
snow-ball sampling. However, some selection bias may have occurred, as most of
the experts who participated were based in Europe. This might be explained by the
fact that the networks used to identify experts were based in Europe. Likewise, even
though invitations were sent to a diverse range of expert coaches, a higher rate of
krav maga expert coaches agreed to take part in the study compared to coaches from
other systems. We do not know to what extent the origin and background of the
experts influenced the results. However, we acknowledge that cultural values and
expert coaches’ socialisation in specific self-defence systems may account for some
of the findings in the current study.
Concerning the generalisability of the results and the transferability to specific
contexts of conflict management, the findings have to be treated with caution.
Different professional contexts (e.g. law enforcement, military) and civilian settings
(e.g. gang violence, bar fights, domestic violence) have different dynamics building
up to the conflict and also different means of solving the conflict (Jackson-Jacobs,
2013; Jensen and Wrisberg, 2014; Katerndahl et al., 2014; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Abraham, et al., 2021a). However, physical conflict situations per se are very complex
140
in nature (Staller and Körner, 2020a), providing a challenge for researchers to
differentiate and to specifically tap into the specificity of distinct contexts. In that light,
the current study should be viewed as a first attempt to shed light into the narrow area
of unfolding physical conflict without focusing on the situational dynamics that lead
towards it. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that the Delphi results do not offer
indisputable facts. The technique provides a snapshot of expert opinion at a specific
time (Hasson and Keeney, 2011). As such, the findings should be interpreted with
appropriate levels of caution.
6.7 Conclusion and Practical Implications
The current study aimed at investigating what is needed in the training settings that
prepare learners to cope with physical conflict settings. In order to map what it needed
a heterogeneous international group of expert coaches in self-defence consented on
the characteristics of expert performance in a violent confrontation before agreeing
on the relative importance of different elements of training to prepare individuals for
such conflict situations. The adopted Delphi poll approach identified key areas for
improvements and a guiding structure for content in training settings that prepare
individuals for managing potential physical conflict, such as police training or self-
defence training.
First, the results suggest that conflict avoidant and de-escalatory behaviour by being
situationally aware and employing de-escalative and communicative skill is a crucial
characteristic of expert performance in the field and an important aspect of training
that should be focused upon. In that light, even when training is advertised as a
training setting where skills for physical conflict management are developed, a
considerable amount of practice time should be spent on developing strategies in
order to avoid the conflict, including de-escalative and communicative behaviour. This
involves providing learners with the skills needed and the opportunity to practice them
alongside physical attacking, defending and fighting skills. Skills for defusing
emotionally-laden situations may include active listening skills (McMains, 2002;
Vecchi, 2009) as well as reflecting on the individuals mindset towards conflict
(McLean et al., 2019; Wolfe et al., 2020). Also, emphasis in training settings may be
put on learning to identify and to interpret clues that may lead up to physical conflict.
By providing learners with the knowledge of such “danger cues” and the opportunities
to practice their response in representatively designed tasks, should be an important
aspect of training.
141
Second, when violence is unpreventable, being able to aggressively attack the
attacker is proposed as characteristic of skilled performance in violent confrontations.
This is reflected in the need of focusing on training content that aims to develop these
skills. As such, training programs may consider putting emphasis on easy to use
attacking techniques like punches, open-hand attacks or easy kicks as well as the
ability for an explosive and aggressive execution of these skills when needed. This
involves trainees learning to spot danger cues that unavoidably lead to physical
conflict, as well as the practice of immediately starting to attack when presented with
such cues (Staller and Abraham, 2016). Furthermore, this means that trainees need
to be trained on perception of when to stop their explosive attacks.
Third, efficient and effective decision-making under the demands of a violent
confrontation (e.g. stress, emotions, complexity, unpredictability) was considered
essential for expert performers in conflict management. As such, training content
needs to, first, encompass situations that allow learners for choosing and using a
broad variety of skills (i.e. communication, de-escalation, situational awareness,
aggression, etc.) and second, allow for experiences under the demands of the field.
The concept of representative learning design in self-defence training described
elsewhere (Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017) may provide readers with further
guidance about how to design such activities.
Finally, the mentioned aspects have fundamental implications for the development of
trainers in the area of professional or civilian conflict management trainings. The study
identified key areas for improvements and a guiding structure for content in training
settings that prepare individuals for managing potential physical conflict. Based on
the current results, these include a variety of conflict management skills needed for
effectively coping with physical conflict and the ability to design learning
environments, that allow for opportunities for practice of the needed skills under the
demands of the field.
142
Chapter 7: Coaching in Police Training – A Case Study
7 Coaching in Police Training – A Case Study
143
7.1 Abstract
Coaching in Police Training – A Case Study
by
Mario S. Staller, Swen Körner, Valentina Heil, Isabel Klemmer,
Andrew Abraham, Jamie Poolton
The manuscript is intended to be submitted for publication in a different form.
Abstract:
The current study aims at investigating the current practice of coaching in police
training concerning police trainers planning, delivering and reflecting processes.
Using a case study approach, we systematically observed a semester of police
training that consisted of 30 hours of police training. Field notes and time-on-task data
were analysed using an inductive approach. Furthermore, police trainers were asked
about their planning for and reflecting on training sessions based on the Coaching
Practice Planning and Reflecting Framework (CPPRF). In total 34 interviews were
conducted (17 pre, 17 post) and analysed. Concerning planning, the results indicated
that police trainer employ two main strategies in order to progress their learners
towards the aims of the training session. First, they focus on making the learning
experience fun and second, they point out the relevance of the to be learnt skills by
creating the demand, showcasing mistakes and then subsequently focusing on
developing the needed skills in isolated contexts. However, the data indicated that
police trainers were generally deficient in their capability to set training session
objectives and to align their delivery of training in a coherent and effective way. In
relation to the actual delivery of police training, the data indicated an adherence to
traditional linear approaches to training resulting in high amounts of augmented
instruction and feedback, an one-size-fits all approach to technical and tactical
behaviour and, a non-efficient use of available training time with low amounts of
engagement in representatively designed tasks. Finally, the results indicate, that
higher levels of reflection of the delivery of the training session were almost absent.
Based on these results we suggest (a) for police trainers and curriculum designers to
align the structure and delivery of police training with the needs of officers in the field
144
(e.g. conflict resolution), (b) for police trainers to employ more learner-centred
pedagogical approaches that account for individual action capabilities and resources
and allow for high amounts of training time with representatively designed training
tasks and (c) for decision-makers to provide the necessary coach education in order
to provide trainers with the knowledge, tools and resources to reflect upon their
practice.
Keywords: police training, firearms training, tactical training, representative learning
design, coaching, planning, reflecting
145
7.2 Author’s Contribution
All authors substantially contributed to the current study and the final manuscript. The
study was designed by MS and SK. Data in the field were collected by MS, SK, VH
and IK. Data analysis was performed by MS and SK. MS wrote the first draft of the
manuscript. SK, AA and JP provided substantial feedback to the manuscript and
helped to reach the manuscript reach its final form.
7.3 Introduction
In the law enforcement domain recruits, regular officers and specialised personal
regularly engage in practice geared towards developing the skills to cope with
different operational situations, ranging from non-conflictual police-citizen encounters
to use of force situations (Birzer, 2003; Nota and Huhta, 2019). Police trainers are in
charge of planning, delivering and reviewing the respective training sessions (Staller
and Zaiser, 2015b; Cushion, 2020). This coaching process - in line with current
conceptualisations of coaching (Lyle, 2018a) - is a decision-making process at its core
(Lyle, 2002; Cushion, Armour and Jones, 2003; Abraham, Collins and Martindale,
2006; Abraham et al., 2015). Police trainers, as coaches, draw from a number of
knowledge structures to inform their decision-making when planning, delivering and
reflecting (Abraham and Collins, 2011a, 2011b).
However, research in the context of police training indicates, that police trainers do
not regularly engage in planning and reflecting processes (Cushion, 2020). In order
to further investigate these findings, the current study focuses on how police trainers
actually plan, deliver and reflect with regards to their training sessions. By expanding
the methodology employed by Cushion (2020), the current study reports data from an
observational study of police training in Germany aligned with data exploring the
planning and reflection of thoughts of coaches around observed delivery of the
training sessions.
7.4 Planning Training Sessions in Police Training
When police trainers plan their coaching, a key aspect is knowing what learners
should be able to know and do as a result of coaching (Abraham et al., 2015). The
intended learning objectives arise from the analysis of the learners needs relative to
his/her current context and form the basis for long-, medium- and short-term plans
with specific outcome, performance and process goals. These objectives serve as a
reference points from which coaches can monitor and adjust their planning, delivering
146
and reflection (Abraham et al., 2015). As such, planning provides a “tentative map” to
follow (Till et al., 2019), providing a sense of direction and clarifies expectations
against which current development can be continually monitored, on which alternate
coaching strategies can be decided upon in order to accommodate and respond to
changing needs of learners or contextual changes (e.g. resources). Coaches can only
intervene if the need to act is noticed within long-, medium- or short-term planning or,
more immediately, within the actual training activity. In order to notice the need to act,
coaches have to be continuously attentive to moments of importance or disruption.
Engaging in deliberate and purposeful planning can help coaches to detect anomalies
by having clear expectations against which current observations of the reality can be
compared against and that might otherwise be overlooked (Jones, Bailey and
Thompson, 2013). The capacity to think in this manner while events are happening in
the coaching process has been described as reflection-in-action (Schön, 1983;
Martindale and Collins, 2012). By improving the clarity of expectations before a
coaching event facilitates reflect-in-action, and thus provides an important stimulus
for reflection after the coaching event; described as reflection-on-action (Schön, 1983;
Kovacs and Corrie, 2017).
Coaching is a continuous planning, delivering and reflection process (Abraham et al.,
2015). As such, a useful planning strategy for police trainers is ongoing, dynamic and
adaptive and enables the coach to respond to changes in the learners and the
learning environment (Kiely, 2012; Abraham et al., 2015; Till et al., 2019). In order to
help coaches to cope with these demands, the Coaching Practice Planning and
Reflective Framework (CPPRF), has been developed (Muir et al., 2011; Till et al.,
2019). It can be understood as a thinking tool to help coaches clarify their expectations
and encourage connections between the desired objectives and coaching strategies.
In particular the CPPRF encourages thinking and reflection around the (a) intended
learning objectives (on a group / individual level), (b) the design of learning activities,
(c) coach behavioural strategies and (d) learner engagement and learning. As a
planning tool, the CPPRF encourages coaches to think about their coaching goals
and the alignment with learner needs and wants (the who), the field-specific demands
(the what) and the learning environment (the how) in order to clarify their expectations.
Furthermore, coaches are encouraged to consider how each coaching interaction is
nested within the long-, medium- and short-term objectives of learners’ development
(Abraham and Collins, 2011a). The intra-coordination of session activities with the
inter-coordination of sessions over a period of time to progress the learner towards
147
agreed overarching goals is referred to as Constructively Aligned Learning practice
(Biggs, 1996; Abraham et al., 2015).
In police training, the on-going complex process of planning, delivering and reflecting
as the heart of coaching best practice (Abraham and Collins, 2011a; Muir et al., 2015;
Till et al., 2019), has not been fully acknowledged (Staller and Körner, 2019b).
However, attempts to incorporate practical coaching models to frame the delivery of
police training have begun to emerge (Körner and Staller, 2018a; Nota and Huhta,
2019). Police trainers need to exhibit the ability to integrate ideas from the
interdependent areas of coaching knowledge (e.g. police-specific content knowledge,
knowledge about skill acquisition, motivation etc.) to inform their reasoning and
decision-making when they plan, deliver and reflect on police training sessions (Till et
al., 2019). This includes identifying the target performance in relation to the learners’
current state in order to formulate input demands as well as performance, process
and outcome goals (Abraham and Collins, 2011a; Abraham et al., 2015; Till et al.,
2019). This includes a careful consideration of the “who”, “what” and “how” to develop
a coaching plan that is coherent, progressive and nested in the bigger picture of a
competent police officer However, the study of how coaches plan, deliver and reflect
is scarce, particularly in the domain of police training. Data provided by Cushion
(2020) from his observations of officer safety training in the UK. This work surmised
that police trainers invested limited time in discussions about the planning and
delivering of courses and did not explicitly consider any criteria for delivery success,
such as outcome, performance or process goals. Cushion (2020) concludes, that
“training was in a self-confirming ‘loop’” (p. 7) manifesting traditional training
approaches, consisting of large amounts of teacher-centred practices aiming at
developing skill in an isolated fashion. Such approaches are regularly observed in
police training (Birzer, 2003; Basham, 2014; Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Klemmer, et al., 2021). This lack of self-reflection has recently been outlined as one
of the major obstacles in advancing the delivery of police training (Staller, Körner,
Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2019b).
7.5 Delivering Training Sessions in Police Training
There is a scarcity of research on the actual delivery of police training and its
components (e.g. self-defence training, arrest and control training, firearms training,
tactical training). Research so far has focused on interviewing learning officers (Buttle,
2007; Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a) and
trainers (Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019b; Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis,
148
2019b) in order to gather feedback for optimising learning environments. Only recently
did Cushion (2020) provide empirical evidence about the actual delivery of police
training. Using a case study approach and employing participant observation,
interviews and time-on-task analysis, Cushion participated and observed three two-
day courses of officers’ safety training in the UK. The study showed that practice
activities were delivered in a disjointed fashion and were not representatively
designed. This adds empirical evidence to the notion that police training methods
regularly seem to employ an instructor-centric linear teaching model (Körner and
Staller, 2018a) underpinned by a non-cognitive behavioural paradigm of training
(Birzer, 2003; Werth, 2011). This approach is characterized, by having defined the
relevant conditions and stimuli under which the learner has to perform, and comparing
the performance of the learner with a clear description of criteria by which the
behaviour will be judged acceptable (Elias and Merriam, 2005) . The underlying
assumption of linear teachings is that skills can be isolated and built part by part in
preparation for the criterion environment. The focus in this process is on a specific
technique and sequence, which must be copied from the trainer’s model and
reproduced in the event of an emergency (Körner and Staller, 2018a). Advantages of
linear approaches include a fast success in motor learning of isolated skills in low-
stress and low variance environments, accompanied by the subjective conviction of
technique mastery (Abraham and Collins, 2011a).
However, such learning environments (low-stress, low-variance) do not usually
correspond to the specific situational parameters of conflict situations in the policing
context (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015; Staller,
Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a). This difference between training and the field
was also evidenced by Cushion (2020) and by results from interview data from
learners (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019b; Staller, Körner,
Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a, 2021b) indicating a lack of representative design within
the employed training tasks. Representative task design in this context consists of
two components: the (a) functionality of the task and the (b) action fidelity (Pinder et
al., 2011). While the functionality of a training activity enables the trainee to meet the
tasks, pressure conditions and constraints expected in the criterion context, action
fidelity refers the learner being allowed to complete the responses like in the field. The
core element of representativeness is the relationship between perceptual-cognitive,
motor and emotional conditions (Broadbent, Causer, Ford, et al., 2015; Headrick et
al., 2015), under which police officers act on duty (Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017)
149
and which seem to be lacking in linear approaches to training in the context of policing
(Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a).
Another drawback of the linear approach to learning may lie in limiting the amount of
time that learners are actually engaged in practice, which may be due to the
adherence to blocked practice drills with augmented coach instruction and feedback
(Curtner-Smith et al., 2001; Renshaw and Moy, 2018). In the context of police training
Cushion (2020) also noted that the available training time was not maximised. Over
the three courses participants spent 54.1 % of the training time being passive, while
the coach(es) demonstrated, briefed the learners and gave feedback. After taking into
account all activities in which participants observed others or worked as a simulator,
the time spent motorically active on engaging in subject matter-related tasks was
between 20 and 30%. Time-on-task is a necessary factor for the mastering of skills
(Ericsson, 2016) and considered a process indicator for learning (Mars, 2006).
However, it is acknowledged that activity alone is not enough. Learners need to be
engaged and invested in the task at hand (Christenson et al., 2012) to advance the
rate of learning. As such, police training needs to engage police recruits in well-
designed learning activities (Staller and Zaiser, 2015b; Staller and Körner, 2019a;
Cushion, 2020). Taken together linear approaches to training may come at the
expense of representative design of the training tasks and low time-on-task of the
learner.
Alternative approaches may include other theoretical perspectives, like the ecological
dynamics paradigm (Davids et al., 2012; Seifert et al., 2019), which underpins non-
linear pedagogy (Chow et al., 2016; Correia et al., 2018). According to this
perspective, skill learning better refers to the process of adapting and attuning to the
environment, instead of reproducing an “ideal” technique” out of context (Araújo and
Davids, 2011). Adopting this perspective leads to pedagogical approaches that
facilitate the emergence of greater functional relationship between the learner,
conceptualized as adaptive and self-organised systems, and the performance
environment instead of pursuing a perfect technique (Körner and Staller, 2018a;
Renshaw and Chow, 2019). By highlighting the importance of performance-
environment coupling, perceptual-action coupling and consideration of the non-
linearity of the learning process and performance in the field (Seifert et al., 2019), the
ecological dynamics framework offers a useful perspective on skill development and
transfer especially with regards to designing practice activities in general (Pinder et
al., 2011; Krause et al., 2017) and in the law enforcement domain particularly (Staller,
150
Zaiser and Körner, 2017; Körner and Staller, 2018a; Staller and Körner, 2019a). A
non-linear approach to training encourages individual learners to explore and to
discover their own functional behavioural solutions to problems in the field (Körner
and Staller, 2018a).
Furthermore, concerning the structure and delivery of police training, the results of
Cushion (2020) indicate a problematic aspect: He reported that police trainers
delivering officer safety training draw from a manual of arrest and self-defence
techniques to design their courses with the goal being to prepare officers for coping
with violent situations. However, the results showed, with officer predominantly
training in isolated and unrepresentative training tasks, that the employed training
approach did not the match the intended learning outcome, indicating a problem in
the constructive alignment of the program.
7.5.1 Reflecting on Training Sessions in Police Training
Reflecting on the delivery of training session is an important feature in continuously
adapting one’s own teaching towards the intended learning outcomes based on the
specifics of the situation. It has therefore been highlighted as an essential
characteristic of a professional police training and as a desirable outcome of coach
education in police training (Körner and Staller, 2018a). Reflective practice is
generally considered as a continuous interaction between planning and delivery that
deepens understanding of the learner’s own practice and experience and leads to
more skilled practice (Schön, 1983). From this viewpoint it seems problematic, that
police trainers seem to lack planning and reflecting processes as evidenced by
Cushion (2020).
From a coach learning perspective, indications of a lack of reflection in police training
coaching practice (Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a; Cushion, 2020) point
towards that learning in police use of force coaching lacks awareness of underlying
assumptions (Brookfield, 2013), such as the underlying pedagogical approach
(Birzer, 2003; Körner and Staller, 2018a) or the inclination towards a more warrior or
guardian-oriented policing approach (McLean et al., 2019; Staller, Körner, Heil and
Kecke, 2019a). Being aware of the underlying assumptions of ones coaching practice
is a necessary ingredient for higher levels of learning (Argyris, 2003; Tosey, Visser
and Saunders, 2012). “Higher” levels of learning in this context means that new
perspectives with a successively wider scope are involved. Tosey et al., (2012)
conceptualized these higher levels in recursive loops, that function as feedback loops
151
from all levels for previous levels and vice versa. Whereas single-loop learning is
concerned with doing things right, double-loop learning takes place by examining and
altering the governing causal and prescriptive assumptions of such practices (Argyris,
2003), answering the question of “Am I doing the right things?”. For example, a single-
loop reflection of a police trainer, Oliver, teaching a take-down technique for a
resisting citizen revolves around questioning himself about when to intervene in case
a learner does not perform the technique like it was shown by him. Further reflecting
on a higher level on the same example will incorporate questioning the assumption of
why our trainer adheres to an ideal technique. Oliver becomes aware that he was
taught in a traditional linear him/herself leading to the assumption of an ideal
technique (Moy et al., 2015). Our trainer now becomes aware of other governing
assumptions like non-linear pedagogy and is able to connect the underlying
assumption with his current practice, resulting in double-loop learning. In the current
training session, our police trainer now allows for more degrees-of-freedom in the
execution of the takedown as long as the citizen is taken down, because he wants the
learner to find his individual solution to taking down a person. By further
acknowledging, challenging and unpacking assumptions with increased awareness
of the relativeness and role of theoretical concepts a higher level of reflection and
learning takes place; this has been described as a triple loop learning process (Tosey,
Visser and Saunders, 2012). The guiding question here is “How do I decide what is
right?”, involving questioning of what Brookfield terms “paradigmatic assumptions”
(Brookfield, 2017): The structuring assumptions we employ to order the world into
fundamental categories and that are hard to recognize. In our example, our police
trainer Oliver– triple-reflecting on the situation – asks himself about when and why to
apply a non-linear or linear approach to learning. He becomes aware that his drive
towards a specific pedagogical approach is partially fuelled by what other coaches in
his milieu favour at the moment. Oliver know starts asking why, when and for who he
should apply a specific pedagogical approach. Reflecting on his current problem, he
thinks about the pros and cons of linear and non-linear approaches to training in the
context of the specific situation he encounters with his learner and reaches the
tentative conclusion, that he will currently employ a more linear approach to training
with more augmented feedback on the take-down execution, because he feels, that
his learner has difficulties in coordinating his movements, lacks creativity and is easily
frustrated, when he is not immediately succeeding in taking down his partner.
However, since from observation studies alone it cannot be inferred that police
trainers do not engage in planning and reflection of their teaching and delivery of
152
programs. Even though they do not have the time to discuss issues with each other
(Cushion, 2020) it can be assumed, that police trainers still engage in some form of
planning and reflecting process. However, the content and the thought processes
associated with these procedures, is unknown.
7.5.2 Aims and Scope of the Study
Taken together the current state of research within the actual planning, delivery and
reflection of police training indicates potential for optimisation. However, empirical
data how police training is actually delivered to reach its intended outcome is limited
with regards to the perspective of the acting individuals (learners, police trainers) and
the specific training setting within the realm of police training (e.g. officer safety
training). Also, the national socio-economic contexts of any conducted research within
the domain of policing have to be taken into account when generalising available
results and providing recommendations. Within that light and given that no empirical
evidence about the actual practice of police training in Germany exists so far, the
current study aims to provide empirical evidence about the actual structure and
delivery of police training in Germany, how it is planned to deliver its outcomes and
how it is reflected upon.
7.6 Methods
A case study methodology was implemented employing participant observation to
systematically garner enough information about police training to effectively
understand how it was delivered (Thomas, 2011; Cushion, 2020) Participant
observation is a frequently applied field strategy in learning settings (Patton, 1990)
and is deemed appropriate for case study designs where the phenomenon under
investigation is observable in the natural environment, the suitable information can be
collected via this means and the boundaries of investigation are open-ended
(Jorgensen, 2015). Furthermore, police trainers were interviewed in a semi-structured
way before and after the training session in order to investigate the planning and
reflection processes. Ethical approval for the study was obtained by the Ethics
Committee of the German Sports University of Cologne
7.6.1 Data Collection
Data collection was conducted at a police academy in Hesse, Germany. A study
section with 5 full days of police training provided the analytical frame of the study
with the object being the process of training (Thomas, 2011). The study section was
part of the second year of the recruits’ training and contained 30 hours of police
153
training and instruction with one weekly training day dispersed over 5 consecutive
weeks. The study section was embedded between two sections of practical training
in the field at a police department. A curriculum of the to be learned skills and
competencies provided the framework for the police training. In general, the goal of
the police education at the University of Applied Sciences of Police and Public
Administration is to develop the competencies needed for fulfilling the tasks of policing
(Hessisches Ministerium des Innen und für Sport, 2016). Concerning police use of
force training the curriculum (Hessische Hochschule für Polizei und Verwaltung,
2016) stated the learning outcomes of developing recruits’ individual self-defence
concept and being able to apply the learned technical and tactical skills in scenario-
based exercises. During the 5 training days, aspects of self-defence, restraint and
control, shooting and tactical training were covered. The class was split in two;
resulting in the analysis of 2 x 5 days of training (see Figure 8)
Four researchers (MS, SK, VH, IK) monitored the training as observer participants.
Three researchers (MS; SK; IK) had more than 10 years of experience in teaching
self-defence and combat related training programmes. All researchers took extensive
field notes in addition to a “time-on-task” analysis. Participants of police training were
informed about the observation in advance. In total, one class with 24 recruits
attended the five days of police training. Several individuals were absent over the
course of the study, so that attendance rates differed in each training session.
Depending on the training session, the class was split into two groups. In these cases
two researchers observed one group each. The number of coaches also differed
depending on the training days and the delivered content. The ratio of coaches-to-
recruits varied over the five days from 2:7 (day 5; firearms training) to 1:24 (day 1;
self-defence, arrest and control training).
The timing, content and duration of each training element was noted in order to
produce a micro-structure of police training. Researchers paid specific attention to
what participants were doing (e.g. training activities, listening) with who (pairs, groups,
alone), what coaches were doing (e.g. demonstrating, giving instruction) and how
participants interacted with each other. This enabled the recording of the type and the
duration of each element along with the pedagogy employed by the coaches.
The microstructure of each session was noted at 15 seconds intervals. Additionally,
for every interval it was noted, what the learners were doing and how the specific
training activity was set up. This included information about group size (e.g. one
learner and three simulators) and a precise description of the exercise.
154
Before and after the training sessions, the police trainers were interviewed using a
semi-structured approach. Prior to the sessions, the interview was structured using
the CPPRF. Specifically, questions pertained to (a) the place of the sessions within
the bigger picture of police training; (b) the planned structure of the learning activities;
(c) the planned teaching behaviours; and (d) planned strategies to engage recruits in
learning activities. After the sessions, police trainers were asked to comment on the
training session. The interviews lasted between 2 and 4 minutes. Police trainers were
encouraged to talk about their session planning and reflection using prompts and
probes. There was no time limit posed by the interviewing researchers. The complete
data set comprised of pre- and post-interviews of 17 training sessions (5 self-defence
training; 4 firearms training; 8 tactical training). The interviews were recorded
transcribed verbatim by a paid and trained research assistant and resulted in 37
pages of single-spaced type written data.
155
Figure 8: Structure of observed training days with additional information regarding
content, training facility and number of coaches, participants and observing
researchers, respectively.
Group 1
Welcome session: Outline of objectives, Questions about last period of practical field training!
Class room!
n = 3 Coaches / n = 24 Participants / n = 4 Researchers
Self-defense, arrest and control training!
Dojo!
n = 1 Coach / n = 12 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 2 Coaches / n = 12 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 2 Coaches / n = 12 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Self-defense, arrest and control training!
Dojo!
n = 1 Coach / n = 12 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Self-defense, arrest and control training!
Dojo!
n = 1 Coach / n = 24 Participants / n = 3 Researchers
Firearms training!
Indoor shooting range!
n = 1 Coach / n = 12 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 1 Coach / n = 12 Participants / n = 1 Researcher
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 1 Coach / n = 12 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Firearms training!
Indoor shooting range!
n = 1 Coach / n = 12 Participants / n = 1 Researcher
Self-defense, arrest and control training!
Dojo!
n = 1 Coach / n = 17 Participants / n = 3 Researchers
Self-defense, arrest and control training!
Dojo!
n = 1 Coach / n = 17 Participants / n = 3 Researchers
Firearms training!
Indoor shooting range!
n = 1 Coach / n = 9 Participants / n = 1 Researcher
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 1 Coach / n = 9 Participants / n = 1 Researcher
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 1 Coach / n = 8 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Firearms training!
Indoor shooting range!
n = 1 Coach / n = 8 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Self-defense, arrest and control training!
Dojo!
n = 1 Coach / n = 15 Participants / n = 4 Researchers
Tactical training with FX Simunition!
Outdoor police training facility!
n = 2 Coaches / n = 7 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Tactical training with FX Simunition!
Outdoor police training facility!
n = 2 Coaches / n = 8 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 1 Coach / n = 7 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 1 Coach / n = 8 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 1 Coach / n = 8 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Firearms training!
Indoor shooting range!
n = 1 Coach / n = 8 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Firearms training!
Indoor shooting range!
n = 1 Coach / n = 9 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Tactical training!
Police training facility!
n = 1 Coach / n = 9 Participants / n = 2 Researchers
Group 2
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
Day 5
156
7.6.2 Data Analysis
Observational data were analysed as follows: Field notes and time-on-task analysis
were compared between the observing researchers within teams. Differences in the
raw data were resolved by discussing the issues in question until agreement about
the observation was achieved. The analytic process consisted of two distinct phases
and followed the protocol employed by Cushion (2020). First, the collected raw data
(field notes, time-on-task analysis) was broken down into “meaning units” that
conveyed one idea or a related set of observations. All field notes were examined
line-by-line as well as data concerning the time frame of each activity within training
sessions. Second, meaning units identified were grouped together to organise
common meaning units into lower-order themes. A further level of interpretation
compared lower-order themes to organise them into larger more inclusive higher-
order themes.
Concerning the time-on-task analysis, the inductive approach resulted in two themes
relating to the training activities that were carried out. First, practice activities that
focused on reproducing the behaviour demonstrated and instructed by the coach.
These activities were concerned with “how” to perform a specific technical or tactical
skill and involved no decision concerning “what” skill to use. Second, “problem
solving” activities included practice that aimed at solving a given task under certain
constraints involving “what” – and “how”-decisions. In order to account for training
activities with different level of participation and different roles (observer, simulator,
player), a player-index was used to calculate net training time from total training time
within a specific activity. The player-index was based on the group size and number
of individuals that performed as player and of those who performed as simulators or
observers. For example, when a training activity consisted of 4 recruits, with 1 player
and 3 simulators, a player index of 1:4 was noted. Net training time was then
calculated by multiplying total training time for this activity with the player index. If the
recorded training time for this activity was 4 minutes, a net training time of 1 minute
was calculated (4 min x 1/4 = 1 min).
Interview data, curriculum and session plans were subjected to qualitative content
analysis following recommendations of Schreier (2014). As a first phase of analysis
and a check for accuracy, members of the research team (MS, VH) listened to the
audible interviews as they read over the transcripts, occasionally making corrections
and filling in missing words. The data were analysed using qualitative content analysis
(Kuckartz, 2016; Graneheim, Lindgren and Lundman, 2017). In order to ensure
157
scientific rigor, themes were systematically developed in a deductive and inductive
manner employing the structuring content analysis technique (Schreier, 2014;
Mayring, 2015). The deductive analysis was based on the research question (CPPRF,
single-loop, double-loop and triple-loop reflection on the training session). The
analysis was open to inductively emerging (sub-)themes (Schreier, 2014). This
approach was justified by the specificity of the different material as well as the
possibility of irritation of the theory by empiricism. The second phase of analysis
involved the identification raw data themes and lower order themes based on the data.
Raw data themes were derived from the data based on reviewing the material in small
steps with regard to new aspects of the topic of interest (Schreier, 2012). For each
new aspect, a new raw data theme was created, while aspects already covered by
another raw data theme in the category system was subsumed under the already
existing theme. In a next step, raw data themes were build-up into meaningful lower
order themes. This emergent category system was then re-examined and discussed
with another member of the research team (SK) leading to modifications of the coding
system. The third phase of analysis involved a final round of focused coding using
MAXQDA data analysis software (Version 18.2.0) based on the modified coding
system. Having used both inductive and deductive analyses to interpret the data into
raw, lower and higher order themes, the final phase of analysis involved gaining
triangular consensus between the lead (MS) and second researcher (SK) along with
two additional researchers (AA and JP) who acted as a “critical friend” (Faulkner and
Biddle, 2002; Kelly et al., 2018). The additional researchers were not involved with
the data collection or analysis and were required to confirm, or otherwise, the
placement of raw data themes into lower and higher order themes.
7.6.3 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis
Using guidelines relating to qualitative methods (Tracy, 2010; Tracy and Hinrichs,
2017), checks were made to ensure eight criteria of high-quality qualitative research
(worthy topic, rich rigour, sincerity, credibility, resonance, significant contribution,
ethics and meaningful coherence) were met. Eliciting the planning, delivering and
reflecting processes of police trainers was perceived to be a worthy topic. With
regards to rich rigour, data collection and analysis procedures were carried out
systematically following established guidelines. The process of analysis is described
in detail in order to be transparent concerning the process of sorting, choosing and
organising the data. Sincerity was observed via two “critical friends” who confirmed
accuracy in the tracking of the data and ensured coherence between the data and the
presented themes. This helped maximise the trustworthiness of the analysis process.
158
To ensure credibility, we ensured that emergent themes were logically traced back to
participant quotations and observations. Furthermore, we highlighted direct
quotations and described situations extensively to support findings, which we argue
demonstrated resonance in that it allowed for visual representations of participants
thoughts and the observed situations. In terms of contributing to the literature, we
argue the study has theoretical (e.g., conceptual understanding) and practical (e.g.,
professional training programmes and applied practice) implications that further
develop the professional practice of coaching in police training. Institutional ethical
clearance was obtained. Situational (e.g., regular discussions with the on-site
research team, reflecting on data worth exposing), relational (e.g., reflection on
researcher actions and potential consequences of data analysis) and exiting (e.g.,
avoiding unjust or unintended consequences of findings presented) obligations were
also adhered to. Finally, in terms of meaningful coherence, the study used methods
consistent with and comparable to earlier studies of coaching in performance
contexts.
7.7 Results
7.7.1 Delivery of Police Training
Concerning the structure and delivery of police training, the higher and lower order
themes of the obtained results are displayed in Table 8.
Table 8: Table of Themes
Higher order theme
Lower-order theme
Structure of police training
Macrostructure of police training
Microstructure of the training sessions
Content and delivery
Prominent focus on the use of force
Disconnected modules of training
Lack of representativeness
Simulators
Non-representative task design
Differences between technical performance and performance
under representative circumstances
7.7.1.1 Structure of police training
On a macrolevel, training was divided into the three different training settings of self-
defence and arrest training, firearms training and tactical training. The total time-on-
159
task analysis showed that recruits spent the most time participating in tactical training
and the least training time on firearms training (see Table 9)
On a microlevel, cumulatively recruits engaged in almost 9 ½ hours (M = 09:29:00) of
practice activities directly related to developing their technical and problem-solving
skills. Of this time, short of 4 hours (M = 03:52:28) was spent as a player (net training
time) reproducing techniques and tactics that were demonstrated by the coaches (M
= 02:28:24) or problem solving (M = 01:24:04). The percentage of time-on-task as a
player (net training time) in each training setting was largest for self-defence and
arrest training (M = 23.13 %) and at similar levels for firearms (M = 15.04 %) and
tactical (M = 13.89 %) training.
Net training time, spent in training activities including problem solving accounted for
on average of 6.37% in self-defence and arrest training, 0.00 % in firearms training
and 7.77 % in tactical training. Coach centred-activities accounted for nearly 9 hours
(M = 08:51:00) of training time with Instruction (M = 13.62 %) and Feedback (M =
11.54 %) being the main activities (see Table 10).
Concerning the time spent in different training sessions, results revealed that most
training time was spent in tactical training (M = 11:31:20). However, the net training
time of each participant was less (M = 01:35:47) than in self-defence, arrest and
control training (M = 01:50:56)
160
Table 9: Descriptive statistics for time-on-task for the three different training sessions
Total
Practice Focus
Preparation activities
Coach-centred
activities
Others
Technique
Problem-solving
Cumulative
total
net
total
net
total
net
Self-defence
and arrest
training
Group 1
07:57:55
(100%)
02:37:15
(32.90%)
1:22:59
(17.36%)
00:55:20
(11.58%)
00:29:10
(6.10%)
03:32:35
(44.48%)
01:52:09
(23.47%)
01:19:55
(16.72%)
02:09:00
(26.99%)
00:56:25
(11.80%)
Group 2
08:01:25
(100%)
02:28:15
(30.79%)
01:17:44
(16.15%)
00:56:50
(11.81%)
00:32:00
(6.65%)
03:25:05
(42.60%)
01:49:44
(22.79%)
01:30:25
(18.78%)
02:01:15
(25.19%)
01:04:40
(13.43%)
Mean
07:59:40
(100%)
02:32:45
(31.85%)
01:20:21
(16.75%)
00:56:05
(11.69%)
00:30:35
(6.37%)
03:28:15
(43.54%)
01:50:56
(23.13%)
01:25:10
(17.75%)
02:05:07
(26.09%)
01:00:33
(12.62%)
Firearms
training
Group 1
02:48:15
(100%)
01:19:10
(47.05%)
00:25:45
(15.30%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
01:19:10
(47.05%)
00:25:45
(15.30%)
00:05:00
(2.97%)
01:05:25
(38.88%)
00:18:40
(11.09%)
Group 2
02:56:30
(100%)
01:32:30
(52.41%)
00:26:06
(14.79%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
01:32:30
(52.41%)
00:26:06
(14.79%)
00:12:00
(6.80%)
00:58:45
(33.29%)
00:13:15
(7.51%)
Mean
02:52:23
(100%)
01:25:50
(49.73%)
00:25:55
(15.04%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
01:25:50
(49.73%)
00:25:55
(15.04%)
00:08:30
(4.89%)
01:02:05
(36.08%)
00:15:57
(9.30%)
Tactical training
Group 1
11:49:10
(100%)
00:57:25
(8.10%)
00:42:05
(5.93%)
02:53:00
(24.39%)
00:46:15
(6.52%)
03:50:25
(32.49%)
01:28:20
(12.46%)
00:49:00
(6.93%)
05:36:35
(47.46%)
01:33:00
(13.11%)
Group 2
11:13:30
(100%)
01:13:15
(10.88%)
00:42:30
(6.31%)
04:05:00
(36.38%)
01:00:44
(9.02%)
05:18:15
(47.25%)
01:43:14
(15.33%)
00:44:00
(6.53%)
04:47:00
(42.61%)
00:24:15
(3.60%)
Mean
11:31:20
(100%)
01:05:20
(9.49%)
00:42:17
(6.12%)
03:29:00
(30.39%)
00:53:29
(7.77%)
04:34:20
(39.87%)
01:35:47
(13.89%)
00:46:35
(6.73%)
05:11:47
(45.04%)
00:58:38
(8.36%)
Intro-Session
Group 1/2
00:51:30
(100%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:15:00
(29.13%)
00:32:00
(62.14%)
00:04:30
(8.74%)
All
Group 1
23:26:50
(100%)
04:53:50
(20.89%)
02:30:48
(10.72%)
03:48:20
(16.23%)
01:15:25
(5.36%)
08:42:10
(37.12%)
03:46:13
(16.08%)
02:29:05
(10.60%)
09:23:00
(40.02%)
02:52:35
(12.27%)
Group 2
23:02:55
(100%)
05:14:00
(22.71%)
02:26:20
(10.58%)
05:01:50
(21.83%)
01:32:44
(6.71%)
10:15:50
(44.53%)
03:59:04
(17.29%)
02:41:25
(11.67%)
08:19:00
(36.08%)
01:46:40
(7.71%)
Mean
23:14:52*
(100%)
05:03:55
(21.80%)
02:28:24
(10.65%)
04:25:05
(19.03%)
01:24:04
(6.03%)
09:29:00
(40.82%)
03:52:28
(16.68%)
02:35:15
(11.13%)
08:51:00
(38.05%)
02:19:37
(9.99%)
Note: “Net” training time refers to the time participants spent as only players. “Total” training time includes the time spent as player and
simulator in each training activity.
* Total training time did not add up to 30 hours of training due to lunch and coffee breaks.
161
Table 10: Descriptive statistics for time-on-task for the three different training sessions on supplementary activities
Preparation activities
Coach-centred activities
Others
Safety
Warm-Up
Fitness
Cool Down
Briefing
Demo
Instruction
Feedback
Discussion
Video
analysis
Lesson
feedback
Transition
Management
Break
Self-defence
and arrest
training
Group 1
(100%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:32:30
(6.80%)
00:28:30
(5.69%)
00:01:00
(0.21%)
00:17:55
(3.75%)
00:05:30
(1.15%)
01:49:15
(22.86%)
00:00:45
(0.16%)
00:13:30
(2.82%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:32:00
(6.70%)
00:03:45
(0.78%)
00:20:40
(4.32%)
Group 2
(100%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:49:30
(7.48%)
00:28:30
(5.92%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:25:55
(5.38%)
00:07:30
(1.56%)
01:40:00
(20.77%)
00:00:15
(0.05%)
00:13:30
(2.80%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:35:15
(7.32%)
00:05:15
(1.09%)
00:24:10
(5.02%)
Mean
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:34:15
(7.14%)
00:28:30
(5.94%)
00:00:30
(0.10%)
00:21:55
(4.57%)
00:06:30
(1.35%)
01:44:37
(21.82%)
00:00:30
(0.10%)
00:13:30
(2.81%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:33:37
(7.01%)
00:04:30
(0.94%)
00:22:25
(4.67%)
Firearms
training
Group 1
(100%)
00:01:55
(1.14%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:03:05
(1.83%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:49:00
(29.12%)
00:10:40
(6.34%)
00:05:45
(3.42%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:15:20
(9.11%)
00:03:20
(1.98%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
Group 2
(100%)
00.03.30
(1.98%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:08:30
(4.82%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:10.45
(6.09%)
00:31:30
(17.85%)
00:16:30
(9.35%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:11:45
(6.66%)
00:01:30
(0.85%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
Mean
00:02:42
(1.56%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:05:47
(3.32%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:29:53
(17.61%)
00:21:05
(12.09%)
00:11:08
(6.38%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:13:32
(7.89%)
00:02:25
(1.42%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
Tactical
training
Group 1
(100%)
00:05:45
(0.81%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:43:25
(6.12%)
00:28:25
(4.01%)
00:48:05
(6.78%)
02:31:05
(21.30%)
00:19:00
(2.68%)
01:08:45
(9.69%)
00:21:15
(3.00%)
01:15:40
(10.67%)
00:15:20
(2.16%)
00:02:00
(0.28%)
Group 2
(100%)
00.01.30
(0.22%)
00:13:30
(2.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00.00:00
(0.00%)
00:29:00
(4.31%)
01:11:30
(10.62%)
01:03:15
(9.39%)
02:07:45
(18.97%)
00:20:00
(2.97%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:04:30
(0.67%)
00:20:15
(3.01%)
00:01:30
(0.22%)
00:02:30
(0.37%)
Mean
00:03:38
(0.52%)
00:06:45
(1.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:36:13
(5.21%)
00:49:58
(7.31%)
00:55:40
(8.09%)
02:19:25
(20.14%)
00:19:30
(2.82%)
00:34:23
(4.85%)
00:12:53
(1.83%)
00:47:58
(6.84%)
00:08:25
(1.19%)
00:02:15
(0.33%)
Intro-Session
Group 1/2
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:15:00
(29.13%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:32:00
(62.14%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00.04:30
(8.74%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
All
Group 1
(100%)
00:07:40
(0.54%)
00:32:30
(2.31%)
00:28:30
(2.03%)
00:01:00
(0.07%)
01:19:25
(5.65%)
00:33:55
(2.41%)
03:26:20
(14.67%)
02:42:30
(11.55%)
01:10:15
(4.99%)
01:08:45
(4.89%)
00:21:15
(1.51%)
02:03:00
(8.74%)
00:26:55
(1.91%)
00:22:40
(1.61%)
Group 2
(100%)
00.05:00
(0.36%)
00:49:30
(3.58%)
00:28:30
(2.06%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
01:18:25
(5.67%)
01:19:00
(5.71%)
02:54:00
(12.58%)
02:39:30
(11.53%)
01:22:00
(5.93%)
00:00:00
(0.00%)
00:04:30
(0.33%)
01:07:15
(4.86%)
00:12:45
(0.92%)
00:26:40
(1.93%)
Mean
00:06:20
(0.45%)
00:41:00
(2.94%)
00:28:30
(2.04%)
00:00:30
(0.04%)
01:18:55
(5.66%)
00:56:28
(4.06%)
03:10:10
(13.62%)
02:41:00
(11.54%)
01:16:07
(5.46%)
00:34:23
(2.44%)
00:12:53
(0.92%)
01:35:07
(6.80%)
00:19:50
(1.42%)
00:24:40
(1.77%)
162
7.7.1.2 Content and Delivery
The analysis of the curriculum and the session plans and the observation of training
yielded two main findings. First, there was a prominent focus on the management of
conflict by the means of force. Only one brief simulation in the five training days aimed
at resolving a conflict by communicative means. Second, there was a lack of
connection between the different modules of police training, namely self-defence and
arrest training, firearms training and tactical training. At a macrolevel, the modules
appeared disjointed, in the sense that one element did not inform or was not
deliberately integrated within another. At a microlevel, there appeared a disconnect
in the topics (skills) covered within a single training session. An example was
observed in self-defence and arrest training:
The training goes from defending against grabs to the wrist, to applying arm
bars, joint locks and handcuffing. In the end the recruits had to do a relay race
with a partner, where they had to handcuff a person who was already stood
against the wall. (Field notes, day 5, self-defence and arrest training)
7.7.1.3 Lack of Representative Task Design
A prominent feature of the police training observed was the lack of
representativeness. A common observation was the level of representativeness
offered by the simulators in training tasks, which often lacked the presentation of valid
information for the learner to act upon. Especially in activities involving the delivery of
blows and strikes, simulators seemed afraid of what the player (key learner) was
about to do. As a result, attacks on the learner were slow and nonaggressive:
Recruits have to stop a charging attacker and to perform a takedown and to
arrest the person. The simulators do not attack properly and players perform
the technique at the wrong distance. Another technique would be more
appropriate at this “wrong distance”. It looks like a choreography. The simulator
did not resist and helped the learner by going down even if the technique was
performed at the wrong distance. (Field notes, day 2, self-defence and arrest
training)
As illustrated, such activities mostly resulted in a non-representative interactions,
which lacked valid feedback for the learner. The coaches did not explicit instruct the
simulator how to act or intervene during the activity to adapt or optimise the simulator
163
behaviour. There were a lot of training tasks that lacked representativeness by design
of the training task. This is evidenced by the following example.
Teams of five competed against each other in a relay race. Four recruits laid on
the floor, their hand behind their backs. One recruit had to handcuff everyone -
and releasing the handcuffs before handcuffing the next partner. The partners
on the ground helped the recruit who was working, because every team wanted
to be the fastest team. Each round lasted for approx. 2 minutes. So every
recruits laid down 4 times for 2 minutes and worked once for 2 minutes. They
all laughed and had a lot of fun during this exercise. (Field notes, day 5, self-
defence and arrest training).
In this example, the task itself was designed in a non-representative way, with five
recruits lying next to each other waiting for being handcuffed. Learners rushed from
one person to another order to be the fastest team. As such, recruits were not able to
perform the behaviour as it would be needed in the field. This lack of action fidelity
could also be observed in firearms training. For example, recruits were tasked with
math problems before shooting.
Participants were in ready position and had to shoot the target the coach was
calling out. Targets were geometrical objects with numbers in it. The coach said:
“yellow 1” or “blue 3”. Recruits shoot two rounds at the specified target. In the
next exercise the coach set a calculation task: “Square root of 9” – Recruits had
to shoot a the “3”. All shooting tasks did not involve a representative stimulus.
(Field notes, day 3, firearms training)
In the field, like in this practice activity, police officers have to react to specific
information sources, however, the information is context specific, unlike this activity.
In tactical training, paper targets were used to represent suspects in a “enter and
search” practice activity.
In tactical training recruits were presented with a scenario (possible burglary in
progress), which they (teams of two) had to respond to. The two recruits had to
enter safely the premises and search for the suspect. The coaches hid paper
targets (picturing a man holding a gun) in the apartment. Recruits had to talk to
the paper targets (e.g. “Drop your gun!”). After the scenario the two recruits
talked among themselves. [Recruit A] said: “That was good. We have to do this
more often”. [Recruit B] answered: “I find it difficult to practice with those paper
targets. They don’t react”. (Field notes, day 5, tactical training)
164
Furthermore, due to official restrictions on tactical training involving simulators with
guns, recruits knew in advance that coaches would not shoot at them, (a) making the
scenario predictable and (b) reducing the anxiety levels within learners
(Nieuwenhuys, Cañal-Bruland and Oudejans, 2012). As such, the task was less
representative.
One team was performing a scenario (entering a building after a potential
burglary); the others observed. One recruit said “Nobody is shooting at you” (the
coaches are not allowed to shoot at the recruits in that kind of training); The
other recruit replied: “Then it’s not that bad”. (Field notes, day 4, tactical training)
Performance of recruits also varied between isolated technical training activities
compared to those that allowed for the integration of information and action. Whereas
recruits seemed to perform quite well during technical training – that is, they applied
the technique according to the instruction and feedback of the coach - they were not
able to apply the trained technique to a more representative setting later in training.
Instead, the recruits found different individual solutions to the problem set:
Recruits were taught a controlling technique on the ground. After 15 minutes of
technical training with corrections from the coach, recruits should team up and
fight against each other with one being the suspect and the other being the
officer trying to control and arrest the partner. Recruits were not able to apply
the taught technique. Every recruit tried different solutions to control the
opponent. Some succeeded, some not. But nobody maintained the shown
position longer than a few seconds. (Field notes, day 3, self-defence and arrest
training)
7.7.2 Planning and Reflecting Training Sessions
Concerning the planning and reflecting on training sessions, the higher order themes
included planning and considerations before the training session and reflection levels
about the training session (see Table 3). Concerning the planning of the training
session, results revealed fiver lower order themes categorized according to the
CPPRF: (a) the learning objectives of the training session, (b) the embedding in the
overall structure of police training, (c) the structure of the specific training session, (d)
the planned coach behaviour to support the learner in reaching their aims of the
session and (e) the facilitation of learner engagement. Reflections of the training
session included single-loop reflections and one incident of double-loop reflection.
165
Table 11: Results of qualitative analysis of interviews displaying hierarchical themes (Numbers in brackets display the number of meaning units
that contributed to the data).
Raw data theme
Lower order theme
Higher order theme
Topic of the training session (e.g. Simulation training) (6)
Learning objectives
Planning and considerations before the training session
Repetition of previous content (7)
New technique / tactic (5)
Determine performance status (3)
Sensitisation (2)
Relates to the previous training session (3)
Embedding in the overall structure
Important later on in the studies (3)
According to the curriculum (2)
Important as police officer (1)
Distinct training segments (6)
Design of learning activities
Demand creation (5)
Increasing complexity (2)
Starting with repetition of previous content (2)
Flexibility (2)
Showing mistakes (4)
Planned coach behaviour to support reaching aims of
the training session
Being supportive (4)
Fun (4)
Personal responsibility (3)
Let them try themselves (3)
Holding back expert knowledge in the beginning (2)
Being motivating (2)
Being positive (2)
Show understanding (1)
Pointing out relevance as police officer (6)
Facilitation of learner engagement
Make it fun (6)
Create demand (4)
Teach new things (2)
Training activity per se (2)
Participation as coach (2)
Adaptation of one's own teaching (5)
Reflection-in-action
Single-loop reflection about the training session
Implemented what I wanted (10)
Positive evaluation of own teaching
166
Raw data theme
Lower order theme
Higher order theme
Happy with the result (7)
Everybody had fun (4)
Was a round thing (4)
Participants improved in the course of the training session (3)
Was able to add additional content (2)
Debriefing took too long (1)
Negative evaluation of own teaching
Was not able to reach the aim of the training session (2)
Not possible to engage all participants (1)
Relativization of teaching practice
Warm up too long – but yet necessary (1)
Participants had forgotten a lot (5)
Deficits of participants
Participants had difficulties (4)
Participants finished quickly their repetitions (1)
Participants did not engage in independent practice (2)
Satisfied with the performance of the participants (3)
Satisfied with the performance of the participants
Not enough coaches for too many participants (3)
Organisational problems
Too little time (2)
Too much load from studies in the morning (2)
Uncertain about giving group or individual feedback (1)
Uncertainty about own behaviour
Double-loop reflection about the training session
!
167
7.7.3 Planning and considerations before the training session
With regards to the learning objectives of the training session coaches most often
referred to the topic of the session (e.g. weapon handling, arrest techniques):
“The goal is the shooting with two weapon systems, long weapon, short
weapon, and to practice switching between the weapon.” (Day 3, firearms
training)
What learners should achieve by the end of a training session was not mentioned.
Reference was also made to the repetition of previous content, and the introduction
of new techniques or tactics.
“Today is a complete repetition, refreshment of the basic training and of course
then one or two additional techniques or extensions of the basic knowledge.”
(Day 1, tactical training)
Coaches provided scarce information about how the specific training session is
embedded in the overall structure of police training. They mainly referred to the
content relating to previous training sessions and the content of the upcoming session
being an essential element of police training, which will be built upon in future training
sessions:
“Then we'll pick up where we left off last week.” (Day 3, tactical training)
However, coaches gave no further detail on how specifically the content fits into the
overall structure of the curriculum.
Concerning the design of learning activities, coaches often described distinct training
segments that appeared to be isolated from each other. For example, the self-defence
and arrest coach outlining the structure of a training session on day 4:
“A short general warm up; then I will explain the circuit training. Then we do
techniques. Then repeating the arrest concept. We finish with boxing.” (Day 4,
self-defence and arrest training)
Coaches provided no rationale for this structure. Another common point of reference
was the “creation of demand”. Under this term coaches understood a training task,
where learners failed due to a technique or tactic, that they were not introduced to
yet. Demand creation was especially prevalent in tactical training:
!
168
“Demand generation scenario, as I said. Then new things like opening doors
and team behaviour in a 360 environment.” (Day 3, tactical training)
The creation of demand was also identified within the context of the planned
behaviour of the coach and applied by use of the strategy of showcasing the learners
mistakes. Police trainers described this as a strategy with the intent to support the
learners:
“Yes, to show mistakes, and to improve them. That they can then better apply
the techniques.” (Day 5, self-defence and arrest training)
Coaches planned at being supportive in correcting the mistakes. They articulated an
intent to help the recruits in improving their mistakes and to perform better:
“[I want] to always stand aside to answer the questions, to do justice to
everyone, to clear up all mistakes, to uncover all mistakes” (Day 3, tactical
training)
The importance of projecting “fun” was mentioned several times as a planning
principle. A coach referred to having fun himself, in order to make the training session
fun for the students.
“Having fun. That I have fun in class myself and I think that's very important.
When I have fun in class, so that my colleagues also notice that. So together
we then can achieve goal of the training session in connection with fun.” (Day
2, tactic training)
The element of fun was also stated quite often with regards to facilitating the
engagement of the learners.
“Going in and out of class with fun”. (Day 5, self-defence and arrest training)
Besides having fun, coaches also planned in pointing out the relevance of the content
of the training session for the recruits as police officers. Specifically, police trainers
mentioned the relevance with regards to training content for worst case scenarios,
where officers do not have a second chance, when they fail (e.g. a lethal knife attack).
“They [the recruits] should be aware that the need to be motivated. Because in
a worst-case scenario we don't have a second chance. Here you must succeed
!
169
the first time, otherwise they get injured or even die. And I think that should be
the greatest motivation.” (Day 1, tactical training)
Besides skills for worst-case scenario, skills that are needed on a daily basis were
also pointed out as relevant for the recruits:
“The need to know the importance of the arrest technique. That they need the
technique in their daily life. Because of that, they should practice accordingly
and be serious during the training session.” (Day 3, self-defence and arrest
training)
Coaches stated a belief that the relevance the content itself provides the motivation
to engage the learner with the subject material.
“The training content must be enough motivation.” (Day 5, tactic training)
Taken together, concerning the planning before training sessions the results showed,
that police trainers reported a specific topic as the learning objective without
referencing what learner should achieve during the session. The topic was embedded
in the long-term development insofar, that the current content follows the previous
content and that is necessary for the content in the next training session. The learning
activities were designed and structured as isolated elements. Police trainers reported
they designed training task, where recruits fail in order to create demand and to show
them their mistakes. Being supportive and having fun themselves were reported as
dominant planned coaching behaviours. Finally, learner engagement was reported to
be facilitated by the relevance of the content and the element of fun.
7.7.4 Single-loop reflection about the training session
The interviews immediately following the training sessions resulted in a number of
different types of reflections, which, for the most part, were single-loop in nature. The
interviews showed that coaches reflected upon their reflection in-action while
conducted their training session. Police trainers mentioned that they adapted their
teaching when they encountered problems in the delivery of the session. Coaches
spoke of adapting the task difficulty when they saw that recruits were not experiencing
success of hitting the assigned target area. A firearms trainer provided a rationale for
this decision.
!
170
“[…] in the further process I designed the exercises a bit simpler, more
balanced, in order to give a positive feeling” (Day 4, firearms training)
Concerning adaptation in other fields of police training, one coach of tactical training
recalled that he scanned the recruits for their motivation and how they were engaging
in order to adapt his program accordingly.
“[…] I watched the recruits, I looked how motivated they are, to what extent they
participate.” (Day 1, tactical training)
The tactical trainer further reported that he perceived that the recruits were tired from
the lessons in the morning and adapted the pace of the training session accordingly
by teaching “step-by-step”.
Reflecting on their teaching performance, police trainers evaluated their teaching very
positively in terms of being able to implement the specific planned content:
“And yes, so it worked out well, training goal achieved. So all components that
we had planned, they were implemented accordingly”. (Day 1, tactical training)
It was often mentioned that they were pleased with the result of the session and that
the delivery itself was fun. One police trainer regularly mentioned that the session
itself was a “round thing”, meaning that everything worked out nicely without any
problems.
“Yes, it was a round thing today”. (Day 3, self-defence and arrest training)
The analysis revealed one account in which a police trainer negatively evaluated an
aspect about their teaching. It was an admission from the coach that they did not
achieve the aim of the training session. They attributed this to an organisational
problem.
“Then the main part, the [entering of] unclear areas I had been able to
implement. But, I have to admit that due to the fact that I am alone and the size
of the group I did not completely meet the aim of the training session.” (Day 3,
tactical training)
Although this was the only negative single-loop reflection of police trainers teaching
performance recorded; there were accounts of relativization of teaching practice.
These accounts gave the impression that coaches were not explicitly satisfied with a
!
171
session; however, a rationale was put forward to relativize the decisions made. In the
following example, the coach appeared to be well aware of the inclusion of a very long
warm-up that included a fitness circuit. Even though this part of the session was not
connected to the curriculum content of self-defence and arrest training, the coach
provided a rationale for his decision:
“The warm-up might have been a bit long, but I think it's necessary to keep
people physically fit.” (Day 3, self-defence and arrest training)
Concerning the performance of the learners, coaches pointed out the deficits of the
recruits on a regular basis. It was mentioned that the recruits had forgotten a lot:
“The problem is after one week a lot has already been forgotten.” (Day 3, tactical
training)
The perception that recruits had forgotten or were not able to perform the taught skills
was attributed to periods of field training where recruits did not have access to police
training in an academy setting. However, this was not an argument for the problem
that recruits were perceived having forgotten the content from a training session two
weeks earlier.
Coaches also pointed out deficits in the motivation of the young officers to practice,
even though it was clear that their skills needed improving. A firearms coach
complained that recruits did not use the opportunity to practice with inert weapons at
the back of the shooting range. Instead, they waited passively until it was their turn.
“What I didn't like was that the offered dry training with red weapons was not
used [by the recruits], because you could see that there were still difficulties in
shooting while moving”. (Day 3, firearms training)
Although coaches reported deficits in skill retention and motivation, the coaches did
also comment on the satisfactory performance of recruits’ over the course of a training
session:
“And in the further process [in the training session] shooting while moving and
the weapon change were constantly repeated and in the end I had a good
impression that they can shoot well while moving and when they have to change
their weapon.” (Day 5, firearms training)
!
172
However, reflections on satisfactory performance were reserved for advances made
by recruits within a session. It is noteworthy that coaches did not mention performance
improvements between the training sessions.
Several coaches mentioned organisational problems impacting their delivery of police
training, including too little time for training to be effective, the general load, both
cognitive and physical, recruits had to endure on a training day, and a low coach to
recruit ratio. For example, after a tactical training session a coach commented on the
class size too big for him as a single coach.
“But due to the size of the group, I couldn't get all the way to the aim of the
training session. And when larger study groups come, it will get more difficult.”
(Day 2, tactical training)
The coach, in this example, is referring to an anticipated rise in numbers of recruits in
the near future. He further explained, that due to current increases in the recruitment
of police officers large group sizes will be the standard for coaches to handle.
7.7.5 Double-loop and triple-loop reflection about the training
session
There was one account of uncertainty regarding an adopted coaching behaviour that
can be considered a double-loop reflection. Specifically, a coach mentioned a
discussion with his peers about addressing issues with a recruit individually or in front
of the whole group:
“We have also just sat down ourselves within the coaches and discussed that
we might have been able to optimise a few things. Possibly we should address
things in front of the whole group and not only individually, thus problems, so
that they don't arise in the next group, because we have already seen them
visually or heard them from the others.” (Day 1, tactical training)
This was the only evidence in the interviews that suggested levels of reflection that
went beyond single-loop learning.
!
173
7.8 Discussion
The aim of the current study is to provide empirical evidence about the planning,
delivering and reflecting processes associated with police training. The observation
and the data analysis provided insights into the actual practice of police training in a
German law enforcement agency. Furthermore, the interviews of the police trainers
provided insights into the question of (a) what and how they planned for the delivery
of their training session and (b) how and to what level they reflected upon the training
session.
7.8.1 The Structure and Delivery of Police Training
The macrostructure of police training seems to lack of consistent rationale grounded
in functional skill development and constructively aligned with the goal of developing
competent police officers. Furthermore, police training seems to adhere to a
traditional, linear structure both on a macro- (isolated training elements) and a micro-
level (isolated techniques and tactics). Finally, the current microstructure of police
training provides recruits with a relatively small percentage of training time actually
engaged in practice focused activities, especially involving problem-solving skills.
7.8.1.1 Lack of a Consistent Rationale for the Structure of Police Training
The overall structure of police training is built around providing solutions to conflict
situation problems. For the solving of operational problems with weapons, recruits
engage in firearms training. In order to be able to solve conflict without the use of
weapons, recruits participate in self-defence and arrest training. The integration of
these elements can sometimes be seen in tactical training, when scenarios are
employed as training activities. However, often the focus of such sessions is not
firearms and/or self-defence, but the teaching of tactical behaviour like situational
awareness and the enter and searching of apartments. This structure around
solutions of conflict situations can be found in other states at a national level
(Hochschule des Bundes für öffentliche Verwaltung, 2015; Hochschule der
Sächsischen Polizei, 2016) as well as in other countries at an international level
(Renden, Landman, et al., 2015; Cushion, 2020).
This is problematic, insofar that (a) tasks are isolated from the context in which they
occur and (b) taught content may not be constructively aligned with the needs of the
learners and their working context.
!
174
Concerning the first aspect, decontextualising practice in order to develop
understanding, problem solving rules and intentional activity is useful on a temporary
basis (Price et al., 2019). However, the lack of context may lead to the practice of
disintegrated, “off-the-shelf” solutions (Cushion, 2020) and the lack of functional task
alignment when designing representative learning tasks (Pinder et al., 2011). As such,
it may be advisable to structure the training content around problems, like citizen-
police interaction, terror intervention or domestic violence interventions instead of
physical coercion, de-escalation or the use of firearms. Focusing on problems instead
of distinct solutions (e.g. use of force, arrest techniques, de-escalation) would allow
learners to use their individual capabilities and conflict resolutions strategies (Körner
and Staller, 2018a; Rutter, 2020). This approach is supported by data from scenario
training in police agencies, where the same problems are solved differently by men
and women according to their own capabilities (Jaeckle, Benoliel and Nickel, 2019).
A problem-based approach would also compliment the ecological dynamics
perspective advocating the developing of skills based on the action capabilities of the
performer and the task at hand (Seifert et al., 2019).
Relating to the second aspect, these problems should be based on a need analysis
of the taught officers, which may vary depending on the specific context they will
operate in. A constructive alignment of the learning program would demand, that the
intended learning objectives arising from the participants’ needs relative to their
working context then becomes the basis for designing long-, medium-, and short-term
plans that will enable these objectives to be achieved and that provide a key reference
point from which police trainers and decision-makers can monitor and adjust the
effectiveness of their programs, plans and delivery (Abraham et al., 2015). The
macrostructure of the training elements appeared not to be guided by a mental model
of what recruits should be expected to cope with at this point in their training, reflecting
a lack in constructive alignment of the training programme. Instead the focus seems
to be on a specific set of skills that should be trained on. Such an approach seems to
limit the curriculum designers and coaches’ perspective of police training. Coping with
operational situations - which are often conflictual in nature (Ellrich and Baier, 2016;
Hine et al., 2016) - demands more than the use of use of force, tactical behaviour and
shooting skills (Zaiser and Staller, 2015; Todak and James, 2018; Todak and White,
2019). Communication and de-escalation skills were not part of the police training in
the study section observed. The lack of training activities focusing on communication
and de-escalation skills has been criticized by trainees of Australian police forces
(Rajakaruna et al., 2017). As such, police training would benefit from more clearly
!
175
aligning the structure and its delivery based on the intended outcome of police recruits
being able to cope with conflict.
7.8.1.2 Traditional, Linear Structure and Delivery of Police Training
It appears that underlying the structure of police training (macrostructure) and the
delivery of training (microstructure) is a traditional, linear and reproductive approach
to skill acquisition.
In this case study, police training was structured at a macro-level into three isolated
parts or “modules”: self-defence and arrest training, firearms training and tactical
training. The de-escalation and communications module is not part of police training,
instead the subject of psychology is in charge of teaching the recruits to apply these
skills (Hessische Hochschule für Polizei und Verwaltung, 2016). In the policing
domain this approach is known as the applied learning model (Adang, 2011), which
is common in police educational settings (Hochschule des Bundes für öffentliche
Verwaltung, 2015; Hochschule der Sächsischen Polizei, 2016). Within this approach
skills are first practiced in isolated (technical) modules before they are integrated in a
scenario training consisting of interactive simulations between learners (players) and
role-players (simulators). In the current study, interactive scenario trainings were
carried out during tactical training. However, besides these interactive simulations
during scenario training, representative simulations were scarce. Instead training was
heavily focused on training isolated techniques in a reproductive manner. The
performance difference of recruits in isolated training tasks compared to
representatively designed tasks, showed that recruits were not able to apply the
formerly learned skills in contextualised environments. This is in line with predictions
from the ecological dynamics’ paradigm (Seifert et al., 2019) and could be explained
by the lack of functional coupling and integration of the different elements (information
and action, brain and body, use of force and de-escalation), that are needed in order
to solve conflicts (Rutter, 2020). The approach of isolating modules (firearms training,
self-defence and arrest training, tactical training, de-escalation) that are later been put
together, is based on the assumption of “modularity”, which is a characterizing feature
of the traditional linear approach to learning. The assumption is, that isolated
processes (i.e. techniques, processes) can be trained isolated from the action in the
performance context and then being integrated into the whole system with enhanced
performance (Renshaw et al., 2019). However, this assumption is not supported by
other theoretical rationales like the ecological dynamic’s framework (Correia et al.,
!
176
2018; Renshaw et al., 2019; Seifert et al., 2019) indicating that skills are developed
in context.
At a micro-level the results also showed evidence of a traditional linear learning
model. These linear models of learning are characterised by: (a) “ideal models” and
the existence of single solutions of skills-to-be-learnt (Moy, Renshaw and Davids,
2016; Orth, Kamp and Button, 2018; Seifert et al., 2019); (b) ideal techniques are
demonstrated by the coach and repeated by learners in isolated drills before put into
application within the performance context (Moy, Renshaw and Davids, 2014, 2016;
Metzler, 2017); (c) complex skills are split into smaller parts (Metzler, 2017); (d)
training consists of highly structured teaching sequences (Moy, Renshaw and Davids,
2016); and (e) detailed prescriptive instructions and corrective verbal feedback
provision by the coach (Correia et al., 2018). The current data, especially the training
in self-defence and arrest and firearms consisted of highly structured sequences as
evidenced by the observation. Also detailed descriptive and prescriptive instructions,
as well as corrective feedback were given regularly. These findings are consistent
with those from studies of police educational settings in general (Werth, 2009;
Shipton, 2012) and police training in particular (Cushion, 2020), which also found a
high prevalence of teacher-centred linear approaches to learning.
Furthermore, the current curriculum emphasises the existence of ideal models of
technical and tactical behaviour in specific situations. As such, the curricular structure
suggests a one-size-fits all approach. All recruits, irrespective of their bodily
composition and action capabilities, should learn certain self-defence and arrest
techniques. The erroneously assumption of one movement pattern that acts as an
optimal template suitable for all individual learners has been rejected on an empirical
basis (Schöllhorn, 1999; Chow et al., 2009; Schöllhorn, Hegen and Davids, 2012).
Hence, this traditional linear approach lacks in providing the learners with
opportunities to develop their individual coping strategies concerning conflict
situations. This problem has been addressed recently (Körner and Staller, 2018a;
Staller and Körner, 2019b; Rutter, 2020), by advocating a more goal-oriented
approach to conflict situations while emphasizing individual solutions fitting one’s own
action capabilities and prerequisites. However, it has to be mentioned, that coaches
especially in self-defence and arrest training and firearms training tried to implement
goal-directed tasks that are constrained by various parameters, allowing for the
practice of context-specific functional solutions.
!
177
7.8.1.3 Low Amount of Qualitative Time-on-Task
In the current case study, a relatively low amount of qualitative time-on-task was
observed (M = 40.82 % total activities with practice focus). This is in line with results
from Cushion (2020), who also found officers less than 50% of the training time
actually spending with tasks, where officers are actively engaged in practice. Since
time-on-task is a necessary factor for the mastering of skills (Ericsson, 2016) and
considered as a process indicator for learning (Mars, 2006) police training would
benefit from increasing the time-on-task of the learners.
However, practice per se is not predictive of learning efficacy, since the quality of
practice task also plays a fundamental role concerning skill development (Correia et
al., 2018). With regards to quality, two aspects have to be considered. First, the
amount of practice time, where the learner actually is able to act upon the
environmental constraints, i.e. the time of practice, when he or she has the role of the
player (and not the simulator) and second, the amount of training time spent
representative simulations, i.e. training tasks that incorporate high levels of
functionality and action fidelity. As such, training tasks, focusing on the technical
reproduction of a certain behaviour could be deemed as low-quality interactions. In
the current study time-on-task involving partner interactions that satisfy these two
desirable criteria (player-status and no technical reproduction) was approximately 6%
of total training time. Since claims for optimising police training regularly include the
call for more training time (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden, Nieuwenhuys,
et al., 2015), the current results would suggest first optimising the disponible training
and shifting a focus to high amounts of quality training tasks (simulations). Tackling
this issue would require dealing with two aspects. First, to reduce the high amounts
of time recruits spent passive, and second, to optimise the partner interactions in a
way that representative simulations can take place beyond the traditional modular
approach, where scenario trainings are placed in the end of a learning programme
(Staller and Körner, 2019a).
7.8.2 Representative Learning Design in Police Training
The results indicated that the levels of representativeness differed across the different
training settings of police training. In firearms training, representativeness was lacking
by design due to the necessary safety constraints of live fire shooting (Adang, 2011;
Staller, Bertram and Körner, 2017). Instead, numbers, static images or coach
instructions served as non-representative cues for initiating a shooting response. In
self-defence and arrest training, it was observed that many exercises contained no
!
178
functional coupling between the information presented and the action of the learner.
For example, a training activity was observed which had recruits lying on the ground
waiting to get handcuffed rather than talking or taking them down. Moreover, it was
observed that the need for recruits to literally act as simulators meant that learners
were responding to information that was not likely representative of the information
presented by a civilian in the field. This stresses the importance of ensuring optimal
partner interaction by developing partners as good simulators by introducing roles and
responsibilities of good training partners (Staller and Körner, 2018, 2019a; Staller,
Körner and Heil, 2019). There is empirical evidence that recruits acting as simulators
elicits positive learning effects (Sjöberg, Karp and Rantatalo, 2016), providing an
additional argument for shifting the simulator role away from the coaches as the sole
simulator.
It was found that tactical training was most representative of the criterion environment
when recruits had the opportunity to solve problems posed using scenario training.
However, after the coaches gave, often large amounts of, corrective feedback,
recruits repeated the same scenario, which now lacked the unpredictability and
surprise of the first training experience. Such observations indicate that scenario
training is not representative by design per se and as such not per se capable of
fostering “realism” in training as advocated in the literature (Murray, 2004; Adang,
2011). Analysing training tasks alongside the framework of representative learning
design may prove the more functional alternative in ensuring skill transfer (Krause et
al., 2017). Hence the simulations should be representatively designed regardless of
their complexity (regular partner interaction vs. high-end scenario training).
Practitioners and researchers alike may consider high quality partner interactions as
a quality criterion for police training (Staller and Körner, 2019a).
It appears that the modularized organisational structure of police training as well as
the linear oriented microstructure is geared towards what is regularly called “realistic
scenario trainings” (Sjöberg and Karp, 2012; Andersen et al., 2016). However, the
amounts of training time spent as learners in respective tasks has been considerably
low. Long waiting times seem to have costs concerning valuable training time-on-task.
Also, the motivation of learners seems to be negatively affected by long waiting times
(Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021b). Due to high numbers of recruits
compared to the low numbers of coaches that are available, a sustainable solution for
this problem may lie in rendering partner interactions with peers as “mini” scenarios,
!
179
being highly representative simulations that get more and more complex over time
and dependent on the resources that are available.
7.8.3 (Reflective) Planning Decisions
Concerning police trainers planning up-front of their training sessions in order to
progress police recruits towards their long-term development goal, the results yielded
several findings that related to the interdependent areas of the CPPRF (Muir et al.,
2011, 2015). Given the centrality of aligning the controllable elements of a training
session (i.e. the structure and design of learning activities and coach behaviour) to
maximise learner engagement with the long term goals of learner development, we
first discuss the alignment of the learning objectives in the long-term development
plan before, secondly, focusing on strategies of trainers to maximise learner
engagement in order to reach their learning objectives.
First, concerning the alignment of learning objectives the interviewed police trainers
did not appear to have a clear conceptualization of the learning objectives of the
training session and its place within the macrostructure of police training. Connections
to the long-term development plan were only made concerning to the last and the
following training session. The rationale for the practicing on a specific training content
(e.g. a takedown) was that follows the last content and precedes the next. This likely
contributed to the isolated, disconnected elements of the curriculum that were
observed in the observational study presented elsewhere (Staller, Körner, Heil,
Klemmer, et al., 2021). This disconnection between elements of the curriculum has
also been reported by other studies in the context of policing (Cushion, 2020). This
disconnection is problematic insofar, that no systematic progression towards an
overall development goal is possible. A constructive alignment of a police training
program would demand, that the intended learning objectives arising from the police
officers needs in the field become the basis for designing long-, medium-, and short-
term plans. These learning objectives then provide a key reference point from which
police trainers and decision-makers can monitor and adjust the effectiveness of their
programs, plans and delivery (Abraham et al., 2015; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer,
et al., 2021). The key reference point in our study seemed to be the number of the
training session, with the police training manual stating what should be taught in which
training session (Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021), an approach that was
also evidenced by Cushion (2020). This suggests, that the purposeful alignment and
structure of training content seems an issue to be optimised within police training
coach learning.
!
180
Second, concerning the controllable elements of coaching (i.e. coaching behaviour &
activity design, the police trainers focused on two overarching aspects, that they
planned to compliment through their coaching behaviour and the structure and design
of learning activities: (a) making the learning experience fun and (b) the relevance of
the to be covered material.
As it concerns “fun”, police trainer tried to have fun by themselves and to have fun
with the recruits together. Police trainers provided no explanation of how the achieve
having fun together. However, as interview data from recruits about the same coaches
in another study showed (Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021b) police trainers
regularly achieve this aim. Aligning coaching behaviour to make the learning fun is in
line with current recommendations (Beni, Fletcher and Chróinín, 2017), since having
fun has recurrently been stated as an element to participate in youth sports and its
absences as a reason for dropout (Bengoechea, Strean and Williams, 2004; Visek et
al., 2015). Furthermore, it has been described as central to meaningful activity
experiences (Smith and Parr, 2006; Jakobsson, Lundvall and Redelius, 2014).
However, Beni et al. (2017) recommend not prioritizing fun at the expense of other
criteria of meaningful experiences.
Police trainers also plan to provide meaningful experiences by providing material, that
is relevant and thus meaningful for the recruits. As such, the regularly communicated
the relevance of the taught material in order to promote learner engagement. Data
from interview studies showed (Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021b) that
recruits are motivated by the perceived relevance of the content in police training.
However, studies have shown that trainees sometimes perceive that there are
differences in the content and its delivery between police training and the field
(Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015; Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Abraham, et al., 2021a). This may affect their motivation, when the perceive the
training as not effective in helping them to develop skill they perceive they need.
Police trainers seem to be aware of this by employing strategies to bolster the
relevance of the taught content. They created learning tasks, where recruits were
“shot” in order to create the demand for learning a specific tactic to avoid getting shot.
The benefit of learning from errors in complex environments is well-document
throughout the literature (Piggott, 2007; Metcalfe, 2017), particularly, when receiving
corrective feedback, including an analysis of the reasoning leading up to the mistake
(Morrison and Meliza, 1999). Police trainers planned for the congruent coaching
!
181
behaviour by showing the recruits the mistakes they made and by subsequently being
supportive in managing the mistakes and providing techniques and tactics.
Police trainers perceived the provided content (techniques and tactics) and the way
of provision as useful and hence, relevant for the recruits. Data from the related
observational study (Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021) showed that police
trainers predominately engaged recruits in repetitive, isolated practice with high
amounts of corrective feedback.
This points towards a problematic issue: That what police trainers think is most
effective (technique/tactic to succeed in the field or pedagogical approach to best
facilitate learning), is not necessarily the best approach. For example, police trainers
design the isolated learning activities with the best intentions, namely to promote
learner engagement, since they (the trainers) think that recruits perceive the content
and how it is delivered as relevant per se. Police trainers think that through structuring
learning of techniques and tactics in these linear isolated processes, recruits develop
the skills needed (i.e. their long-term development goal). However, research has
shown, that diametral to the police trainers’ intentions, repetitive and isolated practice
does not facilitate learner motivation and engagement within this social milieu (Staller,
Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021b) and that other pedagogical approaches (e.g.
non-linear pedagogy) may be more effective in this specific context (Körner and
Staller, 2018a). Likewise, concerning the content of specific techniques or tactics,
interview data repetitively showed, that what is learned in training is not necessarily
that what is needed in the field (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013; Renden,
Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021a).
In order to tackle this issue, police trainers have to be aware of their governing
assumptions about what is needed and what works in the field (e.g. techniques,
tactics, skills) and which pedagogical approach governs their teaching behaviour.
Being aware of theses underlying assumptions constitutes the need for double-loop
reflection (Tosey, Visser and Saunders, 2012; Brookfield, 2013).
7.8.4 The Depth of Reflection
With one exception, coaches engaged in single-loop reflection when reviewing the
training session, they had just delivered. Coaches reflected what has happened within
the training session based on their causal and prescriptive assumptions (Brookfield,
2013). Based on what their assumptions about what should happen in a particular
situation and under what conditions a specific behaviour changes, coaches generally
!
182
evaluated the training session positively. At the same time, they pointed towards
deficits within the students, especially, that they did not retain taught skills from the
last sessions. For coaches, this lack of skill retention provided valuable data
concerning the monitoring of their training program. From here adjustments
adjustment in the planning and delivery of the program can made in order to further
progress towards the long-term goal (Abraham et al., 2015; Farrow and Robertson,
2017; Otte, Millar and Klatt, 2019). However, in the light of their governing
assumptions of what constitutes a good training (i.e. single-loop reflection), they felt
they delivered the training well. It can be assumed that the consequence herein can
be seen in the other areas of reflection: if they did well – the lack of skill progression
within the recruits must be attributed to something else, like organisational problems
or the need or more physical fitness as evidenced by the reported relativization
strategies. Also, police trainers in a recent interview study investigating the
developmental pathways of police trainers (Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019a) pointed
towards the general deficits of young recruits in our society in explaining what has
changed in police training over time. In the light of the current evidence, that police
trainers mainly engage in single-loop reflection, this may seem to be an adaptive
strategy to cope with the monitored lack of skill progression (Shultz and Lepper, 1996;
Martinie and Fointiat, 2006; Vries and Timmins, 2015).
The reported incident by one police trainer of being unsure about a specific approach
in highlighting the mistake of a recruit, indicates that police trainers engage in double-
loop reflection at some point. However, compared to the extensive amount of single-
loop reflection, this may be problematic with regards to delivering effective programs
in police training. There is a consensus, that effective coaching depends on the
coach’s ability to continually reflect, adapt and innovate (Gallimore, Gilbert and Nater,
2014). Not surprisingly, coach education programs in the sport domain are designed
to prepare coaches for ongoing learning, emphasizing the importance of having them
reflect on problems they encounter within their working environments (Gilbert,
Gallimore and Trudel, 2009; Trudel, Gilbert and Werthner, 2010). Teaching critical
thinking with regards to one’s own coaching practice would involve being alert of the
underlying assumptions of practice (Brookfield, 2013), setting the base for being able
to challenge and refine (if needed) these governing ideas (Argyris, 2003; Tosey,
Visser and Saunders, 2012).
In defence of the police trainers, coaching courses in police training seems not to
systematically incorporate elements of reflective practice, in Germany at least (Staller
!
183
and Körner, 2019b). In his case study, Cushion (2020) concluded, that “instructors
[…] are time pressed and have limited time for reflection on their own practice and
are therefore constrained and limited by what they know” (p. 13). The constraining of
coaches planning and reflective processes through influences beyond the influence
of the police trainers seemed also to be prevalent in our study. Police trainers working
days were packed with training sessions, limiting their time for planning and reflection.
Since ongoing critical reflection has been advocated as an important tool for
professional practice in law enforcement in general (Christopher, 2015) and for police
training specifically (Körner and Staller, 2018a; Staller and Körner, 2019b), coach
development programs should be adapted accordingly and time should be made
available to allow for structured planning and reflecting processes. In the light of rising
numbers of police recruits to be educated, this also means employing enough police
trainers to allow for such time frames during regular working days.
7.8.5 Limitations
Our employed methodology has several weaknesses that have to be acknowledged.
Frist, the case study methodology has inherent weaknesses. The current case took
place at a specific time period in the education of young police officers in a specific
training institute. Therefore, the results cannot be generalised to police training in
other law enforcement agencies at a national or international level. As such, further
observations of police training for different populations (recruits, regular officers,
specialized teams, etc.) in different settings (agencies, states, countries) are needed
to get a full picture of the practice of police training. However, the focus on one case
provided profound insights into a rather closed process. Especially, since police
institutions in Germany have been reluctant of providing access in order to research
coaching in police training (Staller and Körner, 2019b), the current case study for the
first time provides insights into such programs and coaching practice of police trainers
with regards to planning, delivery and reflecting training sessions. Second, the
interviews were conducted immediately for and after the training sessions. It may be
possible that due to this immediacy police trainers were distracted by the upcoming
training session or by impressions about the just conducted training session. In both
cases this may have limited the depth of the reporting their planning and reflecting.
As such, future studies may want to consider allowing more time being passed
between the training sessions and the interviews. Third, the on-site research team
(SK, VH, MS) in this study had a positive reputation within the police academy studied.
As a result, it remains possible that coaches wanted to impression manage the
opinions of the interviewers (Leary and Kowalski, 1990) by presenting their view of
!
184
competence in the interviews, resulting in few accounts of negative or critical
evaluation of their practice. Future studies may consider highlighting reflexivity as a
sign of competence towards the police trainers.
7.9 Conclusion and Practical Implications
The reported data points towards several issues, that are worth considering in order
to improve practice.
First, our results revealed a lack of constructive alignment of the training modules and
learning tasks within the training settings. Police trainers and curriculum designers
should focus on the learners needs in their specific working context: being able to
resolve conflictual situations in police-citizen interaction. As such training
programmes and activites could be structured and designed to develop a broader skill
set for coping with conflict in the field at the expense of technical training of distinct
techniques. Especially the area of communication and de-escalation and specific
training activities targeting adaptive behaviour seems to be underrepresented within
existing training programmes. Curriculum designers for police training may consider
a spiral curriculum (Harden and Stamper, 1999) around the necessary concepts
compared to a modularized linear approach to training. By structuring police training
in this spiral fashion, where the main concepts are learned in an iterative and
progressive fashion, skill development of police officers could take place on a much
more individual level by maintaining the demands posed in the field on each skill level.
Related to that aspect, police trainers and curriculum designers might consider a
clearer conceptualisation of a long-term development plan for police recruits. This
may involve questioning and reasoning what a competent police officer actually needs
concerning his or her operational skills in the field (Rajakaruna et al., 2017). Police
trainers also could enhance their ability to coherently align training sessions towards
an objective that reaches beyond the last and next training session. However, police
organisations have to reflect critically if they provide police trainers with the necessary
tools and skills to allow for a constructive alignment of learning programs.
With regards to the actual practice of police training, our results showed an adherence
to traditional linear approaches to training resulting in high amounts of augmented
instruction and feedback and a one-size-fits all approach to technical and tactical
behaviour in specific situations. In order to tackle the limitation of linear models of
learning, police trainers could employ more learner-centred pedagogical approaches
!
185
that allow and foster individual technical and tactical solutions to occur and account
for individual action capabilities and resources.
Furthermore, our data suggests that available training time in police training seems
not be used efficiently. Active time-on-task, especially engagement in representatively
designed tasks, involving problem-solving capabilities were low given that the police
literature advocates representatively and interactively designed training tasks as the
gold standard for training (Nota and Huhta, 2019; Staller and Körner, 2019a). In order
to address this problem, police trainers may focus on pedagogical approaches that
optimise time-on-task for learners in representatively designed training activities.
However, in order to achieve transformations in the use of pedagogical approaches,
coach development in police training should provide police trainers with alternate
pedagogical approaches to skill learning by letting coaches experience these new
approaches and simultaneously provide theoretical underpinnings of the respective
learning theory. Furthermore, traditional pedagogies and their genesis within the
knowledge structure of the coach should be reflected upon (Hoy and Murphy, 2001;
Cushion, 2020).
Finally, the current study showed the problems being associated with a lack of higher
levels of reflection in police training. Not going beyond single-loop reflection police
training may lead to the manifestation of ineffective training delivery on an individual
level, since assumptions about what is needed and which approach is best to achieve
it, are not questioned. This may also in increase the reluctance of police organisations
to engage in higher levels of reflection concerning their training procedures in general,
which has recently been documented (Körner and Staller, 2019c). In this light, we
suggest that decision-makers and coach developers in police training focus on
enhancing the reflexivity of police trainers, especially concerning higher levels of
reflection. This includes the ability to reflect on assumptions and models that underpin
the chosen learning and coaching process (Chow et al., 2016), including those
premises, that underpin this reflection process itself (Körner and Staller, 2018a).
7.9.1 Further Research
Concerning further research, the results of the current study point out various avenues
for further research. With regard to the documented planning and reflection processes
of police trainers and the practical implications aiming at coach learning and
development, a set of further questions arise. Studies focusing on the police trainer
may ask: What are the developmental pathways of police trainers? Where do coaches
!
186
get their knowledge from? What are the formal and informal sources of coaching
knowledge in police training? What information concerning coaching do police trainers
attend to? Research questions aiming at the organisational structures supporting or
hindering coach learning and development may include the following: How do police
organisation implement coach learning and development for police trainers? How are
coaching development courses designed and delivered? Since currently not much is
known about coach learning and development of police trainers answering any of
those question would provide valuable insights.
From the perspective of application research (Lyle, 2018b) and linked to the capacity
of critical reflection of coaches, further research could focus on further developing the
reflective practitioner in police training (Schön, 1983; Körner and Staller, 2018a). This
may include designing and evaluating programs to enhance reflective thinking within
the domain of police training.
Finally, concerning the underlying assumptions of coaching practice and what is
needed as a police officer, we would encourage researchers to further investigate two
areas, that would provide the basis for double- and triple loop reflection and learning
of police trainers: First, to investigate the benefits and drawbacks of different
pedagogical approaches in police training and second to further examine the needs
of frontline police officers concerning their ability to manage operational situations and
conflict.
7.10 Conclusion
In the light of lacking empirical evidence, the current study aimed at eliciting the
planning, delivering and reflecting processes of police trainer in regard to training
sessions in police training. For that purpose, we investigated a case of coaching
practice of police training in Germany.
Concerning the planning of training sessions, our results indicated that police trainers
employ two main strategies in order to progress their learners towards the aims of the
training session. First, they focus on making the learning experience fun and second,
they point out the relevance of the to be learnt skills by creating the demand,
showcasing mistakes and then subsequently focusing on developing the needed skills
in isolated contexts. However, police trainers struggle to conceptualize the immediate
learning objectives and embedding them in the long-term development plan for police
recruits.
!
187
With regards to the actual practice of police training, the results indicated an
adherence to traditional linear approaches to training resulting in high amounts of
augmented instruction and feedback and a one-size-fits all approach to technical and
tactical behaviour and a non-efficient use of available training time with low amounts
of engagement in representatively designed tasks, involving problem-solving
capabilities.
Concerning the reflection after the delivery of the sessions, the results yielded, that
police trainers mainly evaluated their training positively and identified deficits in the
progress of their recruits’ progression. Furthermore, higher levels of reflection, such
as questioning governing assumptions and beliefs about training approaches and
what is needed for recruits in the field (e.g. long-term development), were almost
absent. Taken together, this indicates various avenues for the optimisation of
coaching in police training.
!
188
Chapter 8: Topics, Sources and the Application of Coaching
Knowledge in Police Training
8 Topics, Sources and the Application of Coaching
Knowledge in Police Training
!
189
8.1 Abstract
Topics, Sources and the Application of
Coaching Knowledge in Police Training
by
Mario S. Staller, Swen Körner,
Andrew Abraham, Jamie Poolton
Prepared for submission
Abstract:
The current study aimed at exploring police trainers’ perceptions of their actual and
preferred methods of acquiring new coaching knowledge; the types of knowledge they
currently acquire and/or desire; and their application of new knowledge. A total of 163
police trainers from Germany and Austria participated in the study. The responses
were analysed using an inductive approach. The results showed that police trainers
largely acquired coaching knowledge through non-formal and informal learning
settings; they mainly prefer and apply context-specific knowledge related to police-
specific content and pedagogy; and they prefer police-specific content knowledge
more than pedagogical knowledge. Based on these findings, it is suggested police
trainers are in need of context-specific knowledge and support to develop the
declarative knowledge structures that afford critically reflection of new information.
Keywords: police training, coaching knowledge, coach learning, coach development,
coach education
!
190
8.2 Author’s Contribution
All authors substantially contributed to the current study and the final manuscript. The
study was designed by MS and SK. Data were collected by MS; Data analysis was
performed by MS and SK. MS wrote the first draft of the manuscript. SK, AA and JP
provided substantial feedback to the manuscript and helped to reach the manuscript
reach its final form.
8.3 Introduction
In most police departments, institutions, academies and agencies, police training is
considered an essential training setting for recruits and sworn officers to develop and
refine their practical front-line skills, such as self-defence and arrest skills, firearms,
tactical skills and communication (Isaieva, 2019; Staller and Körner, 2019b), order to
safely and effectively cope with operational and conflictual scenarios that are a
regularly part of police work (Ellrich and Baier, 2016). Within this context, the police
trainer has been identified as the facilitator of the achievement of learning outcomes
(Birzer, 2003; Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021). However,
in relation to the craft of delivering police training, research from observational and
interview studies has identified several problematic issues: (i) training does not
necessarily meet the intended outcomes (Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Abraham, et al., 2021c; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021); (ii) there is a
prevalence of out-dated pedagogical approaches (Birzer, 2003; Cushion, 2020;
Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021); and (iii) the knowledge structure required
for purposeful planning and reflection on training sessions is lacking (Cushion, 2020;
Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021c). Such observations bring the structure
coach development framework into question. With anecdotical evidence from
Germany that police trainers are assigned to teach other police officers without
experience of formal coach education (Staller and Körner, 2019b), and sporadic
evidence that coach education varies regarding content, depth and duration (Staller,
Körner and Abraham, 2020), questions regarding the type, source and application of
knowledge arise. However, coach learning in police training has not been subject to
rigorous investigation.
In the light of this scarcity of research in the domain of coach learning in policing, the
closely aligned field of sport coaching offers insight. An increasing body of research
has investigated how coaches learn how to coach (Cushion et al., 2010; Stoszkowski
and Collins, 2015). The acquisition of coaching knowledge takes place in a variety of
!
191
settings, extends far beyond formal coach education settings and encompasses
informal and self-directed learning situations (Cassidy and Rossi, 2006; Lemyre,
Trudel and Durand-Bush, 2007; Wright, Trudel and Culver, 2007; Stoszkowski and
Collins, 2015). Whereas formal coach education is considered as a highly
institutionalised setting that is formally recognized with diplomas and certificates,
nonformal coach education encompasses organised learning opportunities outside
the formal educational setting (Mallett and Dickens, 2009). In the context of police
training, national regulations provide the framework for the formal coach education
for police trainers. For example, in Germany, the police regulation 211 (PDV211,
2014) describes the obligation for police force to adequately equip their coaches with
the needed knowledge and competencies in order to deliver a police training
curriculum. These formal coach education courses differ from state to state (Körner,
Staller and Kecke, 2019d). Non-formal coach education settings regularly comprise
of workshops, seminars and conferences that police trainers attend. Within formal and
nonformal coach education settings, opportunities for informal coach learning can
arise. Informal learning is primarily controlled by the learner and is not typically
classroom based or highly structured (Mallett and Dickens, 2009). For example, police
trainers discussing new operational tactics would be considered as an informal
learning setting.
The different formats of learning seem to have a unique role in the development of
coaches (Lemyre, Trudel and Durand-Bush, 2007; Wright, Trudel and Culver, 2007).
For example, Wright et al. (2007) identified seven different learning situations
accessed by ice hockey coaches as sources for their coaching knowledge,
encompassing formal (large-scale coach education programs, formal mentoring),
non-formal (coaching clinics and seminars) and informal learning settings (books and
videotapes, personal experiences, face-to-face interactions with other coaches, the
internet). An online coach survey involving some 320 participants found that coaches
prefer and acquire coaching knowledge from informal learning activities, especially
when activities allow for social interaction, such as talking to other coaches
(Stoszkowski and Collins, 2015). The data also revealed that coaches employed
knowledge taken from formal coach education settings, even though this learning
setting was not indicated as a preferred source of knowledge acquisition by the
majority of coaches. Since participants of the study of Stoszkowski and Collins (2015)
comprised of coaches of a variety of different sports, it is likely that informal learning
settings are also a common source of acquiring knowledge for police trainers.
!
192
While informal learning opportunities are valued by coaches, there is potential that in
the absence of conscious evaluative processes, coaches may simply acquire
knowledge and reproduce practices from these interactions that are outcome-neutral,
potentially harmful, outdated and/or ineffective (Gilbert and Trudel, 2001; Mallett and
Dickens, 2009; Cushion, Ford and Williams, 2012). Learning as a coach often
depends on power relationships (with mentors, superiors) and held values, attitudes
and beliefs that often can be described as anti-intellectual and anti-change in nature
(Abraham, Muir and Morgan, 2010). As such, work environments of coaches may not
be conducive to generating new ideas or supporting active experimentation. It has
been argued that coaches need a profound amount of declarative knowledge
structures (“why” knowledge) that new information acquired in informal learning
situations can be planned with, delivered and reflected against (Abraham, Collins and
Martindale, 2006; Abraham and Collins, 2011a). An advanced declarative knowledge
base guards against coaches mindlessly mimicking the practice of other coaches
(Grecic and Collins, 2013). For the context of physical conflict settings, it has recently
been argued, that a heavy or even sole focus on procedural knowledge (“doing”
knowledge) limits the coach’s ability to adequately cope with problems, disturbances
and the individuality of trainees (Staller, Körner and Abraham, 2020). The coach
needs a declarative knowledge base containing knowledge about pros and cons of
wide range coaching approaches in order to make informed decisions and
judgements about navigating the dynamics of police training (Abraham and Collins,
2011a; Staller, Körner and Abraham, 2020). In short, knowing what and how to do
(procedural) something in police training is clearly important to coaches. However, it
is knowing why they are doing something (declarative), and indeed why they are not
doing something else, that facilitates adaptability and criticality in coaching.
Results from Stoszkowski and Collins (2015) indicated that critical reflection and
justification in the application of acquired coaching knowledge was mostly absent
within sport coaches. Based on these results, the authors infer the “necessity of some
element of ‘up front’ formal learning, in order to equip coaches with the structures to
ensure their informal development is sufficiently open-minded, reflective and critical”
(p. 8). Indeed, appropriate formal learning may actually be crucial for the majority of
coaches at different stages of their development. This may be particularly true as
coaches come to understand the ‘relative’ nature of knowledge and practice (Collins,
Abraham and Collins, 2012). With regard to police training, the potential lack of
knowledge structures for police trainers to reflect informally acquired knowledge
!
193
against, may provide a rationale for the manifestation of traditional pedagogies within
this specific domain (Birzer, 2003; Cushion, 2020).
However, since there is no empirical data on where police trainers get their knowledge
from (the sources), what knowledge domains are relevant to them (the topics) and
how they actually use their knowledge (the application), it would be speculative to
generalise the conclusions arising from sport coaching education to the police training
domain. As such, in order to close this gap and to investigate if existing practice is
critically reflected or just simply reproduced (Reade, Rodgers and Hall, 2008; Reade,
Rodgers and Spriggs, 2008), it is important to investigate: police training coaches’
actual and preferred methods of acquiring new coaching knowledge (i.e., sources of
coaching knowledge); the topics of coaching knowledge police training coaches
currently acquire and think they need to know more about (i.e., topics of coaching
knowledge); and the way police training coaches apply their newly acquired coaching
knowledge (i.e., application of coaching knowledge).
8.4 Method
8.4.1 Participants
One-hundred and sixty-three police training coaches from German speaking
countries (Germany and Austria) volunteered to participate. Demographic details of
participants are displayed in Table 12. Coaches from Austria, Saxony and Hesse were
particularly well-represented.
Table 12: Demographic details of participants
!
Number of
coaches
Number of
coaches
Number of
coaches
Gender
Male
158
Female
4
w/o specification
1
Age range
25-29
7
30-39
63
40-49
53
50-59
37
60 or more
2
w/o specification
2
Country where participants are based
Germany
104
Austria
59
Police Agencies of the n = 104 German police officers
Saxony
48
Hesse
46
Customs
3
Federal Police
3
Bavaria
1
North Rhine-
Westphalia
1
Rhineland-Palatinate
1
Lower Saxony
1
Number of years coaching experience in police training
0-2 years
13
3-5 years
30
6-9 years
33
10-15 years
42
16-20 years
29
21-30 years
29
!
194
30 and more
2
w/o specification
2
Number or years police officer experience
0-2 years
13
3-5 years
30
6-9 years
33
10-15 years
42
16-20 years
29
21-30 years
12
30 and more
2
w/o specification
2
8.4.2 Online survey
An online survey was constructed in SoSci Survey (www.soscisurvey.de) that
comprised demographic questions and seven open-ended questions taken and
translated from Stoszkowski and Collins (2015). The online survey afforded data
collection from police trainers across German speaking countries. The seven open
ended questions listed in Table 13 elicited qualitative responses about the sources
the participants consult for coaching knowledge (questions 4, 6 ,7), the topics of
coaching knowledge they seek and acquire (questions 1, 2, 3), and the ways they use
and apply the acquired knowledge (question 5). While questions 1, 2, 6 and 7 aimed
at generally eliciting the knowledge needs and sources of police trainers, questions 3
to 5 aimed at their last learning experience.
Table 13: Questions posed about sources, topics and application of coaching
knowledge
Number
Question
Aim
1
State the main thing you feel you need to know more about in order to be a better coach.
Topics
2
Why do you feel that is the case?
Topics
3
State the last thing you learned which you found useful for your coaching.
Topics
4
Where did this idea or information come from?
Sources
5
How have you used the idea or information since you got it?
Application
6
What would you say is your most preferred way to gain coaching knowledge?
Sources
7
Give 3 reasons why you prefer this method of gaining coaching knowledge
Sources
8.4.3 Procedures
The questionnaire was distributed using opportunity sampling (Brady, 2006). The
survey was initially distributed by email to a professional network of police training
coaches and to gatekeepers of police trainer networks. The Survey was hosted by
the German online survey tool SoSci Survey. The landing page of the survey
contained detailed information about the purpose and procedure of the study and how
responses to the survey would be handled. Participants were informed that they
should only continue if they were active police training coaches. Participants were
also informed that submission of responses would constitute consent to use the data
!
195
and that they could not withdraw their data once it was submitted as no identifying
information was tracked at any stage of the data collection. Recruitment of
participants took place over a 10-week period before the web link was deactivated.
8.4.4 Data analysis
The open-ended responses consisted of a mixture of short statements and longer,
more structured sentences and were subjected to an inductive content analysis
(Patton, 2002) using MAXQDA 2018. The analysis followed a two-stage protocol
(Nelson, Cushion and Potrac, 2013; Stoszkowski and Collins, 2015). First, the survey
answers were treated as stand-alone meaning units. If they contained more than one
self-definable point, for example, “visiting conferences and talking with peers”, they
were separated accordingly. The meaning units for each item were listed and labelled,
before they were compared for similarities and organised into raw data themes.
Meanings units were treated as similar, when they conveyed the same idea; for
example, “will boost motivation of trainees” and “officers will be more motivated”. In
the second stage, the analysis proceeded to a higher level of abstraction. The raw
data themes were built up into larger and more general themes and categories to form
higher-order concepts (Côté et al., 1993). In order to enhance the validity of the data
analysis, two researchers (MS and SK) independently familiarised themselves with
the data before discussing meaning units, categories and themes to reach a
consensus. If consensus was not reached initially, the researchers debated the issue
of contention until consensus was achieved. Having used inductive content analysis
to interpret the data into raw, lower and higher order themes, the final phase of
analysis involved gaining triangular consensus between the lead (MS) and second
researcher (SK) along with two additional researchers (AA and JP) who acted as a
“critical friend” (Faulkner and Biddle, 2002; Kelly et al., 2018). The additional
researchers were not involved with the data collection or analysis and were required
to confirm, or otherwise, the placement of raw data themes into lower and higher order
themes.
8.4.5 Enhancing Trustworthiness of the Analysis
Using guidelines relating to qualitative methods (Tracy, 2010; Tracy and Hinrichs,
2017), checks were made to ensure eight criteria of high-quality qualitative research
(worthy topic, rich rigour, sincerity, credibility, resonance, significant contribution,
ethics and meaningful coherence) were met. Investigating the sources, topics and
application of coaching knowledge in police training was perceived to be a worthy
topic. With regards to rich rigour, data collection and analysis procedures were carried
!
196
out systematically following established guidelines. The process of analysis is
described in detail in order to be transparent concerning the process of reaching
consensus. Sincerity was observed via two “critical friends” who ensured coherence
between the data and the presented raw, lower and higher order themes. This helped
maximise the trustworthiness of the analysis process. To ensure credibility, we
ensured that consented aspects were traced back to the participant’s statements.
Furthermore, we highlighted direct quotations to support findings, which we argue
demonstrated resonance in that it allowed for visual representations of participants
thoughts. In terms of contributing to the literature, we argue the study has theoretical
(e.g., conceptual understanding) and practical (e.g., professional training
programmes and applied practice) implications that develop this area of study.
Institutional ethical clearance was obtained. Situational (e.g., reflectively discussing
the analysis process with the research team and reflect on data worth exposing),
relational (e.g., reflection on researcher actions and potential consequences of data
analysis) and exiting (e.g., avoiding unjust or unintended consequences of findings
presented) obligations were also adhered to. Finally, in terms of meaningful
coherence, the study used methods consistent with and comparable to earlier studies
of coaching knowledge.
8.5 Results
8.5.1 Topics of Coaching Knowledge
The topics that participants felt they need to know more about to be a better coach
tended to be associated with police training specific knowledge (47.20%) or related
to coaching pedagogy (29.44% - see Table 3). Specifically, participants felt the need
to know more about past operations and incidents (12.15%); the criterion
environment, like statistics and current modes of operandi (10.57%); methodology
and didactics, such as teaching methods for firearms training or learning approaches
(10.28 %); and coaching tools, including frameworks for periodisation or training
principles (9.35%).
Participants reported why they need a particular piece of information (see Table 15).
Based on the police training coaches’ answers, the knowledge specified is mainly
needed for the purpose of personal development (26.49%); to optimise learning
environments (23.78%); and to optimise the taught police-specific training content
(20.54%).
!
197
Table 14: Participants' perception of what they need to know more about to be a better coach
Raw data theme
Frequency
%
Higher Order Theme
Frequency
%
Methodology / didactics
22
10.28%
Pedagogy
63
29.44%
Coaching tools
20
9.35%
Motivation of participants
7
3.27%
Perspective / needs of participants
6
2.80%
“Pedagogy”
5
2.34%
Communication as a coach
3
1.40%
Data from past operations / incidents
26
12.15%
Police training specific knowledge
101
47.20%
Knowledge about the criterion environment
23
10.75%
Tactical knowledge
17
7.94%
Knowledge about police training
16
7.48%
Technical knowledge
9
4.21%
Legal knowledge
5
2.34%
Firearms / Non-lethal weapons
5
2.34%
Own learning / further education
15
7.01%
Own development
28
13.08%
Own operational experiences
8
3.74%
Self-reflection
5
2.34%
Physiology
3
1.40%
“Ologies”
10
4.67%
Psychology
7
3.27%
Experiences from other coaches
8
3.74%
Experiences from other coaches
8
3.74%
Nothing
4
1.87%
Nothing
4
1.87%
!
198
Table 15: Participants perception of why they need to know the knowledge reported in Table 3
Raw data theme
Frequency
%
Higher Order Theme
Frequency
%
Desire for personal improvement
21
11.35%
Personal development
49
26.49%
Eliminating of own deficits
16
8.65%
Perceived as basic prerequisite
6
3.24%
Is needed to stay „up-to-date“
6
3.24%
Would make coaching sessions more effective
35
18.92%
Optimising of learning environments
44
23.78%
Would help to design training in a more practical way
9
4.86%
Optimisation of taught training content
26
14.05%
Optimisation of police-specific training content
38
20.54%
Would help to adapt content to current needs
10
5.41%
Better preparation for future missions
2
1.08%
Would help to increase the motivation of the participants
9
4.86%
Optimisation of individualization and motivation
29
15.68%
Would help answer questions from participants
7
3.78%
Would help with the individualization of training
6
3.24%
Would help to identify the needs of participants
5
2.70%
Would help for additional explanations
2
1.08%
Increases credibility / acceptance as coach
9
4.86%
Social Reasons
14
7.57%
Feedback / exchange with others
5
2.70%
Would help to standardize teaching
5
2.70%
Organisational reasons
7
3.78%
Would help break up old training structures
1
0.54%
Would help limit „copy & paste“ coaching
1
0.54%
Education / CPD is sufficient
1
0.54%
Reasons for no reported need of knowledge
3
1.62%
Informed enough by own commitment
1
0.54%
Dealt enough with coaching
1
0.54%
No answer
1
0.54%
No answer
1
0.54%
!
199
8.5.2 Sources of Coaching Knowledge
Table 16 indicates that the majority of police trainers preferred to acquire knowledge
by informal means (69.29%), particularly from conversations with and observation of
their peers (32.86%). Fewer police trainers pointed out nonformal Continuing
professional development (CPD) learning activities (e.g., seminars, workshops,
conferences) as their preferred learning source (28.21%). Formal learning activities
were the least favoured source. Three police trainers (1.07%) preferred to acquire
knowledge from formal coach education programmes.
The reported reasons for why coaches prefer particular methods of acquiring
coaching knowledge were wide ranging (see Table 17); however, perceived quality of
the source (31.63%), social interaction (24.82%) and knowledge grounded in reality
(19.46 %) were the most common reasons for a particular method being preferred.
!
200
Table 16: Participants' preferred method of acquiring coaching knowledge
Raw data theme
Frequency
%
Lower Order Theme
Frequency
%
Higher Order Theme
Frequency
%
Coaching course
3
1.07%
Formal coach education
3
1.07%
Formal learning
3
1.07%
Seminar / workshop / course
76
27.14%
Attending CPD activities
79
28.21%
Nonformal learning
79
28.21%
Conferences
2
0.71%
Trade shows
1
0.36%
Discussion with other coaches
70
25.00%
Other coaches / colleagues
92
32.86%
Informal learning
194
69.29%
Discussion with other officers
13
4.64%
Observing in the learning environment
6
2.14%
Observing in the criterion environment
3
1.07%
Books
12
4.29%
Reading
22
7.86%
“Reading”
4
1.43%
Academic journals
3
1.07%
Operation reports
2
0.71%
Magazines
1
0.36%
Internet
20
7.14%
Internet/Intranet
30
10.71%
Youtube / Videos
5
1.79%
Online social networks
2
0.71%
Intranet
2
0.71%
Share point / Cloud storage
1
0.36%
Theory
2
0.71%
Theory
2
0.71%
Experience as practitioner in training settings
21
7.50%
Practical experience
40
14.29%
Experience as officer
7
2.50%
Reflection
7
2.50%
Experience as coach
4
1.43%
Other sport
1
0.36%
Self-study
8
2.86%
Self-study
8
2.86%
No answer
1
0.36%
Reasons for no preferred method
4
1.43%
Reasons for no preferred method
4
1.43%
Learned nothing in the past
1
0.36%
Every way is right
2
0.71%
!
201
Table 17: Participants' reasons for preferring particular methods of acquiring coaching knowledge
Raw data theme
Frequency
%
Higher Order Theme
Frequency
%
Too few /no officers on duty
22
5.35%
Official obstacles
27
6.57%
Official information is too slow
4
0.97%
Only official knowledge is permitted
1
0.24%
Contributes to safety of colleagues
1
0.24%
Contribution to safety
2
0.49%
Contributes to own safety
1
0.24%
Makes fun / is enjoyable
4
0.97%
Fun / joy
4
0.97%
Can gain own experience
26
6.33%
Grounded in reality
80
19.46%
Works in reality
26
6.33%
Includes practical training
19
4.62%
Allows for reviewing one’s own knowledge base
9
2.19%
Information is not filtered
8
1.95%
Filtering function
14
3.41%
Information is pre-selected
6
1.46%
Food for thought
5
1.22%
Food for thought
5
1.22%
Fast and easy access
31
7.54%
Logistics
39
9.49%
No distraction
4
0.97%
Expenses
2
0.49%
Autonomy in terms of what is attended
1
0.24%
Plannable
1
0.24%
Exchange of experiences
41
9.98%
Social Interaction
102
24.82%
Perspectives from other coaches
16
3.89%
Questions can be asked directly
15
3.65%
Social relatedness
9
2.19%
Contributes to a uniform perspective
8
1.95%
Enables change of perspective (participant view)
5
1.22%
Own experience can be brought in
4
0.97%
Internationality
4
0.97%
Good for knowledge expansion
34
8.27%
Perceived quality
130
31.63%
Good for learning
26
6.33%
New ides / Information
25
6.08%
!
202
Up-to-date
18
4.38%
Competent personnel / experts / professionals
16
3.89%
Officially verified knowledge
6
1.46%
Evaluation of the source is possible
3
0.73%
More suitable than CPD on duty
2
0.49%
Own licensing
1
0.24%
Own licensing
1
0.24%
Not specified
5
1.22%
Reasons for no specific answer
7
1.70%
Can only be learned from own experience
1
0.24%
No preferred way
1
0.24%
!
203
8.5.3 Topics, Sources and Application of Recently Acquired
Knowledge
Concerning the last topic police trainers found they had learned or found useful, the
results tended to be either content specific to police training (57.54%), particularly
technical or tactical knowledge, or specific to the delivery of police training, that is
pedagogy (29.61% - see Table 18). Police trainers indicated that knowledge was
mainly gained from accessing a variety (see Table 19) of nonformal (46.33%) and
informal learning opportunities (44.63%). CPD seminars, workshops and/or courses
either organised by the Police force or privately attended were the primary source of
knowledge identified. Concerning the application of that knowledge police trainers
primarily reported that they immediately utilised the knowledge to inform their own
coaching practice (78.36%). Police trainers also reported to have considered the
newly acquired knowledge further to reflect or adapt their practice (9.36 %); although,
in nearly 10% of the cases police trainers acknowledged that the knowledge had not
been used at all (9.94 %).
Concerning specific categories of knowledge, the results showed, that pedagogical
knowledge mainly was acquired in informal learning settings (49.06%) compared to
nonformal (33.96%) and formal learning settings (22.64%). Participants reported that
of this knowledge topic a high amount of was applied in practice (86.79%).
Concerning the domain-specific content knowledge, the source of knowledge
acquisition was reported to be mainly nonformal learning settings (56.31%) compared
to informal (35.93%) and formal learning settings (3.88%). Nearly three-quarters of
the content knowledge was applied in practice (74.76%)
!
204
Table 18: Last thing participants' perceived they had found useful for their coaching
Raw data theme
Frequency
%
Higher Order Theme
Frequency
%
Specific coaching method / technique
11
6.15%
Pedagogy
53
29.61%
Specific training activities
10
5.59%
Skill acquisition
10
5.59%
Pedagogy
8
4.47%
Effective planning
7
3.91%
Communication as coach
7
3.91%
Technical knowledge
60
33.52%
Police training specific knowledge
103
57.54%
Tactical knowledge
30
16.76%
Data from past operations / incidents
4
2.23%
Coping with stress
4
2.23%
Attitude / Mindset
4
2.23%
Legal knowledge
1
0.56%
Self-awareness as coach
5
2.79%
Own development
7
3.91%
Self-awareness as practitioner
2
1.12%
Psychology
3
1.68%
“Ologies”
4
2.23%
Physiology
1
0.56%
Social interaction / discussion with other coaches
3
1.68%
Social interaction / discussion with other coaches
3
1.68%
Not specified
9
5.03%
Not specified
9
5.03%
!
205
Table 19: The source of the last thing that participants perceived they had learned or found useful
Raw data theme
Frequency
%
Lower Order Theme
Frequency
%
Higher Order Theme
Frequency
%
Coaching course – attended as part of duty
11
6.21%
Formal coach education
16
9.04%
Formal learning
16
9.04%
University course
4
2.26%
Coaching course – attended privately
1
0.56%
Seminar / workshop / course – attended as part of duty
61
34.46%
Attending CPD activities
82
46.33%
Nonformal learning
82
46.33%
Seminar / workshop / course – attended privately
16
9.04%
Conference / Symposium
3
1.69%
Lecture
2
1.13%
Internet
3
1.69%
Internet / Intranet
6
3.39%
Informal learning
79
44.63%
Youtube
2
1.13%
Intranet
1
0.56%
Books / Magazines
6
3.39%
Reading
6
3.39%
Experience as practitioner in training settings
15
8.47%
Practical experience
25
14.12%
Experience as coach
6
3.39%
Reflection
4
2.26%
Another coach
27
15.25%
Other coaches / colleagues
42
23.73%
Another officer
11
6.21%
Feedback from observers
2
1.13%
Feedback from participants
1
0.56%
Observing another coach
1
0.56%
!
206
Table 20: How participants perceive they used the acquired knowledge
Raw data theme
No
%
Higher Order Theme
No
%
Applied/used in practice as coach
119
69.59%
Application
134
78.36%
Applied/used on operational duty
12
7.02%
Applied/used in own training as practitioner
3
1.75%
Base for further thought / reflection
7
4.09%
Considered further
16
9.36%
Reflected and adapted for own context
5
2.92%
Experimented and adapted
4
2.34%
Not used
14
8.19%
Not used
17
9.94%
Application is forbidden
2
1.17%
Application has to be agreed upon
1
0.58%
No answer
4
2.34%
No answer
4
2.34%
!
207
8.6 Discussion
Given the prevalence of several problematic issues in the context of police training
delivery and the lack of empirical data about how police trainers learn to coach, the
current study aimed at gaining a more thorough understanding of the topics, sources
and the application of coaching knowledge of police trainers. Specifically, the study
was in response to empirical findings indicating that (i) police training does not
necessarily meet its intended outcomes (Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Abraham, et al., 2021c; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021); (ii) there is a
prevalence of out-dated pedagogical approaches (Birzer, 2003; Cushion, 2020;
Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021); ; and (iii) police trainers lack the
knowledge structure required for purposeful planning and reflection on training
sessions (Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021c). Structured
around three main research questions, the results provide insight into what knowledge
police trainers think they need, where they prefer to get it from, and how the apply
their recently acquired knowledge.
8.6.1 Context-Specifity of Police Training Knowledge
The findings show an overall trend for police trainers perceiving a need for police
training specific knowledge. This includes the need for specifity concerning the taught
content (what is taught) as well as the employed pedagogy (how it is taught).
Coaches reported that they generally need to know more about past operations and
incidents, as well as statistics and further information about the current situation on
the street. When asked about their preferred way of acquiring new knowledge,
nonformal CPD activities and informal self-directed learning activities, especially own
practical experiences and social interaction with officers and other coaches, were
reported as the preferred methods. Only a few coaches stated a preference for formal
coaching courses. The importance of domain specific content knowledge for coaches
has been identified throughout the literature (Nash and Collins, 2006; Abraham and
Collins, 2011a). In the specific domain of police training, the focus on specific content
knowledge may reflect the uncertainty of how-to best cope with (un-)armed conflict
situations in the field. Since recent studies provided evidence for a lack of transfer
from the skills learned to the application in the field (Jager, Klatt and Bliesener, 2013;
Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015), the focus on the best technical or tactical
solution to cope with such situations is one avenue to pursue in order to optimise
police training (Renden, Savelsbergh and Oudejans, 2016; Körner and Staller,
!
208
2018a). CPD activities in police training, like workshops and seminars, mainly involve
police training specific content, like technical or tactical behaviour. As such it is not
surprising, that this domain specific content knowledge is actually picked up by
coaches from this source as the current data showed. Also, within these settings,
information of past operations or incidents is well transported via case studies and
anecdotical evidence complimenting the need of police trainers for further knowledge
within these areas. This also resonates with the need for social interaction between
other coaches and colleagues, that CPD activities regular promote and where
discussions and exchange with peers are promoted and facilitated.
Besides the need for specific content knowledge, the findings of the current study also
support the interpretation that police trainers long for police training specific
pedagogical knowledge, since police trainers reported that (a) they generally wanted
to know more about pedagogical aspects and (b) they prefer nonformal and in-formal
sources to acquire their knowledge. Research has consistently highlighted the
importance of gaining coaching knowledge through informal, self-directed learning
situations (Lemyre, Trudel and Durand-Bush, 2007; Erickson et al., 2008; Mallett et
al., 2009; Stoszkowski and Collins, 2015), which is also in line with findings from
Stoszkowski and Collins (2015) who identified other coaches and colleagues as
important sources of coaching knowledge. Interactions among coaches can provide
valuable learning situations, in which coaching issues are discussed and strategies
are developed, experimented upon and evaluated to resolve these issues (Gilbert and
Trudel, 2001; Lemyre, Trudel and Durand-Bush, 2007). Therefore, self-directed
learning activities allow police trainers to tackle their specific coaching issues, an
aspect that is more difficult to focus on in formal learning settings, where the agenda
is somewhat fixed by the ones delivering the program. The limited impact of formal
coaching courses has been documented throughout the coaching literature
(Abraham, Collins and Martindale, 2006; Lemyre, Trudel and Durand-Bush, 2007;
Jones, Armour and Potrac, 2010). A possible explanation is that coach-education
programs fail to cover complex contextual factors in the specific sport coaching
environment (Lemyre, Trudel and Durand-Bush, 2007; Jones, Armour and Potrac,
2010). This is also supported by the reported need for police trainers to know more
about police training specific content knowledge and pedagogical aspects, and by
interview data of police trainers (Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019d), who reported a
lack of context specifity towards police training within formal coaching courses.
!
209
The reported reasons for preferring specific sources provided further explanations for
what coaches need in order to find coaching knowledge useful. Police trainers
reported that they preferred specific sources, because they perceive the source as
(a) high in quality, (b) valid for providing knowledge grounded in reality and (c) an
opportunity that promotes valuable social interaction. The perceived quality of the
source and the content that is grounded in reality, also point towards the need for
coaching solutions that work and tackle the specific issues of police trainers. Likewise,
exchange and discussions with coaches and colleagues, provide ample opportunities
for conveying knowledge regarding specific solutions of encountered problems in the
field settings (Cassidy and Rossi, 2006) and may as such be reported as a reason for
a preferred source. However, while the reported criteria of being high in quality and
grounded in reality provide a functional reference point for what knowledge is needed
and where to get it from, there is a problem attached to that argument. In the self-
defence domain, a reference to reality has been identified as a major selling point for
technical and tactical behaviour advocated by different self-defence systems (Staller
et al., 2016). However, research indicates that the conception of what works in self-
defence situations differs between individuals (Heil, Staller and Körner, 2017a, 2019).
This may provide a rationale for the reported need of coaches to acquire further
knowledge about the criterion environment (“the reality”). However, if anecdotes of
colleagues are used as a primary source for information about the criterion
environment compared to relying on sound and rigorous analyses of operational
situations (Staller and Körner, 2019b), police trainers view on reality might not
accurately reflect reality.
Concerning their last meaningful learning experience, the surveyed police trainers
predominately reported police-specific content knowledge, like tactics and
techniques, as nearly twice as often as pedagogical knowledge as the last learned
aspect that they found being useful. The acquired knowledge was predominantly
acquired in non-formal and informal learning settings. Specifically, the source for
pedagogical knowledge were mainly informal learning settings, whereas domain-
specific content knowledge was mainly acquired though non-formal learning settings.
All knowledge topics could be applied in practice in nearly 80% of the cases. These
findings show that (a) police trainers mainly find and use context-specific content and
pedagogical knowledge in non-formal and informal learnings settings compared to
formal learning settings and that (b) informal learning settings are the main sources
for pedagogical knowledge, whereas non-formal learning settings are the primary
source for domain-specific content knowledge. This adds to the current data from
!
210
coaches’ preferred sources and topics, suggesting formal coaching courses may lack
context specifity and as such direct applicability for police trainers.
The dominant difference between reports of police-specific content and pedagogical
knowledge in the last meaningful learning experience indicates a shortfall of
pedagogical knowledge compared to police-specific knowledge and might explain a
prevalence of observed out-dated pedagogical approaches (Birzer, 2003; Cushion,
2020; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021). Recent studies advocate for
strengthening the focus on pedagogical aspects of police training centred coach
education (Staller and Zaiser, 2015b; Nota and Huhta, 2019; Staller and Körner,
2019a; Cushion, 2020). Knowledge of pedagogy is considered an attribute of
coaching excellence (Nash and Collins, 2006; Abraham and Collins, 2011a), which is
widely acknowledged by sport coaches (Stoszkowski and Collins, 2015). While some
police trainers acknowledged the need for pedagogical knowledge, many more
reported the need for police training specific content knowledge. Such views may
reflect the “shadowy existence” the topic of pedagogy has in the German police
training domain (Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019d; Staller and Körner, 2019b). While
police training specific content (e.g. tactical behaviour and use of force) and “ologies”
(e.g. psychology) are explicitly referenced in the official regulations about how police
training coaches in Germany should be qualified for their work (PDV211, 2014), there
is no direct mention of the need of pedagogical knowledge.
When asked about their last learning experience, police trainers reported that they
primarily acquired pedagogical knowledge trough self-directed informal learning
settings. This further supports the notion that finding and tapping into the sources of
such knowledge primarily rests in the hands of police trainers. This adds to evidence
from interview data from police trainers reporting that the potential for pedagogy for
police training has not been recognised comprehensively within policing (Körner,
Staller and Kecke, 2019d). As such, it may be fruitful to further strengthen and
communicate the value of pedagogy for effective coaching in police training (Körner
and Staller, 2018a).
8.6.2 Need for Knowledge Structures for Reflection
The synthesis of the results indicate that police trainers are in need of knowledge
structures that allow for reflection, especially when they come in contact with new
information. The findings yield that police trainers prefer police-specific content
knowledge more than pedagogical knowledge and draw mainly from informal
!
211
learnings settings, especially from interactions and observations of other coaches.
Also, related to their last meaningful learning experience, police trainers reported that
other coaches and colleagues are a useful source and that pedagogical knowledge
is primarily acquired through self-directed informal learning activities. Finally, the vast
majority of recently acquired knowledge has been directly applied.
While these findings do not directly indicate a need of knowledge structures that allow
for the filtering and reflection of new information, they may serve as an explanation
for results reported in other studies (Birzer, 2003; Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Abraham, et al., 2021c; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021) indicating that
police trainers use out-dated pedagogical approaches and that declarative knowledge
structures are missing allowing for a critical reflection of police training delivery
(Körner and Staller, 2018a; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021c).
In order to tackle out-dated pedagogical approaches, police trainers need to be aware
of what approach they are using and what assumptions about learning governs their
behaviour as a coach. They also need alternative approaches with the underlying
knowledge of why a specific approach might be useful in a given situation. Acquiring
this knowledge and being able to reflect on it seems hard to achieve through self-
directed learning activities, which was predominately reported as the main source for
pedagogical knowledge. Instead, it seems more likely that coaches stick to the
pedagogical approach they know, which seems to be a traditional approach to
learning (Birzer, 2003; Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021c;
Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021). Without the knowledge structures about
pedagogical approaches, and without guidance for what and where to look for new
information, self-directed learning activities may become a self-reinforcing
mechanism for traditional pedagogical approaches (Hoy and Murphy, 2001).
This potential lack of reflecting capacity also becomes problematic when police
trainers draw knowledge from social interactions with peers and observation. The
main purpose of the coaching environment is coaching the trainees – and not coach
learning (Trudel, Gilbert and Werthner, 2010; Stoszkowski and Collins, 2015).
Instead, research indicates that coach learning within this environment is problematic
(Gilbert and Trudel, 2004b). For coaches it is hard to know how appropriate or relevant
shared information by other coaches is, particularly considering the differing needs of
both coaches and participants and the differing contexts within which coaches coach
(Stoszkowski and Collins, 2015). Just because a “successful” coach applies a specific
method or uses a specific drill, does not necessarily mean that it will be appropriate
!
212
or effective for another coach in another context (Abraham and Collins, 2011a;
Cushion, Ford and Williams, 2012). Likewise, this argument holds true for police
training specific content, like technical or tactical behaviour. Just because on operator
successfully applies a specific technique in a specific situation does not necessarily
mean that the application of the same technique will be effective for another officer
and/or in another situation (Staller and Körner, 2020a). Moreover, there is evidence
from the sport coaching domain that the social milieu of coaches encourages
perceiving training aspects as relevant that actually are not (Nelson, Cushion and
Potrac, 2013), and that much of the coaching practice that coaches observe and
discuss in the coaching environment is more influenced by tradition (Abraham, Collins
and Martindale, 2006; Lemyre, Trudel and Durand-Bush, 2007; Jones, Armour and
Potrac, 2010) than the critical consideration of current research (Stoszkowski and
Collins, 2015). The precedence of traditional knowledge has also been identified in
observational studies of police training (Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021).
In sum, even though when reflected against the current literature the coaches of the
current study seem aware of what they need, it seems that they do not seek this in a
sufficiently critical and reflective way and via the best routes.
In order to engage in meaningful discussion with other coaches and colleagues, a
declarative knowledge base is needed to allow coaches to reflect new information
against (Nash and Collins, 2006; Abraham and Collins, 2011a; Staller, Körner and
Abraham, 2020). However, the current results indicate that newly acquired knowledge
is directly applied, suggesting that the knowledge has been critically reflected upon
before application or that it has been uncritically applied. In the case of an uncritical
application of newly acquired knowledge this would suggest that many participants
may lack an overall knowledge structure against which they can compare, contrast,
and reflect new knowledge against. Evidence from recent studies investigating the
planning, delivery and reflection of police training (Cushion, 2020; Staller, Körner,
Heil, Abraham, et al., 2021c; Staller, Körner, Heil, Klemmer, et al., 2021) indicate that
this might be the case. The lack of declarative knowledge has been pointed out as
problematic in sport (Martindale and Collins, 2013; Stoszkowski and Collins, 2014,
2015) and martial arts domains (Staller, Körner and Abraham, 2020). The need for
such knowledge structures, providing clear and justifiable criteria against which
questions, practice, habits, standards, values and beliefs can be reflected against
have been continuously highlighted as being important with regards to coaching
practice (Gilbert and Trudel, 2001; Abraham, Collins and Martindale, 2006; Abraham
and Collins, 2011a). As such, without these structures, there is potential for police
!
213
training coaches (a) to uncritically adopt information from the dominant culture,
especially if the main source of learning is another coach or someone who is
perceived as an expert without necessarily being one (Staller and Körner, 2020b),
and (b) to incorporate information through self-directed learning settings without
appropriate filters. Strengthening the acquisition of declarative knowledge structures
within police trainers would prevent the implementation of potentially undesired,
ineffective and/or dangerous practices that are otherwise simply being accepted at
face value (Rynne and Mallett, 2014).
Furthermore, the need for knowledge structures for reflection also concerns the
choice of where police trainers look for new information and knowledge. When asked
to identify the source of the last thing learned that they found useful, it is notably that
a portion of the CPD activities from which knowledge was drawn were privately
attended seminars, workshops or courses. This adds to findings indicating that police
trainers do what they do because they like it and are privately invested in it and as
such are influenced by their personal background stories, especially with regards to
martial arts or self-defence systems (Körner, Staller and Kecke, 2019e). On the one
hand, the finding might suggest that police trainers are highly engaged in their subject
matter; however, on the other hand, it might suggest that there are perceived gaps in
content and/or knowledge provided by Police programmes that motivated trainers
may be seeking out. Especially in the light of a lack of higher levels of reflection
concerning the assumptions governing their behaviour this may become problematic.
For example, communicative and de-escalative conflict resolution strategies in police
training have been identified as blind spots in the delivery of police training
(Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a; Staller, Körner, Heil,
Klemmer, et al., 2021). As such, a police trainer who attends a physical combat and
fighting workshop, needs to be aware if the taught content is needed for further
becoming a better coach, if he or she just likes the content or both. It may be in
advisable, that police trainers remain self-reflexive about that issue.
8.6.3 Practical Implications
First, coach education in police training has to context specific. The context within a
police trainer operate may differ widely (Staller and Körner, 2020b): from teaching
recruits at the academy over a longer period of time and CPD activities for regular
officers, to the training of special operators. Each context differs with regards to the
wants and needs of the learners, the curriculum, the learning environment and the
organisational context. Police trainers seek out applicable knowledge tackling their
!
214
specific problems in the field. As such coach education in police training has to identify
and specify the specific context police trainers operate in a provide the structures and
resources that police trainer can operate with in their specific context.
Second, police trainers have to be aware that coaching in in the law enforcement
domain is a pedagogical endeavour (Basham, 2014; Körner and Staller, 2018a). The
current data implies that police trainers want a better understanding of pedagogy. As
such, it is important that nonformal coaching activities are built around pedagogical
knowledge and are reflected upon from this perspective. A strong focus on
pedagogical aspects in nonformal (and formal) learning settings, may result in
pedagogical issues becoming the topic of informal activities as well. It is important to
note that this does not call for downsizing the importance of police training specific
content knowledge. However, valuing the coaching process as a decision-making
process (Abraham and Collins, 2011a) and as such a focus on knowledge structures
allowing for the effective plan, implementation and review of learning environments,
may be beneficial for formal coach courses as well as for nonformal and informal
learning situations. Thinking and reflecting tools such as the Coaching Practice
Planning and Reflecting Framework (Muir et al., 2011, 2015) or reflective cards
(Hughes, Lee and Chesterfield, 2009) may help coaches with the demands of this
ongoing, dynamic and adaptive process of coaching. Consequently, regulations about
the qualifications and the development of police training coaches have to account for
the need of pedagogical knowledge, and police training coaching courses have to be
designed to cover these aspects and promote the development of the needed
knowledge structures.
Third, it seems that police training coaches are in need of being able to critically and
open-mindedly reflect on information they come across. Since social interactions with
other coaches and colleagues and in self-directed learning settings seem to provide
valuable context-specific knowledge for the coaches, the need to be wary, critical and
open minded to make the best use of these interactions. Preparing police trainers for
continuously making the best out of informal and nonformal learning opportunities
may be one of the main goals of formal coaching education in police training. In order
to achieve this, formal coach education in police training has to be fundamentally
changed. Stoskowski and Collins (2015) suggest to equip coaches in formal learning
with the structures ensuring critical and reflective thinking in informal and nonformal
learning settings and to implement coach learning “episodes” aiming at uncovering
and challenging pre-existing values and beliefs that coaches may have acquired with
!
215
regards to a certain topic. Based on these experiences, context specific theoretical
knowledge could be introduced to provoke, stimulate debate and to raise awareness
of more effective constructs relating to that topic (Werthner and Trudel, 2006).
Planned learning episodes used to check, re-visit and monitor the appropriateness of
new beliefs and knowledge and regular interactions in the coaching context could
then interspersed and periodically implemented. This would allow coaches to move
forward towards a more critical understanding of their thinking, reasoning and
behaviour (Cushion, Armour and Jones, 2003; Abraham, Muir and Morgan, 2010;
Stoszkowski and Collins, 2015), and reduce the copy and paste mentality of some
coaches.
8.6.4 Limitations
There are limitations inherent to the survey approach employed by this study. Since
police trainers answered the survey questions on their own, potential biases in the
way participants perceive questions associated with not being able to clarify the
responses may have contributed to potential biases in the survey responses (Evans
and Mathur, 2005). Hence, future studies in police training could incorporate more
interactive approaches (e.g. interviews) to further illicit how knowledge structures are
developed in police training. Furthermore, participants in this survey were mainly
recruited from three police agencies (Saxony, Hesse and Austria). Although no
differences in patterns of responses were detected between the three main
communities during the analysis, caution is warranted with regards to the
generalisation of the results, especially if states fundamentally differ with regards to
coach education in police training. Future studies should therefore incorporate other
states and federal agencies as well.
8.7 Conclusion
The current study focused on coaching knowledge in police training. Specifically, it
aimed at answering questions about (a) the preferred sources of knowledge, (b) the
topics that coaches acquired new information from and what the need to know more
about and (c) and how they apply the acquired information. First, the results showed
that police trainers tend to prefer context-specific knowledge related to police-specific
content knowledge, as well as to pedagogical knowledge. Second, while being
reported as important, pedagogical knowledge has not been assigned the same
importance than police-specific content knowledge and is mainly acquired in self-
directed learning formats. In the light of observed out-dated pedagogical approaches
(Cushion, 2020) and findings that pedagogy is not in the central focus of coach
!
216
education in police training, this seems to be a crucial aspect to tackle at an
organisational level with regards to police training coach education. Third, the findings
show nonformal and informal learnings settings are a major source for acquiring new
coaching knowledge. In order to make best use of these settings police trainers need
the declarative knowledge structures allowing to be wary, open-minded and critically
reflective about new information.
!
217
Chapter 9: General Discussion
9 General Discussion
!
218
Police training is an important component in ensuring the safety of officers while
performing their regular duties (Buttle, 2007; Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Cushion, 2020).
However, besides its practical significance, research regarding coaching in the
domain of police training is scarce. The current work builds on first results that aimed
at optimising learning environments in police training by synthesizing knowledge from
the sport coaching domain with police training (Staller, 2015c; Staller and Zaiser,
2015b; Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017). The overarching aim of this research was
to provide evidence-based guidance for optimising coaching in police training. This
was addressed through mutually informing objectives aligned to that aim that build
the structure for the chapters within this thesis. These included, the wants and
subjective needs of participants concerning positive and negative aspects of police
training (Chapter 4); the perception of recruits on skill transfer from training to the real
world (Chapter 5); the content that is needed to prepare for physical conflict situations
(Chapter 6); the actual structure and delivery of police training with the associated
planning and reflection of coaches (Chapter 7); and finally, the sources, topics and
application of coaching knowledge of police trainers (Chapter 8). The results have
been discussed in detail in the respective chapters. The following chapter discusses
key findings related to the general aim of the research and synthesizes them into
recommendations for coaching in police training. By doing so the current body of work
provides the basis for further optimising coaching within police training and thus
contributes to a further professionalization in that domain (Körner et al., 2018).
The findings align with the knowledge domains that the who-what-how model of
coaching is predicated upon (Abraham et al., 2015; Muir et al., 2015; Till et al., 2019).
These knowledge structures surround (a) the learner (the who), (b) the domain-
specific content (the what), (c) the principles of skill acquisition and learning (the who),
(d) the context in which coaching takes plays, (e) coaches’ existing knowledge,
beliefs, values and behaviours and (f) the coaching process per se. As such, the who-
what-how model serves as reflection template for structuring the discussion of the
results of the current thesis. Concerning the distinct knowledge domains, the findings
in this thesis allow for a deeper understanding of the learners in police academy
training (Chapter 3, 4, 7) the content (Chapter 4, 5, 6), the learning environment
(Chapter 4, 5, 6, 7), the coaching practice (Chapter 7, 8), the self (Chapter 7, 8) and
the context (Chapter 8).
!
219
9.1 Knowledge Domains of Coaching in Police Training
9.1.1 Understanding the Who
Police recruits perceive police training as an important and relevant part of their
training (Chapter 4). However, immediate relevance of the content is mainly perceived
with upcoming performance tests of police training skills in mind; although, graduating
recruits acknowledged that they were able to regularly apply learned skills in the field,
as long as the situation was less complex and not chaotic.
Regarding the training itself, the practical rather than theoretical feature of police
training was motivational, as was being allowed to solve scenarios and tasks
autonomously were motivating factors. On the other hand, isolated, de-contextualised
practice and static repetitions, and the lack of skill development opportunities focused
on coping with chaotic and highly dynamic situations, reported by recruits in Chapter
4 and 5, respectively, and observed in Chapter 7, contributed negatively to motivation
and engagement.
The motivational impact of relevance resonates with recent research on mandatory
police training (Honess, 2016, 2020). If officers are aware of the likelihood of
experiencing a given situation, they are more likely to attach importance to training
content designed to deal with such situations (Kaminski and Martin, 2000). Therefore,
thoroughly aligning the content, training activities and coaching behaviour of police
training to the demands met in the field is crucial to optimally foster skill development
(Abraham et al., 2015; Muir et al., 2015). This need for alignment must also extend to
the design of police training testing environments. In keeping with other learning
environments, results indicated that recruits (learners) were aware of the connection
between learning and assessment (Entwistle and Peterson, 2004; Mallett and
Dickens, 2009). Police training was perceived as particulary relevant when linked with
upcoming performance test. It is crucial therefore that these performance tests are
representatively designed (Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017). If this is not the case,
recruits maybe motivated to engage in activities and practice skills that are relevant
for the test, but not for the field (Entwistle and Peterson, 2004).
Concerning the police training activities, the findings are in line with research showing
that an autonomy-supportive training climate is linked with adaptive outcomes such
as superior performance, increased effort and self-determined motivation
(Vansteenkiste et al., 2004; Cheon, Reeve and Moon, 2012; Occhino et al., 2014).
For example, a recent study (Behzadnia, Mohammadzadeh and Ahmadi, 2017)
!
220
provided evidence that a learning environment that emphasised learning through
discovery; movement variability; the manipulation of constraints in order to guide the
emergence of specific motor behaviours and promote self-organisation; and unique
optimal movement patterns for each learner; led to greater increases in autonomous
motivation and skill learning than a traditional learning environment, where ‘optimal’
behavioural patterns were prescribed and emphasis was put on teaching technical
skills in isolated practice. In the domain of police training, an autonomy supporting
approach to training seems to be linked with higher motivation, engagement and
performance (Staller, Bertram, et al., 2018; Staller, Körner, Heil, Abraham, et al.,
2021b), and has also been recently suggested as a way to improve shortcomings in
the adherence to safety regulations within police training (Schwering et al., 2019).
As such, adopting pedagogical approaches to police training that allow for the
integration of skill in representatively designed training tasks (Pinder et al., 2011,
2014; Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017) and allow for individual action capabilities and
resources to be put into practice (Jaeckle, Benoliel and Nickel, 2019) may prove a
fruitful avenue for enhancing police recruits motivation for and engagement in police
training. However, coaches should carefully balance the skill level of the recruits
against the challenge level of the training task, since too challenging task can
negatively impact motivation. For example, a recent study focusing on investigating
differences between a linear and a non-linear approach to teaching police recruits
how to defend against a knife attack indicated, that recruits subjectively felt safer
when provided with clear guidance about how to defend the attack (Koerner, Staller
and Kecke, 2020). In line with this, the interpretation of the results of the studies in
this thesis does not advocate the complete removal of isolated training, but to note its
limitations when alternative options exist.
Taken together, recommendations concerning optimising coaching with regards to
the wants and needs of the learner include the following:
• Consideration of the need for autonomy within learners and designing
autonomy-supportive learning climates. This includes allowing and fostering
for individual technical and tactical solutions to occur and to account for
individual action capabilities and resources. (Recommendation 1)
• Ensuring that the taught content aligns with the demands in the field. It is
important that this alignment is properly justified and communicated with the
learners. (Recommendation 2)
!
221
• Ensuring that training and testing tasks are representatively designed.
(Recommendation 3)
9.1.2 Understanding the What
The findings presented in the thesis suggest the existence of a significant gap
between what is taught in the learning environment and what is needed in the criterion
environment. Police training delivery mainly focuses on extreme threats, neglecting
the role of communication and de-escalative behaviour in the context of conflict
management (see Chapter 5 and Chapter 7), yet expert self-defence coaches
(Chapter 6) ranked de-escalative behaviour as a distinguishing characteristic of
expert performers in conflict situations. Similarly, graduating recruits identified a need
for adaptability and flexibility to cope with the ever-changing demands of conflict
situations, and expert self-defence coaches (Chapter 5) agreed that situational
awareness and decision-making should be prominent within a self-defence training
curriculum and adaptably coping with violent confrontations requires a broad variety
of skills (including communication, de-escalation, situational awareness, controlled
aggression, etc.). Yet, observation of current practice (Chapter 7) suggests that such
skills are insufficiently trained, since there is a strong focus on technical training. The
planning and reflection of police trainers surrounding their training (Chapter 7) as well
as the observation of the current practice (Chapter 7) suggest, that police training is
not constructively aligned towards developing competent police officers.
The identified gap between what is taught and what is needed in the field supports
and extends a gathering body of knowledge regarding what officers need in order to
cope with the demands in the field (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Preddy, Stefaniak and
Katsioloudis, 2019b; Todak and White, 2019). The need for adaptive and flexible
behaviour has been continuously emphasized in the domain of police training (Staller
and Zaiser, 2015b; Boulton and Cole, 2016; Staller and Abraham, 2016; Preddy,
Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019a), with situational awareness identified as a desired
characteristic of performance (Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Nota and Huhta, 2019;
Preddy, Stefaniak and Katsioloudis, 2019b). Likewise, the need for the development
of communication and de-escalation skills has been highlighted by empirical studies
(Rajakaruna et al., 2017; Todak and James, 2018) as well as by conceptual papers
(Oliva, Morgan and Compton, 2010; Zaiser and Staller, 2015)
The reason for the gap and the problems concerning constructive alignment may lie
in police trainers and curriculum designers lack of declarative knowledge concerning
!
222
the development and the dynamics of aggressive and conflictual situations (Staller,
Körner and Abraham, 2020). Coaches are clearly interested in knowledge about the
dynamics of operational situations (Chapter 8), but the reliance on nonformal and
informal sources, without the declarative knowledge structures to reflect new
information against, may result in biased decisions about the content of police
training, which contributes to the observed gap. Furthermore, the tendency of
coaches to view conflict management through their lens of expertise may further the
divide. Police training coaches in Germany mainly seem to be recruited based on their
biographical background within martial arts and/or shooting (Körner, Staller and
Kecke, 2019e). Therefore, the inclination of coaches to teach what they know best
rather than facilitate a more holistic conflict management approach, including
communication and de-escalation tactics, may be a limiting factor.
The observed linear and modularized approach to training may provide further
difficulties for the constructive alignment of police training. The observed training
settings seemed to be split according to the solutions of problems in the field (e.g.
arrest and self-defence techniques, shooting, tactical behaviour) and not based on
the problem (e.g. domestic violence conflict, responding to a person with mental
illness). This may lead towards a lack of competence in learners to adapt to different
problems in the field with their individual skill set (Körner and Staller, 2018a; Rutter,
2020). Furthermore, the perception (based on the linear approach to training) that
complex settings can only be addressed, when certain skills are developed may lead
to a lack of opportunities for individuals to cope with complex settings if they have not
developed the isolated basic skills, that police trainers think are needed. An
alternative approach of designing curriculums may lie in the development of a spiral
curriculum (Bruner, 1960; Harden and Stamper, 1999) that focuses on the needed
training content in a spiral fashion. A spiral curriculum emphasises the iterative
revisiting of topics, subjects or themes throughout the program. The topics are visited
with increasing levels of difficulties with linking new information directly back to
learning in previous phases of the spiral. With each visit of topic within the spiral the
competence of learners increase till the overall objective of the program are achieved.
Hence, the following aspects are recommended to be considered in order to further
optimise the content of the police training curriculum:
• Focusing on the development of a broader skill set for coping with conflict in
the field, at the expense of technical training of distinct techniques.
Particularly, the area of communication and de-escalation, situational
!
223
awareness, controlled aggression and specific training activities targeting
adaptive behaviour need to be developed. (Recommendation 4)
• Designing of a spiral curriculum around the needed concepts compared to a
modularized, linear approach. By structuring police training content in this
spiral fashion, where the main concepts are learned in an iterative and
progressive fashion, skill development of police officers could take place on a
much more individual level by maintaining the demands posed be the field on
each skill level. (Recommendation 5)
9.1.3 Understanding the How
Chapter 7 provided evidence that the macro- and microstructure of police training is
generally built upon a modularized and linear understanding of skill learning that limits
skill development of the police recruits. Furthermore, the design of the training
activities generally lacked representativeness and often resulted in relatively low time-
on-task. This particularly concerns opportunities for skill development, that were
representatively designed and allowed for problem solving.
The compromised representativeness of police training learning activities (Jager, Klatt
and Bliesener, 2013; Renden, Nieuwenhuys, et al., 2015; Rajakaruna et al., 2017;
Cushion, 2020) and the use of traditional linear pedagogies, employing a modularized
and teacher-centred approach, are recurring themes of research in the police training
domain (Birzer, 2003; Basham, 2014; Cushion, 2020). Despite recommendations to
increase the amount of representative practice (Nota and Huhta, 2019) and to move
to a more learner-centred approach in order to optimise training (Birzer, 2003;
Sjöberg, Karp and Rantatalo, 2016; Staller and Körner, 2019a) linear models of
learning are still employed by police practitioners (Nota and Huhta, 2019). A reason
for this adherence to traditional pedagogies may lie in the socialisation of police
trainers during their own time as learners in learning settings within the police. Without
the declarative knowledge of the underlying assumptions of one’s own employed
pedagogical approach, it is hard for the coach to take another perspective (Hoy and
Murphy, 2001). This may provide a rationale for why traditional pedagogies are hard
to overcome (Moy et al., 2015). In order to tackle this problem, the need to experience
and theoretically understand alternative pedagogical approaches in a coach
education setting has been recommended (Moy et al., 2015).
Furthermore, consequently incorporating the paradigm of representative learning
design into police training (Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017; Körner and Staller,
!
224
2018a; Staller and Körner, 2019a) right from the start may be a fruitful avenue to
pursue. This will provide learners with the opportunities to immediately experience
representatively designed simulations and to develop their skills within these settings
instead of first learning isolated skills in de-contextualised settings, that then are later
practiced in scenario-based trainings (Staller and Körner, 2019a).
Hence, recommendations in order to optimise coaching concerning the design of
learning environments include:
• Coach learning and development should focus on providing police trainers
with different pedagogical approaches and the underlying assumptions of
these approaches to allow for context-specific use of them. This includes
focusing on learner-centred approaches that optimise time-on-task for
learners in representatively designed training activities. (Recommendation 6)
9.1.4 Understanding the Context
There is a tendency towards preparing recruits for the use of force rather than
communication when resolving conflict (Chapter 7). Indeed, police trainers did not
mention the need for knowledge pertaining to communication or de-escalation to
make them a better coach (Chapter 8), which counters the panel of expert self-
defence coaches view that such skills should be key components of self-defence
training (Chapter 5). Furthermore, data from Chapter 8 indicates that coaches are
situated in a professional setting that promote the acquisition of domain-specific
knowledge over knowledge structures affecting the delivery of content. As a result,
the structure and organisation of police training and the actual delivery of content
seem to be built on traditional linear approaches to skill learning (Chapter 7).
Regarding the culture of coach learning within police training, Chapter 8 indicates that
social interaction is perceived as a major and preferred source of acquiring new
knowledge, whereas formal coach education courses are rarely preferred. This seems
to be problematic insofar that well-developed declarative knowledge structures are
required to check and challenge the practical application and utility of new knowledge
and appear lacking in the population sampled (Chapter 8).
These results add to the body of research indicating that police culture is heavily
influenced by tradition (Karp and Stenmark, 2011; Mitchell and Lewis, 2017). Despite
benefiting from research, there is a reluctance to adopt evidence-based policing
research into practice (Rosenbaum, 2010; Rojek, Alpert and Smith, 2012).
!
225
This extends to the specific context of police training, where similarities to the
acculturation of pedagogical approaches in teacher learning seem to exist (Hoy and
Murphy, 2001; Moy et al., 2015). Becoming a teacher involves considerable time
spent as a student at the receiving end of teaching. Therefore, there is opportunity for
learning about the pedagogy of teaching and learning. Likewise, police training
coaches spend considerable time as a student of conflict management. As such,
police trainers are also likely to have acquired implicit beliefs about how to design
learning environments and how to behave as a coach. This provides one explanation
for why coaches are more inclined to be biased towards their own experiences
compared to empirical-based knowledge and theories that they have been exposed
to (Oberfield, 2012; Fridell and Lim, 2016; Spencer, Charbonneau and Glaser, 2016).
The strong hierarchical structure within the police culture might fuel the stabilisation
of these implicit beliefs, as such structures seem to limit the reflection based on
empirical results (Mitchell and Lewis, 2017). In order to change police culture, it is
suggested to adopt a stepwise approach to evidence-based practice within the police
instead of aiming for a complete transformation of the culture (Sherman, 2015). In line
with discussions about the professionalisation of policing (Green and Gates, 2014)
and police training in particular (Körner et al., 2018), further broadening the
knowledge base of coaches and the adoption of a lifelong commitment to learning
should be cornerstones of professional police training practice.
As such, recommendations concerning the context of police training are as follows:
• Evidence-based practice should be adopted. Valuing reproducible evidence
over tradition or beliefs should be taught and incorporated in police training
coach education. Decisions concerning the organisation, structure and
delivery of police training should be reflected against current evidence.
(Recommendation 7)
9.1.5 Understanding Self
Chapter 7 showed that coaches insufficiently reflect on their planning and delivery of
practice. Specifically, coaches seem to mainly engage in lower-order reflection, in that
they tend not to question the assumptions governing their coach behaviour. One
potential reason for this is that declarative knowledge structures of police training
coaches are underdeveloped (Chapter 8) to the extent that coaches are not
adequately equipped to critically reflect on their planning and delivery. This lack of
self-reflection capability also proves to be problematic when exposed to new
!
226
knowledge in nonformal and informal learning settings, as ‘unchecked’ knowledge
seems to be implanted directly into practice.
Becoming a reflective practitioner is seen as an essential part of coach learning
(Gilbert and Trudel, 2001; Cushion, Armour and Jones, 2003; Gallimore, Gilbert and
Nater, 2014). It is considered a distinguished feature of coaching effectiveness (Côté
and Gilbert, 2009) and expertise (Knowles, Borrie and Telfer, 2007; Irwin, Hanton and
Kerwin, 2010; Nash, Sproule and Horton, 2011). As such, a lack of self-reflexive ability
on the coaches’ side is likely to reduce the effectiveness of police training
programmes. Especially, since coach learning activities mainly take place in
nonformal and informal learning settings, the capacity to reflect experiences against
declarative knowledge structures is essential.
Second, the lack of reflexivity concerning the governing assumptions of one’s own
behaviour my result in an unreflected transmission of values and beliefs, that may
lead to learning outcomes that are diametral to what has been intended. The
existence of a hidden curriculum has regularly been evidenced in police training (D.
White, 2006; Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a; Cushion, 2020). Since the
current work highlighted the prominent role of the coach in the perception of recruits
(Chapter 4), police training may particularly influence recruits’ perspectives, values
and beliefs to central aspects of policing (Spencer, Charbonneau and Glaser, 2016),
specifically how conflicts have to be managed (Bengston, 2017; Staller, Körner, Heil
and Kecke, 2019a). These may include a general mindset towards policing
(Stoughton, 2015, 2016; McLean et al., 2019) but also values and beliefs about
pedagogical theories and concepts (Hoy and Murphy, 2001; Basham, 2014; Shipton,
2019) and the value of empirical evidence (Rojek, Alpert and Smith, 2012; Mitchell
and Lewis, 2017). This broad influence of the police training coach, which is beyond
the pure delivery of technical and tactical skills, supports the perspective that police
training coaches are more educators than instructors (Basham, 2014). However, the
lack of research regarding coaching in police training suggests that this pivotal role of
the police trainer in transporting values has been widely unnoticed. As a
consequence, an active examination of the implicit effects of training is warranted
(Staller, Körner, Heil and Kecke, 2019a).
Therefore, recommendations facilitating understanding of the self within police
training coaches are as follows:
!
227
• Self-reflexivity should be a cornerstone of coach education, and police training
more broadly. This especially concerns the governing assumptions of
coaches’ behaviour regarding pedagogical approaches and values and beliefs
towards the management of conflicts. (Recommendation 8)
9.1.6 Understanding coaching practice
The findings from the interviews of coaches in Chapter 7 are consistent with research
showing that police training coaches rarely engage in systematic planning and
reflective activities concerning the delivery of police training (Cushion, 2020). As
evidenced in Chapter 7 this seems lead to coaching practices that aim at “ticking the
box” with regards to what has been planned for a given day by default (e.g. training
session 8 equals introduction of technique X). This approach does not acknowledge
the need for adjusting the current practice to the specific context on that day. As such,
it seems that the complex and dynamic nature of coaching practice is neglected within
police training. However, research has indicated that this mechanistic
conceptualisation of coaching seems widespread with the German police (Körner and
Staller, 2018a, 2019c, 2019b). One possible explanation is that pedagogy, as a topic,
is absent from official coach development documentation (PDV211, 2014) and so
perhaps out of the focus of police trainers (Körner and Staller, 2019c; Körner, Staller
and Kecke, 2019d). Furthermore, it might be possible that decision-makers within the
police find it beneficial to view coaching as a deterministic process, where teaching
“X” automatically leads to the learning outcome “Y” without considering influential
factors or asking the question of “Y” actually has been achieved. That being said,
Chapter 8 provided evidence that coaches perceive they need to know more about
pedagogy in police training. Yet, even though first attempts to include a coaching
model in police training have been made (Staller and Zaiser, 2015a), pedagogical
standards or concepts that help police trainers managing the demands of their
coaching practice are still scarce (Nota and Huhta, 2019). In the light of this scarcity
and given that the planning, delivery and reflecting process is central to coach
decision-making (Abraham and Collins, 2011a; Abraham et al., 2015), it would be
helpful to further adapt the who-what-how model of coaching decision-making of
police training (Staller and Zaiser, 2015a), which was based on the work of Muir and
colleagues (Muir et al., 2011; Abraham et al., 2015). Specifically, by including the
coaching self and the coaching context as two more aspects of reflection (Till et al.,
2019) , the modified version of the who-what-how model now contains six domains of
knowledge structures influencing coach decision-making in the police training
domain, which have been studied in this thesis (see Figure 9).
!
228
Reference to the model would help coach education to better develop police trainers
and police trainers to optimise their planning, delivery and reflection. Furthermore, it
would help coaches, coach developers and key decision-makers within policing to
view the coaching of police training as a continuous decision-making process instead
of a mechanistic, deterministic process.
Figure 9: The modified who-what-how model for decision-making within police training
coaching
Hence, recommendations for the understanding to the coach process are as follows:
• Adopting the modified who-what-how model for decision-making within police
training coaching (see Figure 9) to facilitate police trainers planning, delivery
and reflecting on their coaching practice in order to optimise coach decision-
making. Coach developers should consider the coaching model when
designing learning settings for coach education. (Recommendation 9)
• Coaching within police training is a professional judgement and decision-
making process and is complex and dynamic in its nature. Decision-makers in
police training should consider the coaching model as a reference point
concerning the complex nature of coaching. (Recommendation 10)
Who
are you coaching?
Understanding
of Learner
Using bio-psycho-social theories & concepts as
thinking tools to understand your
learners needs and wants
What
are you coaching?
Understanding
of Content
Using theories and concepts of aggression, violence
dynamics, communication and (non-)physical
conflict management as thinking tools coupled with
an understanding of the demands of the field to
determine the content of the program
How
are you coaching?
Understanding of
Learning Environment
Using theories and concepts of learning & skill
development as thinking tools to optimize
learning & development opportunities
Your Coaching Context
Institution/Organisation/Unit, Legislation/Regulations, Resources, Culture/Traditions,
Learners/Coaches/Superiors/Other Stakeholder Enabling & Constraining Resources
Understanding of Context
Your Coaching Self
Understanding of Self
Existing Knowledge, Beliefs, Values & Behaviors
Your Coaching
Practice
Understanding of
Planning, Delivery & Reflection
The way you facilitate your learners development
and learning through planning, delivering and
reflection practices
!
229
9.2 Overview of the Recommendations for Optimising
Coaching in Police Training
The body of evidence presented has provided grounds for a range of practical
recommendations for coaching in police training. The broad scope of the
recommendations suggests that to optimise coaching in police training there is a need
to target different levels of the (German) police system. Recently, a structural basis
for the investigation of police training was provided (Staller and Körner, 2019b).
According to this framework, police training can be reflected upon on three levels (see
Figure 10): the level of the coaching process (microlevel); the level the structure and
organisation of training and its embedment within the police organisation as a whole
(mesolevel); and at the societal level (macrolevel).
Figure 10: Levels of reflection in police training (Staller and Körner, 2019b)
At the microlevel, coaches make decisions about police training. Decisions about the
curriculum, the structure and organisation of police training, as well as coach
education and recruitment are made at the mesolevel. The proposed
recommendations target the microlevel and the mesolevel of police training.
Concurrent targeting of these two levels allows for immediate actions in a step-wise
manner, offering a gradual change in police training coaching (Sherman, 2015).
Employing this strategy is likely to take account of the individuals motivation to
contribute to change within the police (Green and Gates, 2014). As such, a holistic
approach to change involves personal in roles across the police education system to
Mesolevel
Coaching Process
Organisation / Institution
Society
Microlevel
Macrolevel
Professionalisierung des
Polizeilichen Einsatztrainings
!
230
contribute to change, with or without the support of the organisation. As such, Table
21 proposes for each of the ten recommendations emerging from this thesis the
connection to the model of coaching decision-making; the targeted level of reflection;
the personal in charge of implementing the recommendation; and the need for
organisational support.
!
231
Table 21: List of recommendations for optimising coaching in the domain of police training
No
Recommendation
Knowledge Domain
Target level
Target personal
1
Consideration of the need for autonomy within learners and designing autonomy-supportive learning climates. This
includes allowing and fostering for individual technical and tactical solutions to occur and to account for individual action
capabilities and resources.
who
micro
police trainer
coach developer
2
Ensuring that the taught content aligns with the demands in the field. It is important that this alignment is properly justified
and communicated with the learners.
who
micro
meso
police trainer
coach developer
curriculum designer
decision-maker
3
Ensuring that training and testing tasks are representatively designed.
who
micro
meso
police trainer
coach developer
curriculum designer
4
Focusing on the development of a broader skill set for coping with conflict in the field, at the expense of technical training
of distinct techniques. Particularly, the area of communication and de-escalation, situational awareness, controlled
aggression and specific training activities targeting adaptive behaviour need to be developed.
what
micro
meso
police trainer
coach developer
curriculum designer
decision-maker
5
Designing of a spiral curriculum around the needed concepts compared to a modularized, linear approach. By structuring
police training content in this spiral fashion, where the main concepts are learned in an iterative and progressive fashion,
skill development of police officers could take place on a much more individual level by maintaining the demands posed be
the field on each skill level.
what
micro
curriculum designer
6
Coach learning and development should focus on providing police trainers with different pedagogical approaches and the
underlying assumptions of these approaches to allow for context-specific use of them. This includes focusing on learner-
centred approaches that optimise time-on-task for learners in representatively designed training activities.
how
micro
police trainer
coach developer
7
Evidence-based practice should be adopted. Valuing reproducible evidence over tradition or beliefs should be taught and
incorporated in police training coach education. Decisions concerning the organisation, structure and delivery of police
training should be reflected against current evidence.
context
micro
meso
coach
coach developer
decision-maker
8
Self-reflexivity should be a cornerstone of coach education, and police training more broadly. This especially concerns the
governing assumptions of coaches’ behaviour regarding pedagogical approaches and values and beliefs towards the
management of conflicts.
self
micro
meso
coach
coach developer
decision-maker
9
Adopting the modified who-what-how model (see Figure 9) as a practical model for police trainers for planning, delivery
and reflecting on their coaching practice in order to optimise coach decision-making. Coach developers should consider
the coaching model when designing learning settings for coach education.
coaching process
micro
coach
coach developer
10
Coaching within police training is a professional judgement and decision-making process and is complex and dynamic in
its nature. Decision-makers in police training should consider the coaching model as a reference point concerning the
complex nature of coaching.
coaching process
micro
meso
coach
coach developer
decision-maker
!
!
232
9.3 Reflections as a Practitioner and Researcher
Self-reflexivity is a core concept of any qualitative research project (Tracy, 2020).
Especially in contexts that are restrictive of being accessed publicly like policing
(Jasch, 2019), qualitative research is regularly carried out by researchers that are also
practitioners in the field (Reuter, 2014; Hendy, 2018). This double role is associated
with several beneficial aspects like having a specific understanding of the context and
having access to data (Greene, 2014). However, there is a threat to objectivity due to
the subjective and potentially biased nature of the position of the researcher in relation
to the object of study. In the context of policing Hendy (2018) explicitly warns that
one’s thought pattern in the research process may be influenced by one’s own
experience. In order to ensure the trustworthiness of the findings, qualitative
researchers with the double role of working and researching in their specific domain,
should adopt a self-reflexive stance in order to mitigate potential negative influences
of the “insider role” and prevent potential biases (Greene, 2014; Hendy, 2018; Tracy,
2020). This reflexive stance has been adopted throughout the body of work. Detailed
information about this stance, that allows the reader to judge the trustworthiness of
the provided argument by him/herself has been provided in the General Methods
section. These reflections could also be included in this section, since they are
concerned with reflecting on the process of the current body of work after the majority
of the thesis was written. However, I decided to move this section in front of the
empirical chapters, since the reflections provide the reader with detailed information
about the pragmatist approach taken and how this approach influenced the studies
conducted and in the end the composition of the whole thesis. Therefore, I would
kindly refer the reader to the General Methods section for further information about
my self-reflexive stance during this project and how it influences the composition of
the final thesis.
9.4 Future Research
Overall, this thesis provides findings upon which future research can build. These
research strands involve (a) the alignment between the training and the criterion
environment, (b) coach learning and development and (c) knowledge management.
9.4.1 The Alignment Between Training and the Criterion
Environment
Concerning the alignment between training and the field, future work may further
elaborate on the discrepancies between the criterion and the learning environment.
!
233
In order to provide police training coaches with valuable information about real life
conflict, situational parameters and dynamics of conflict situations should be
investigated using objective data like body cams or CCTV footage (Nassauer and
Legewie, 2018, 2019). This may involve a focus on different contexts, depending on
where the targeted learners regular fulfil their duties. This may involve investigating
the demand of different occupational specialisations, like regular officers, criminal
detectives or special forces, but also differentiating between different areas and social
milieus that officers police (e.g. rural areas vs. cities, different communities, etc.) and
specific situations that regular occur, for example, dealing with individuals with mental
illness (Franz and Borum, 2011; Morabito !"#$%&, 2012). The research should more
specifically target understanding of skills officers need to cope with the demands
presented by specific settings. The Delphi poll provided a blueprint how this might be
done beyond the focus on self-defence situations. For example, what is needed to
influence conflict settings toward conflict resolution without the use of force (Wolfe !"#
$%&, 2020)? As part of this, future studies should also consider the value of harvesting
the knowledge of seasoned officers who may have developed effective practice-
informed strategies to cope with specific situations, which could be included into the
police training curriculum. Finally, concerning the content of training, the effectiveness
of police training programs should be investigated in a rigorous manner (Körner,
Staller and Kecke, 2019c; Wolfe !"# $%&, 2020)extends to the specific pedagogy
employed (Renden, Savelsbergh and Oudejans, 2016; Körner, Staller and Kecke,
2019c). This concerns examining the use of different pedagogical approaches and
their benefits and drawback in different contexts of police training. The pertinent
question here is how different approaches may compliment rather than oppose each
other (Price !"#$%&, 2019). Focusing on what is needed, for whom, and in what context
(Abraham and Collins, 2011a) may provide valuable, applicable information for police
trainers.
Furthermore, within the realm of transfer from training to the field, the role of testing
environments (Staller, Zaiser and Körner, 2017) should be focused upon. This
concerns the investigation of the alignment of the testing tasks with the skills needed
for coping with conflict in the field, as well as aspects of evaluation (Davids !"#$%&,
2013). Especially given the aspect that representative task design cannot be fully
achieved when evaluating the ability of coping with violent situations, it might be worth
investigating how police trainers may best achieve this. Agreeing on criteria for
representative task design (Krause !"#$%&, 2017) and evaluation (Davids !"#$%&, 2013)
in police training may be a first step in this direction.
!
234
9.4.2 Coach Learning and Development
The findings of this thesis highlight the importance of further understanding
developmental pathways of police trainers and the organisational structures
facilitating coach learning and development. The role of formal coach education
seems particularly pertinent. Specifically, the part it can play to facilitate engagement
in and learning from some of the informal and/or non-formal learning settings police
trainers prefer to source knowledge. Furthermore, not enough is known about the
police trainer recruitment process. Which competencies do human resource
departments consider essential and desirable and do these skills match those needed
to be a competent police training coach? Might there be value in selecting and
developing trainers from outside the organisation. Finally, in terms of developmental
pathways, future research might focus on the development of expertise in police
trainers and how this is achieved. The expert performance approach (Ford, Coughlan
and Williams, 2009) might be a guiding framework to use to investigate these
questions. Future studies employing this approach could identify representative tasks
that capture the essence of coaching expertise in police training; have expert (and
possibly novice) trainers participate in those tasks, recording the mechanisms that
mediate the expert's superior performance; and trace the acquisition of those skills
and mechanisms in order to promote the development of future expert police trainers.
With regard to the organisational structures within the police that support the
continued professional development of police trainers, it would be informative in the
first instance to understand how formal and informal coach education in police training
is structured and delivered. This relates to the content (the '($") and to the process
of delivery (the ()' and *)$*(+,-#./$*"+*!), as well as to the conveyed values, beliefs
and practices (the 0!%1). The who-what-how model of coaching decision-making,
employed by this thesis, again offers a framework for the investigation of coach
education programmes. This work might extend to investigating the role and
competencies of the coach developers.
Providing answers to coach learning and development questions will help police
organisations reflect on issues concerning the recruitment and the development of
police trainers and coach developers.
9.4.3 Knowledge Management
The current work suggests that high level reflection is scarce in police trainers. In the
light of this also been true at a police organisational level (Mitchell and Lewis, 2017;
!
235
Körner and Staller, 2019c), future work may focus on how the police organisation as
a whole manages knowledge in the context of police training. This concerns questions
of how the police accomplishes different levels of reflection within the organisation
(Tosey, Visser and Saunders, 2012; Tosey, 2016); how the police makes the best use
of already existing data (e.g. video footage from body-cams); and how organisational
structures can support the preservation and the development of knowledge of and for
police training (Körner and Staller, 2020c). Specifically, an application research
perspective (Lyle, 2018b; Staller and Körner, 2020b) may focus on developing and
evaluating structures, tools and procedures that support the organisation. These
might include the establishment of a “research and development department” with a
remit to inform best practice in police training (Rothwell !"# $%&, 2020) or the
development of an analysis matrix and filter methods for the collection, analysis and
application of training-relevant operational parameters (Körner and Staller, 2020c).
By valuing police training knowledge as an organisational resource and by
investigating structures and processes that can be implemented to make the best use
of this resource, will provide further avenues of research to further optimise coaching
in police training.
9.5 Limitations
Limitations of the distinct studies have been identified and discussed in the respective
chapters. However, higher-level limitations concerning the compilation of the data
reported in this thesis need acknowledging.
First, some of the provided work in the thesis seems to be inconsistent with regards
to the population sampled. Whereas for Chapter 3, 4, 6 and 7 data were obtained by
observing police training and interviewing recruits in a specific vicinity
(Mühlheim/Hesse), Chapter 8 investigated police training across a wider region (not
just Hesse), incorporating police training coaches from other states (especially
Saxony) and Austria as well. Also, chapter 5 centred on the training settings that
develop the skills to cope with physical conflict situations in general: On the one hand,
the Delpi poll sampled experts from outside the policing domain; on the other hand,
the study only targeted self-defence situations, which is a small component of police
training. The slight deviances in focus were due to the process of this PhD journey.
During the five-year research process access to participants changed due to my
career change from full time police trainer to full time academic. This resulted in
changes in data collection opportunities and a slight adaptation to the focus of the
thesis from self-defence training in general to police training. Akin to police officers
!
236
coping with conflict situations in the field for officers, the PhD journey called for
flexibility and adaptability (Ng and Ogle, 2016).
The data collection within the domain of police training presented significant and
unique challenges. These included limited time for obtaining data (interviews,
observation) due to academic and operational responsibilities of the recruits and
coping with limited number of participants due to tasks that recruits had to carry out
on the pre-arranged interview dates. This led to the problem that participants of the
interviews (Chapter 3 and 4) were not the same participants as those participating in
the observed police training (Chapter 6). Furthermore, no more recruits could be
interviewed than on the pre-arranged interview dates. As such, sample size was
determined by access rather than guided by information power (Francis !"#$%&, 2010;
Malterud, Siersma and Guassora, 2016).
Even though higher-level limitations exist, a clear focus on application and practical
relevance heightens the contribution of the thesis to the science of coaching in
general (Lyle, 2018b) and the coaching of police training in particular.
9.6 Conclusion
The current work provided evidence about (a) motivating and demotivating factors in
the structure and delivery of police training; (b) the curriculum content that is needed
in order cope with the demands in the field; (c) problems in skill development
associated with a modularised and linear approach to learning in police training; and
(d) current issues regarding police trainer knowledge and coach learning. Based on
the findings, recommendations for optimising coaching within the domain of police
training were derived, which target both coaches and the institution they serve.
The goal of the current work was not do describe an exhaustive description of
coaching in police training, but to elicit key aspects that contribute to effective
coaching within this context. As such, the thesis has led to a broader understanding
of key aspects in coaching in police training and provides several avenues for
currently underdeveloped research and the optimisation of police use of force training.
!
237
References
10 References
(Sepur, 2015)
!
238
Abraham, A. !"# $%& (2015) “Planning your coaching: A focus on youth participant
development,” in Nash, C. S. (ed.) 2/$*"+*$%# 3.)/"0# 4)$*(+,-. New York, NY:
Routledge, pp. 16–53.
Abraham, A. (2015) 5,6!/0"$,6+,-# 4)$*(+,-#$0#$#786-!9!,"# $,6#6!*+0+),#9$:+,-#
./)*!00;#<9.%+*$"+),0#1)/#*)$*(#6!=!%).9!,"#./$*"+*!#>8,.8?%+0(!6#6)*")/$%# "(!0+0@.
Preston: University of Central Lancashire.
Abraham, A. and Collins, D. J. (1998) “Examining and extending research in coach
development,” A8!0", 50(1), pp. 59–79.
Abraham, A. and Collins, D. J. (2011a) “Effective skill development: How should
athletes’ skills be developed?,” in Button, A. and Richards, H. (eds) 2!/1)/9$,*!#
.0B*()%)-B;#C#./$*"+"+),!/0#-8+6!. New York: Churchill Livingstone, pp. 207–229. doi:
10.1016/b978-0-443-06734-1.00015-8.
Abraham, A. and Collins, D. J. (2011b) “Taking the next step: Ways forward for
coaching science,” A8!0", 63(4), pp. 366–384. doi:
10.1080/00336297.2011.10483687.
Abraham, A. and Collins, D. J. (2015) “Professional Judgement and Decision Making
in Sport Coaching: To Jump Or Not To Jump,” pp. 1–7.
Abraham, A., Collins, D. J. and Martindale, R. (2006) “The coaching schematic:
Validation through expert coach consensus,” D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0#3*+!,*!0, 24(06), pp.
549–564.
Abraham, A., Muir, B. and Morgan, G. (2010) 5E# 4!,"/!#1)/# 4)$*(+,-# FG*!%%!,*!#
3*).+,-# 2/)7!*"# H!.)/";# I$"+),$%# $,6# +,"!/,$"+),$%# ?!0"# ./$*"+*!# +,# %!=!%# J# *)$*(#
6!=!%).9!,". Leeds: Sports Coach UK, pp. 1–96.
Adang, O. (2011) “Learning to deal with potentially dangerous situations: A situation-
oriented approach,” in Haberfeld, M. R. et al. (eds) 2)%+*!#)/-$,+K$"+),#$,6#"/$+,+,-.
New York: Springer, pp. 153–168.
!
239
Aggerholm, K. and Ronglan, L. T. (2012) “Having the last laugh: The value of humour
in invasion games,” 3.)/"L# F"(+*0# $,6# 2(+%)0).(B, 6(3), pp. 336–352. doi:
10.1080/17511321.2012.689321.
Aguinis, H. and Kraiger, K. (2009) “Benefits of training and development for
individuals and teams, organizations, and society,” C,,8$%# H!=+!'# )1# 20B*()%)-B,
60(1), pp. 451–474. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163505.
Allen, J. J., Anderson, C. A. and Bushman, B. J. (2018) “The General Aggression
Model,” 48//!,"# M.+,+),# +,# 20B*()%)-B, 19, pp. 75–80. doi:
10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.034.
Alpert, G. P. (2004) “Interactive Police-Citizen Encounters that Result in Force,”
2)%+*!#A8$/"!/%B, 7(4), pp. 475–488. doi: 10.1177/1098611103260507.
Amendola, K. L. (1995) N)6!%# )1# )11+*!/# 80!#)1# *),"/)%# "$*"+*0# $,6# "!*(,)%)-+!0# +,#
.)%+*!O*+"+K!,#!,*)8,"!/0. Police Foundation (Police Foundation).
Andersen, J. P. !"#$%& (2016) “Highly realistic scenario based training simulates the
psychophysiology of real world use of force encounters: implications for improved
police officer performance,” P(!#D)8/,$%#)1#Q$'#F,1)/*!9!,", 5(4).
Anderson, J. R. (1982) “Acquisition of cognitive skill.,” 20B*()%)-+*$%#H!=+!', 89(4),
pp. 369–406. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.89.4.369.
Araújo, D. and Davids, K. (2011) “What exactly is acquired during skill acquisition?,”
D)8/,$%#)1#4),0*+)80,!00#3"86+!0, 18(3–4), pp. 7–23.
Argyris, C. (2003) “A Life Full of Learning,” M/-$,+K$"+),#3"86+!0, 24(7), pp. 1178–
1192.
Ashford, M., Abraham, A. and Poolton, J. (2020) “A Communal Language for Decision
Making in Team Invasion Sports,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#3.)/"#4)$*(+,-#D)8/,$%, pp. 1–8. doi:
10.1123/iscj.2019-0062.
Asken, M. J. and Grossman, D. (2010) R$//+)/#9+,60!". Warrior Science Publications.
Baier, D. (2020) “Antworten auf Huhn-und-Ei-Fragen: Was Längsschnittstudien
leisten können illustriert am Beispiel des Zusammenhangs von Gewalterfahrungen
und Furcht vor Übergriffen [Answers to chicken and egg questions: What longitudinal
!
240
studies can achieve illustrated by the example of the connection between experiences
of violence and fear of assault],” S)/9$"#N$-$K+,!, 9, pp. 25–31.
Bailey, R. !"#$%& (2010) 2$/"+*+.$,"#6!=!%).9!,"#+,#0.)/";#C,#$*$6!9+*#/!=+!'. Sports
Coach UK.
Ball, K. and Martin, J. (2012) “Self-defense training and traditional martial arts:
Influences on self-efficacy and fear related to sexual victimization.,” 3.)/"L#FG!/*+0!L#
$,6#2!/1)/9$,*!#20B*()%)-B, 1(2), pp. 135–144. doi: 10.1037/a0025745.
Barriball, K. L. and While, A. (1994) “Collecting data using a semi-structured interview:
A discussion paper,” D)8/,$%# )1# C6=$,*!6# I8/0+,-, 19(2), pp. 328–335. doi:
10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01088.x.
Bartholomew, K. J. !"# $%& (2011) “Self-determination theory and diminished
functioning: The role of interpersonal control and psychological need thwarting,”
2!/0),$%+"B# $,6# 3)*+$%# 20B*()%)-B# T8%%!"+,, 37(11), pp. 1459–1473. doi:
10.1177/0146167211413125.
Basham, B. B. (2014) “Police instructor or police educator?,” 3$%80#D)8/,$%, 2(1), pp.
99–109.
Beehr, T. A. !"#$%& (2004) “Working in a violent environment: The accuracy of police
officers’ reports about shooting incidents,” D)8/,$%#)1#)**8.$"+),$%#$,6#)/-$,+K$"+),$%#
.0B*()%)-B, 77(2), pp. 217–235. Available at:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1348/096317904774202153/abstract.
Behr, R. (2002) “Lebenswelt Polizei. Ein ethnografischer Zugang zur Berufsidentität
von Polizeibeamten [Lifeworld Police. An ethnographic approach to the professional
identity of police officers],” S)/89;#A8$%+"$"+=!#3)K+$%1)/0*(8,-, 3(1).
Behr, R. (2006) 2)%+K!+:8%"8/;#H)8"+,!,#O#H+"8$%!#O#H!1%!G+),!,. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag
für Sozialwissenschaften. doi: 10.1007/978-3-531-90270-8.
Behr, R. (2014) “„Gewalt“ und „Zwang“ – Überlegungen zum Diskurs über Polizei
["Violence" and ‘Coercion’ - Reflections on the Discourse on Police],” in Schmidt-
Semisch, H. and Hess, H. (eds) U+!#3+,,./)=+,K#6!/#E/+9+,$%+"V". Heidelberg: Springer
Fachmedien, pp. 203–218. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-03479-5_12.
!
241
Behr, R. (2017) “„Ich bin seit dreißig Jahren dabei“: Relevanzebenen beruflicher
Identität in einer Polizei am dem Weg zur Profession ["I’ve been on the job for thirty
years": Relevant levels of professional identity in a police force on the way to
professionalisation],” in Müller-Hermann, S. et al. (eds) 2/)1!00+),0:8%"8/!,# W#
4($/$:"!/+0"+:$# 8,"!/0*(+!6%+*(!/# ./)1!00+),!%%!/# 2/$G!,. Wiesbaden: Springer
Fachmedien, pp. 31–62. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-19415-4_3.
Behr, R. (2018) “‘Die Polizei muss ... an Robustheit deutlich zulegen’: Zur
Renaisssance aggressiver Maskulinität in der Polizei ["The police must... be much
more robust": On the renaissance of aggressive masculinity in the police],” in Loik, D.
(ed.) E/+"+:#6!/#2)%+K!+. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag, pp. 165–180.
Behr, R. (2019) “Gewalt und Polizei [Violence and police],” C80# 2)%+"+:# 8,6#
X!+"-!0*(+*("!, (21–23), pp. 24–28.
Behzadnia, B., Mohammadzadeh, H. and Ahmadi, M. (2017) “Autonomy-supportive
behaviors promote autonomous motivation, knowledge structures, motor skills
learning and performance in physical education,” 48//!,"#20B*()%)-B, 34(4), p. 317.
doi: 10.1007/s12144-017-9727-0.
Beighton, C., Poma, S. and Leonard, V. (2013) “Expansive learning in Firearms
training: the HE/professional learning interface,” 2)%+*!#2/$*"+*!#$,6#H!0!$/*(, 16(5),
pp. 378–390. doi: 10.1080/15614263.2014.951045.
Belur, J. (2019) “Police Research and Public Health.” Edited by P. Liamputtong, pp.
2179–2195. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_138.
Bengoechea, E. G., Strean, W. B. and Williams, D. J. (2004) “Understanding and
promoting fun in youth sport: coaches’ perspectives,” 2(B0+*$%# F68*$"+),# Y# 3.)/"#
2!6$-)-B, 9(2), pp. 197–214. doi: 10.1080/1740898042000294994.
Bengston, K. (2017) T$6#*).0#)/#?$6#"/$+,+,-Z#[)'#.)%+*!#)11+*!/#"/$+,+,-#+9.$*"0#80!#
)1# 1)/*!# \9$0"!/]0# "(!0+0^. Minnesota: Hamline University. Available at:
https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/dhp/60.
Beni, S., Fletcher, T. and Chróinín, D. N. (2017) “Meaningful Experiences in Physical
Education and Youth Sport: A Review of the Literature,” A8!0", 69(3), pp. 291–312.
doi: 10.1080/00336297.2016.1224192.
!
242
Bernt, P. and Kuhleber, H. W. (1991) “Das deeskalative Einsatzmodell [The de-
escalative deployment model],” U+!#2)%+K!+, (9), pp. 219–235.
Biggs, J. (1996) “Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment,” [+-(!/#
F68*$"+),, 32(3), pp. 347–364.
Binder, A. and Scharf, P. (1980) “The violent police-citizen encounter,” P(!#C,,$%0#)1#
"(!# C9!/+*$,# C*$6!9B# )1# 2)%+"+*$%# $,6# 3)*+$%# 3*+!,*!, 452(1), pp. 111–121. doi:
10.1177/000271628045200111.
Birzer, M. L. (2003) “The theory of andragogy applied to police training,” 2)%+*+,-;#C,#
<,"!/,$"+),$%# D)8/,$%# )1# 2)%+*!# 3"/$"!-+!0# Y# N$,$-!9!,", 26(1), pp. 29–42. doi:
10.1108/13639510310460288.
Bochenek, A. (2014) _!'$%"# -!-!,# 2)%+K!+?!$9"!;# T!%$0"8,-!,# 68/*(# .(B0+0*(!#
_!'$%"$,'!,68,-#0)'+!#,`"+-!#E)9.!"!,K!,#=),#2)%+K!+?!$9"!,#K8/#C?'!(/#=),#
-!'$%""V"+-!,#C,-/+11!,#>a+)%!,*!#$-$+,0"#.)%+*!#)11+*!/0;#U!9$,60#),#.)%+*!#)11+*!/0#
68!#")#.(B0+*$%#=+)%!,*!#$,6#*)9.!"!,*+!0#")#*).!#'+"(#"(!0!@#\5,.8?%+0(!6#9$0"!/]0#
"(!0+0^. Bochum: Ruhr-Universität Bochum.
Bochenek, A. and Staller, M. S. (2014) “Gewalt gegen Polizeibeamte - Zum Bedarf
eines Kompetenzmodells zur Abwehr von gewalttätigen Angriffen [Violence against
police officers - On the need for a competence model To defend against violent
attacks],” in Liebl, S. and Kuhn, P. (eds) N!,0*(!,#+9#X'!+:$9.1#O#E$9.1:8,0"#8,6#
E$9.10.)/"#+,#S)/0*(8,-#8,6#Q!(/!#bcde. Hamburg: Czwalina, pp. 228–233.
Boulkedid, R. !"# $%& (2011) “Using and reporting the delphi method for selecting
healthcare quality indicators: A systematic review,” 2Q)3# MIF. Edited by J. M.
Wright, 6(6), p. e20476. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020476.
Boulton, L. (2014) 3+98%$"!6# $/9!6# *),1/),"$"+),# $,6# .)%+*!# 6!*+0+),# 9$:+,-;#
!G$9+,+,-# "(!# +9.$*"# )1# !G.!/"+0!# ),# !G!*8"+=!# 18,*"+),+,-# \5,.8?%+0(!6# 6)*")/$%#
6+00!/"$"+),^.
Boulton, L. and Cole, J. C. (2016) “Adaptive flexibility examining the role of expertise
in the decision making of authorized firearms officers during armed confrontation,”
D)8/,$%# )1# 4)-,+"+=!# F,-+,!!/+,-# $,6# U!*+0+),# N$:+,-, 10(3), pp. 291–308. doi:
10.1177/1555343416646684.
!
243
Bowes, I. and Jones, R. L. (2006) “Working at the edge of chaos: Understanding
coaching as a complex, interpersonal system,” 3.)/"#20B*()%)-+0", 20(2), pp. 235–
245.
Bowman, P. (2017) NB"()%)-+!0#)1#N$/"+$%#C/"0. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Boyle, M. and Wallis, J. (2016) “Violence against paramedics – when will it stop?,”
C80"/$%$0+$,#D)8/,$%#)1#2$/$9!6+*+,!, 13(1), pp. 1–3.
Brady, A. (2006) “Opportunity sampling,” in Jupp, V. (ed.) P(!# 3$-!# 6+*"+),$/B# )1#
0)*+$%#/!0!$/*(#9!"()60. London: Sage, pp. 205–206.
Branch, M. (2020) “‘The nature of the beast:’ the precariousness of police work,”
2)%+*+,-#$,6#3)*+!"B, pp. 1–15. doi: 10.1080/10439463.2020.1818747.
Brandl, S. G. and Stroshine, M. S. (2003) “Toward an Understanding of the Physical
Hazards of Police Work,” 2)%+*!# A8$/"!/%B, 6(2), pp. 172–191. doi:
10.1177/1098611103006002003.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2019) “Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis,” A8$%+"$"+=!#
H!0!$/*(# +,# 3.)/"L# FG!/*+0!# $,6# [!$%"(, 11(4), pp. 1–9. doi:
10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806.
Brecklin, L. R. (2008) “Evaluation outcomes of self-defense training for women: A
review,” C--/!00+),# $,6# a+)%!,"# T!($=+)/, 13(1), pp. 60–76. doi:
10.1016/j.avb.2007.10.001.
Brewer, J. D. (1990) “Sensitivity as a Problem in Field Research: A Study of Routine
Policing in Northern Ireland,” C9!/+*$,#T!($=+)/$%#3*+!,"+0", 33(5), pp. 578–593. doi:
10.1177/0002764290033005006.
Broadbent, D. P., Causer, J., Ford, P. R., !"#$%& (2015) “Contextual interference effect
on perceptual-cognitive skills training.,” N!6+*+,!#$,6#0*+!,*!#+,#0.)/"0#$,6#!G!/*+0!,
47(6), pp. 1243–1250. doi: 10.1249/mss.0000000000000530.
Broadbent, D. P., Causer, J., Williams, A. M., !"#$%& (2015) “Perceptual-cognitive skill
training and its transfer to expert performance in the field: Future research directions.,”
F8/).!$,# D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"# 3*+!,*!, 15(4), pp. 322–331. doi:
10.1080/17461391.2014.957727.
!
244
Brookfield, S. D. (2013) “Teaching for Critical Thinking,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#C68%"#
a)*$"+),$%# F68*$"+),# $,6# P!*(,)%)-B# \<DCaFP^, 4(1), pp. 1–15. doi:
10.4018/javet.2013010101.
Brookfield, S. D. (2017) T!*)9+,-# $# 4/+"+*$%%B# H!1%!*"+=!# P!$*(!/. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass (Jossey-Bass).
Bruner, J. S. (1960) P(!#2/)*!00#)1#F68*$"+),. London: Harvard University Press.
Buchheit, M. (2017) “Outside the Box,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#7)8/,$%#)1#0.)/"0#.(B0+)%)-B#$,6#
.!/1)/9$,*!, 12(8), pp. 1001–1002. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2017-0667.
Bundeskriminalamt (2012) _!'$%"#-!-!,#2)%+K!+?!$9"+,,!,#8,6#O?!$9"!;#Q$-!?+%6#
bcdd#>a+)%!,*!#$-$+,0"#.)%+*!#)11+*!/0;#bcdd@. Wiesbaden: Bundeskriminalamt.
Bundeskriminalamt (2019) _!'$%"# -!-!,# 2)%+K!+=)%%K8-0?!$9"+,,!,# 8,6#
2)%+K!+=)%%K8-0?!$9"!;#T8,6!0%$-!?+%6#bcdf#>a+)%!,*!#$-$+,0"#.)%+*!#)11+*!/0;#bcdf@.
Wiesbaden: Bundeskriminalamt.
Buttle, J. W. (2007) “A constructive critique of the officer safety programme used in
England and Wales,” 2)%+*+,-# $,6# 3)*+!"B, 17(2), pp. 164–181. doi:
10.1080/10439460701302735.
Byrnes, J. P. and Wasik, B. A. (1991) “Role of conceptual knowledge in mathematical
procedural learning.,” D)8/,$%#)1#2!/0),$%+"B#$,6#3)*+$%#20B*()%)-B, 27(3), pp. 777–
786.
Carleton, R. N. !"# $%& (2020) “Assessing the Relative Impact of Diverse Stressors
among Public Safety Personnel.,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#7)8/,$%#)1#!,=+/),9!,"$%#/!0!$/*(#$,6#
.8?%+*#(!$%"(, 17(4), p. 1234. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17041234.
Carter, S. M. and Little, M. (2007) “Justifying Knowledge, Justifying Method, Taking
Action: Epistemologies, Methodologies, and Methods in Qualitative Research,”
A8$%+"$"+=!# [!$%"(# H!0!$/*(, 17(10), pp. 1316–1328. doi:
10.1177/1049732307306927.
Cassidy, T. and Rossi, T. (2006) “Situating Learning: (Re)examining the Notion of
Apprenticeship in Coach Education,” <,"!/,$"+),$%# D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!# Y#
4)$*(+,-, 1(3), pp. 235–246. doi: 10.1260/174795406778604591.
!
245
Charman, S. (2013) “Sharing a laugh: The role of humour in relationships between
police officers and ambulance staff,” <,"!/,$"+),$%# D)8/,$%#)1# 3)*+)%)-B# $,6# 3)*+$%#
2)%+*B, 33(3/4), pp. 152–166. doi: 10.1108/01443331311308212.
Charman, S. (2017a) 2)%+*!#0)*+$%+0$"+),L#+6!,"+"B#$,6#*8%"8/!;#T!*)9+,-#?%8!. Cham:
Palgrave macmillan.
Charman, S. (2017b) “Training and Education in Policing,” in. Springer (Police
Socialisation, Identity and Culture, Becoming Blue), pp. 63–90. doi: 10.1007/978-3-
319-63070-0_4.
Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J. and Moon, I. S. (2012) “Experimentally based, longitudinally
designed, teacher-focused intervention to help physical education teachers be more
autonomy supportive toward their students,” D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"# $,6# FG!/*+0!#
20B*()%)-B, 34(3), pp. 365–396. doi: 10.1123/jsep.34.3.365.
Cherryholmes, C. H. (1992) “Notes on Pragmatism and Scientific Realism,”
F68*$"+),$%#H!0!$/*(!/, 21(6), pp. 13–17. doi: 10.3102/0013189x021006013.
Chow, J. Y. !"#$%& (2009) “Nonlinear pedagogy: Implications for Teaching games for
understanding (TGfU),” in Hopper, T. et al. (eds). PHE-Canada (TGfU-Simply good
pedagogy: Understanding a complex challenge), pp. 131–144.
Chow, J. Y. !"# $%& (2011) “Nonlinear pedagogy: Learning design for self-organizing
neurobiological systems,” I!'# <6!$0# +,# 20B*()%)-B, 29(2), pp. 189–200. doi:
10.1016/j.newideapsych.2010.10.001.
Chow, J. Y. !"#$%& (2016) I),%+,!$/#.!6$-)-B#+,#0:+%%#$*g8+0+"+),. London: Routledge.
Christenson, S. L. !"#$%& (eds) (2012) [$,6?)):#)1#/!0!$/*(#),#0"86!,"#!,-$-!9!,".
New York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7.
Christopher, S. (2015) “The police service can be a critical reflective practice … if it
wants,” 2)%+*+,-, 9(4), pp. 326–339. doi: 10.1093/police/pav007.
Collard, L., Oboeuf, A. and Ahmaidi, S. (2007) “Motor skills transfer from gymnastics
to swimming.,” 2!/*!."8$%# $,6# N)")/# 3:+%%0, 105(1), pp. 15–26. doi:
10.2466/pms.105.1.15-26.
!
246
Collins, D., Abraham, A. and Collins, R. (2012) “On Vampires and Wolves - exposing
and exploring reasons for the differential impact of coach education,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#
D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"#20B*()%)-B, pp. 255–271.
Collins, D. J. !"#$%& (2012) “Three worlds: New directions in participant development
in sport and physical activity,” 3.)/"L#F68*$"+),#$,6#3)*+!"B, 17(2), pp. 225–243. doi:
10.1080/13573322.2011.607951.
Collins, R. (2009) “The micro-sociology of violence,” P(!#T/+"+0(#D)8/,$%#)1#3)*+)%)-B,
60(3), pp. 566–576. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2009.01256.x.
Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A. and Noe, R. A. (2000) “Toward an integrative theory of
training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research,” D)8/,$%#)1#
C..%+!6#20B*()%)-B, 85(5), pp. 678–707. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.g5.5.678.
Correia, V. !"#$%& (2018) “Principles of nonlinear pedagogy in sport practice,” 2(B0+*$%#
F68*$"+),# $,6# 3.)/"# 2!6$-)-B, 24(2), pp. 117–132. doi:
10.1080/17408989.2018.1552673.
Côté, J. !"#$%& (1993) “Organizing and interpreting unstructured qualitative data,” P(!#
3.)/"#20B*()%)-+0", 7(2), pp. 127–137. doi: 10.1123/tsp.7.2.127.
Côté, J. !"# $%& (2007) “Towards a Definition of Excellence in Sport Coaching,”
<,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#4)$*(+,-#3*+!,*!, 1(1), pp. 3–17.
Côté, J. and Gilbert, W. (2009) “An integrative definition of coaching effectiveness and
expertise,” <,"!/,$"+),$%# D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!#Y# 4)$*(+,-, 4(3), pp. 307–323.
doi: 10.1260/174795409789623892.
Crawley, A. A. !"#$%& (2016) “Physical Fitness of Police Academy Cadets: Baseline
Characteristics and Changes During a 16-Week Academy.,” D)8/,$%#)1#0"/!,-"(#$,6#
*),6+"+),+,-# /!0!$/*(# h# I$"+),$%# 3"/!,-"(# Y# 4),6+"+),+,-# C00)*+$"+),, 30(5), pp.
1416–24. doi: 10.1519/jsc.0000000000001229.
Creswell, J. C. (2014) H!0!$/*(#6!0+-,;#A8$%+"$"+=!L#g8$,"+"$"+=!L#$,6#9+G!6#9!"()60#
$../)$*(!0. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
!
247
Crowne, D. P. and Marlowe, D. (1960) “A new scale of social desirability independent
of psychopathology,” D)8/,$%#)1#2!/0),$%+"B#$,6#3)*+$%#20B*()%)-B, 24(4), pp. 349–
354. doi: 10.1037/h0047358.
Cruickshank, A. and Collins, D. J. (2017) “Beyond ‘crude pragmatism’ in sports
coaching: Insights from C.S. Peirce, William James, and John Dewey: A
commentary,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0#3*+!,*!#Y#4)$*(+,-, 12(1), pp. 70–72.
doi: 10.1177/1747954116684226.
Curtner-Smith, M. D. !"# $%& (2001) “Urban Teachersí Use of Productive and
Reproductive Teaching Styles Within the Confines of the National Curriculum for
Physical Education,” F8/).!$,# 2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#H!=+!', 7(2), pp. 177–190. doi:
10.1177/1356336x010072005.
Cushion, C. (2011) “Coach and athlete learning: A social approach,” in Jones, R. L.
et al. (eds) P(!#3)*+)%)-B#)1#3.)/"0#4)$*(+,-. Routledge, pp. 166–177.
Cushion, C. J. (2007) “Modelling the complexity of the coaching process,”
<,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0#3*+!,*!#$,6#4)$*(+,-, 2(4), pp. 395–401.
Cushion, C. J. !"#$%& (2010) 4)$*(#%!$/,+,-#$,6#6!=!%).9!,";#C#/!=+!'#)1#%+"!/$"8/!.
Available at: https://www.sportscoachuk.org/sites/default/files/Coach-Learning-and-
Dev-Review.pdf.
Cushion, C. J. (2020) “Exploring the delivery of officer safety training: A case study,”
2)%+*+,-;#C#D)8/,$%#)1#2)%+*B#$,6#2/$*"+*!. Edited by M. Meyer and M. S. Staller, 14(1),
pp. 166–180. doi: 10.1093/police/pax095.
Cushion, C. J., Armour, K. M. and Jones, R. L. (2003) “Coach education and
continuing professional development: Experience and learning to coach,” A8!0",
55(3), pp. 215–230. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2003.10491800.
Cushion, C. J., Armour, K. M. and Jones, R. L. (2006) “Locating the coaching process
in practice: models ‘for’ and ‘of’ coaching,” 2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#$,6#3.)/"#2!6$-)-B,
11(1), pp. 83–99. doi: 10.1080/17408980500466995.
Cushion, C. J., Ford, P. R. and Williams, A. M. (2012) “Coach behaviours and practice
structures in youth soccer: Implications for talent development,” D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"0#
3*+!,*!0, 30(15), pp. 1631–1641. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2012.721930.
!
248
Davids, K. !"# $%& (2012) “Principles of motor learning in ecological dynamics: A
comment on functions of learning and the acquisition of motor skills (with reference
to sport),” P(!# M.!,# 3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!0# D)8/,$%, 5(1), pp. 113–117. doi:
10.2174/1875399x01205010113.
Davids, K. !"# $%& (2013) “An Ecological Dynamics Approach to Skill Acquisition:
Implications for Development of Talent in Sport,” P$%!,"#U!=!%).9!,"#$,6#FG*!%%!,*!,
5(1), pp. 21–34.
Davids, K., Button, C. and Bennett, S. (2008) “Dynamics of skill acquisition: A
constraints-led approach,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0#3*+!,*!#Y#4)$*(+,-, 3(1),
pp. 147–151.
Dayley, E. H. (2016) H!68*+,-# "(!# 80!# )1# 1)/*!;# 6!O!0*$%$"+),# "/$+,+,-# 1)/# .)%+*!#
)11+*!/0#\5,.8?%+0(!6#9$0"!/]0#"(!0+0^. Montery, CA: Naval Postgraduate School.
Deggs, D. and Hernandez, F. (2018) “Enhancing the Value of Qualitative Field Notes
through Purposeful Reflection,” P(!#A8$%+"$"+=!#H!.)/", 10(23), pp. 2552–2560.
DeMarco, G. M. and Mccullick, B. A. (1997) “Developing expertise in coaching:
Learning from the legends,” D)8/,$%# )1# 2(B0+*$%# F68*$+"),L# H!*/!$"+),# Y# U$,*!,
68(3), pp. 37–41. doi: 10.1080/07303084.1997.10604909.
Deppermann, A. (2014) “Das Forschungsinterview als soziale Interaktionspraxis [The
research interview as social interaction practice,” in Mey, G. and Mruck, K. (eds)
A8$%+"$"+=!# S)/0*(8,-. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, pp. 133–149. doi:
10.1007/978-3-658-05538-7_8.
Derin, B. and Singelnstein, T. (2019) “Amtliche Kriminalstatistiken als Datenbasis in
der empirischen Polizeiforschung [Official crime statistics as a database for empirical
police research],” in Howe, C. and Ostermeier, L. (eds) 2)%+K!+# 8,6# _!0!%%0*($1"# O#
P/$,06+0K+.%+,V/!# 2!/0.!:"+=!,# K8# N!"()6!,L# P(!)/+!# 8,6# F9.+/+!# /!1%!G+=!/#
2)%+K!+1)/0*(8,-. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, pp. 207–230. doi: 10.1007/978-
3-658-22382-3_9.
Dirks, K. T. (2000) “Trust in leadership and team performance: Evidence from NCAA
basketball.,” D)8/,$%# )1# C..%+!6# 20B*()%)-B, 85(6), pp. 1004–1012. doi:
10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.1004.
!
249
Draper, C. E. and Coalter, F. (2014) “‘There’s just something about this club. It’s been
my family.’ An analysis of the experiences of youth in a South African sport-for-
development programme,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#H!=+!'#1)/#"(!#3)*+)%)-B#)1#3.)/", 51(1), pp.
44–60. doi: 10.1177/1012690213513783.
Dreeben, R. (1968) M,# '($"# +0# %!$/,!6# +,# 0*())%. Boston: Addison - Wesley
Publishing Company.
Dror, I. E. (2009) “How can Francis Bacon help forensic science? The four idols of
human biases,” D8/+9!"/+*0, 50, pp. 93–110.
Elias, J. L. and Merriam, S. B. (2005) 2(+%)0).(+*$%#S)8,6$"+),0#)1#C68%"#F68*$"+),.
Malabar, FL: Krieger Publications.
Ellis, C. (2007) “Telling Secrets, Revealing Lives: Relational Ethics in Research With
Intimate Others,” A8$%+"$"+=!# <,g8+/B, 13(1), pp. 3–29. doi:
10.1177/1077800406294947.
Ellrich, K. (2016) “Burnout and violent victimization in police officers: a dual process
model,” 2)%+*+,-, 39(4), pp. 652–666. doi: 10.1108/pijpsm-10-2015-0125.
Ellrich, K. and Baier, D. (2014) _!'$%"# -!-!,# ,+!6!/0V*(0+0*(!# T!$9"+,,!,# 8,6#
T!$9"!#$80#6!9#F+,0$"K#8,6# 3"/!+1!,6+!,0";#X89# F+,1%800#=),# .!/0),!,OL#$/?!+"0O#
8,6# 0+"8$"+),0?!K)-!,!,# N!/:9$%!,# $81# 6$0# _!'$%").1!//+0+:)# >a+)%!,*!# $-$+,0"#
I)/"(OH(+,!OR!0".($%+$,#.)%+*!#)11+*!/0;#P(!#+,1%8!,0!#)1#.!/0),$%L#')/:O/!%$"!6#$,6#
0+"8$"+),$%# *($/$*"!/+0"+*0# ),# "(!# /+0:# )1# =+*+"+9+K$"+),@. 123. Hannover:
Kriminologisches Forschungsinstitut Niedersachsen e.V.
Ellrich, K. and Baier, D. (2016) “Police officers as victims of violence: Findings of a
germany-wide survey,” in Baier, D. and Pfeiffer, C. (eds) H!./!0!,"$"+=!#0"86+!0#),#
=+*"+9+0$"+),. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, pp. 139–
162. doi: 10.5771/9783845273679-139.
Ellrich, K., Baier, D. and Pfeiffer, C. (2011) _!'$%"#-!-!,#2)%+K!+?!$9"!;#T!18,6!#K8#
F+,0$"K?!$9"!,L#3+"8$"+),09!/:9$%!,# 8,6#S)%-!,#=),# _!'$%"i?!/-/+11!,#>a+)%!,*!#
$-$+,0"#.)%+*!# )11+*!/0;# H!08%"0# /!-$/6+,-# .)%+*!#)11+*!/0L#0+"8$"+),$%# .$/$9"!/0# $,6#
*),0!g8!,*!0# )1# =+)%!,*!@. Hannover: Kriminologisches Forschungsinstitut
Niedersachsen e.V.
!
250
Ellrich, K., Pfeiffer, C. and Baier, D. (2010) _!'$%"# -!-!,# 2)%+K!+?!$9"!;# _!'$%"#
-!-!,#2)%+K!+?!$9"!;#T!-%!+""!G"#K8# jk# P(!0!,# K8/# _!'$%"# -!-!,#2)%+K!+?!$9"!&
!
F/0"!#F/-!?,+00!#!+,!/#2)%+K!+?!1/$-8,-#+,#6!,#T8,6!0%V,6!/,#T!/%+,L#T/$,6!,?8/-L#
T/!9!,L# I+!6!/0$*(0!,L# N!*:%!,?8/-Oa)/.)99!/,L# H(!+,%$,6O# 21$%KL# 3$*(0!,O
C,($%"L#3$$/%$,6L#3*(%!0'+-O[)%0"!+,#8,6#P(i/+,-!,l#>a+)%!,*!#-$+,0"#.)%+*!#)11+*!/0;#
38..%!9!,"# ")# jk# "(!0!0# /!-$/6+,-# =+)%!,*!# $-$+,0"# .)%+*!# )11+*!/0l@. Hannover:
Kriminologisches Forschungsinstitut Niedersachsen e.V.
Endsley, M. R. (2018) “Expertise and situational awareness,” in Ericsson, K. A. et al.
(eds) P(!# 4$9?/+6-!# ($,6?)):# )1# !G.!/"+0!# $,6#!G.!/"#.!/1)/9$,*!. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 714–741.
Endsley, M. R. and Robertson, M. M. (2000) “Training for situation awareness,” in
Endsley, M. R. and Garland, D. J. (eds) 3+"8$"+),# $'$/!,!00# $,$%B0+0# $,6#
9!$08/!9!,". Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 349–365.
Engel, R. S. and Whalen, J. L. (2010) “Police–academic partnerships: ending the
dialogue of the deaf, the Cincinnati experience,” 2)%+*!#2/$*"+*!#$,6#H!0!$/*(, 11(2),
pp. 105–116. doi: 10.1080/15614261003590803.
Entwistle, N. J. and Peterson, E. R. (2004) “Conceptions of learning and knowledge
in higher education: Relationships with study behaviour and influences of learning
environments,” <,"!/,$"+),$%# D)8/,$%#)1#F68*$"+),$%# H!0!$/*(, 41(6), pp. 407–428.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.009.
Erickson, K. !"# $%& (2008) “Gaining insight into actual and preferred sources of
coaching knowledge,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0#3*+!,*!#Y#4)$*(+,-, 3(4), pp.
527–538. doi: 10.1260/174795408787186468.
Ericsson, K. A. (2016) “Expertise and individual differences: The search for the
structure and acquisition of experts’ superior performance,” R+%!B# <,"!/6+0*+.%+,$/B#
H!=+!'0;#4)-,+"+=!#3*+!,*!, 8(1–2), pp. e1382-6. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1382.
Evans, J. R. and Mathur, A. (2005) “The value of online surveys,” <,"!/,!"#H!0!$/*(,
15(2), pp. 195–219. doi: 10.1108/10662240510590360.
Farkash, U. !"#$%& (2017) “Prevalence and patterns of injury sustained during military
hand-to-hand combat training (krav-maga),” N+%+"$/B#N!6+*+,!, 182(11), pp. e2005–
e2009. doi: 10.7205/milmed-d-17-00015.
!
251
Farrow, D. and Robertson, S. (2017) “Development of a Skill Acquisition Periodisation
Framework for High-Performance Sport,” 3.)/"0#9!6+*+,!, 47(6), pp. 1043–4057. doi:
10.1007/s40279-016-0646-2.
Faulkner, G. and Biddle, S. (2002) “Mental health nursing and the promotion of
physical activity,” D)8/,$%#)1#20B*(+$"/+*# $,6#N!,"$%# [!$%"(#I8/0+,-, 9(6), pp. 659–
665. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2850.2002.00520.x.
Finkel, E. J. and Hall, A. N. (2018) “The I3 Model: a metatheoretical framework for
understanding aggression,” 48//!,"# M.+,+),# +,# 20B*()%)-B, 19, pp. 125–130. doi:
10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.013.
Ford, P., Coughlan, E. and Williams, M. (2009) “The Expert-Performance Approach
as a Framework for Understanding and Enhancing Coaching Performance, Expertise
and Learning,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%# )1#3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!#Y# 4)$*(+,-, 4(3), pp. 451–
463. doi: 10.1260/174795409789623919.
Fox, J. C. and Lundman, R. J. (1974) “Problems and Strategies in Gaining Access in
Police Organisations,” 4/+9+,)%)-B, 12(1), pp. 52–69. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-
9125.1974.tb00620.x.
Francis, J. J. !"#$%& (2010) “What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data
saturation for theory-based interview studies,” 20B*()%)-B# Y# [!$%"(, 25(10), pp.
1229–1245. doi: 10.1080/08870440903194015.
Franz, S. and Borum, R. (2011) “Crisis Intervention Teams may prevent arrests of
people with mental illnesses,” 2)%+*!#2/$*"+*!#$,6#H!0!$/*(;#C,#<,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%,
12(3), pp. 265–272. doi: 10.1080/15614263.2010.497664.
Fridell, L. and Lim, H. (2016) “Assessing the racial aspects of police force using the
implicit- and counter-bias perspectives,” D)8/,$%#)1#4/+9+,$%#D80"+*!, 44, pp. 36–48.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2015.12.001.
Frymier, A. B. and Shulman, G. M. (1995) “‘What’s in it for me?’: Increasing content
relevance to enhance students’ motivation,” 4)998,+*$"+),# F68*$"+),, 44(1), pp.
40–50. doi: 10.1080/03634529509378996.
Füllgrabe, U. (2000) “Chancen der Eigensicherung [Opportunities for self-protection],”
U!8"0*(!#2)%+K!+, 49(8), pp. 10–11.
!
252
Füllgrabe, U. (2002) 20B*()%)-+!# 6!/# F+-!,0+*(!/8,-# >P(!# .0B*()%)-B# )1# )11+*!/#
0$1!"B@. Stuttgart: Boorberg.
Füllgrabe, U. (2014) 20B*()%)-+!# 6!/# F+-!,0+*(!/8,-# >P(!# .0B*()%)-B# )1# )11+*!/#
0$1!"B@. Stuttgart: Boorberg.
Gallimore, R., Gilbert, W. and Nater, S. (2014) “Ref lective practice and ongoing
learning: a coach’s 10-year journey,” H!1%!*"+=!# 2/$*"+*!, 15(2), pp. 268–288. doi:
10.1080/14623943.2013.868790.
Getty, T. J. (2014) C# *)9.$/+0),# )1# *8//!,"# ,$=$%# 9$/:09$,0(+.# "/$+,+,-# =0&#
0+98%$"+),O?$0!6# 9$/:09$,0(+.# "/$+,+,-# '+"(# "(!# 80!# )1# <,6))/# 3+98%$"!6#
N$/:09$,0(+.# P/$+,!/# \<3NP^# \5,.8?%+0(!6# 9$0"!/]0# "(!0+0^. Montery: Naval
Postgraduate School.
Giacobbi, P. R., Poczwardowski, A. and Hager, P. (2005) “A Pragmatic Research
Philosophy for Applied Sport Psychology,” P(!#3.)/"#20B*()%)-+0", pp. 18–31.
Gilbert, W. D. and Baldis, M. W. (2014) “Becoming an effective strength and
conditioning coach,” 3"/!,-"(# $,6# 4),6+"+),+,-# D)8/,$%, 36(1), pp. 28–34. doi:
10.1519/ssc.0000000000000026.
Gilbert, W. D. and Trudel, P. (2001) “Learning to coach through experience: Reflection
in model youth sport coaches,” D)8/,$%#)1# P!$*(+,-#+,# 2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),, 21, pp.
16–34.
Gilbert, W. D. and Trudel, P. (2004a) “Analysis of Coaching Science Research
Published from 1970–2001,” H!0!$/*(# A8$/"!/%B#1)/#FG!/*+0!#$,6# 3.)/", 75(4), pp.
388–399.
Gilbert, W. D. and Trudel, P. (2004b) “Role of the Coach: How Model Youth Team
Sport Coaches Frame Their Roles,” P(!#3.)/"# 20B*()%)-+0", 18(1), pp. 21–43. doi:
10.1123/tsp.18.1.21.
Gilbert, W., Gallimore, R. and Trudel, P. (2009) “A learning community approach to
coach development in youth sport,” D)8/,$%#)1#4)$*(+,-#F68*$"+),, 2(2), pp. 3–23.
doi: 10.1123/jce.2.2.3.
!
253
Glitz, B. (1998) S)*80#-/)8.0#1)/#%+?/$/+!0#$,6#%+?/$/+$,0. New York: Forbes Custom
Publishing.
Goodman, C. M. (1987) “The Delphi technique: a critique,” D)8/,$%# )1# C6=$,*!6#
I8/0+,-, 12(6), pp. 729–734. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1987.tb01376.x.
Gould, D. !"#$%& (2007) “Coaching life skills through football: a study of award winning
high school coaches,” D)8/,$%#)1# C..%+!6#3.)/"# 20B*()%)-B, 19(1), pp. 16–37. doi:
10.1080/10413200601113786.
Graneheim, U. H., Lindgren, B.-M. and Lundman, B. (2017) “Methodological
challenges in qualitative content analysis: A discussion paper,” I8/0!# F68*$"+),#
P)6$B, 56, pp. 29–34. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.06.002.
Grant, M. A. and Dorgo, S. (2014) “Developing Expertise in Strength and Conditioning
Coaching,” 3"/!,-"(# $,6# 4),6+"+),+,-# D)8/,$%, 36(1), pp. 9–15. doi:
10.1519/ssc.0000000000000028.
Grecic, D. and Collins, D. J. (2013) “The epistemological chain: Practical applications
in sports,” A8!0", 65(2), pp. 151–168. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2013.773525.
Green, B. !"#$%& (1999) “Applying the Delphi technique in a study of GPs’ information
requirements,” [!$%"(# $,6# 3)*+$%# 4$/!# +,# "(!# 4)998,+"B, 7(3), pp. 198–205. doi:
10.1046/j.1365-2524.1999.00176.x.
Green, T. and Gates, A. (2014) “Understanding the process of professionalisation in
the police organisation,” P(!# 2)%+*!# D)8/,$%, 87(2), pp. 75–91. doi:
10.1350/pojo.2014.87.2.662.
Greene, M. J. (2014) “On the inside looking in: Methodological insights and
challenges in conducting qualitative insider research,” P(!#A8$%+"$"+=!#H!.)/", 29(19),
pp. 1–13.
Guadagnoli, M. A. and Lee, T. D. (2004) “Challenge point: A framework for
conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning,” D)8/,$%#
)1#N)")/#T!($=+)/, 36(2), pp. 212–224. doi: 10.3200/jmbr.36.2.212-224.
!
254
Guadagnoli, M., Morin, M. P. and Dubrowski, A. (2012) “The application of the
challenge point framework in medical education,” N!6+*$%#!68*$"+),, 46(5), pp. 447–
453. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04210.x.
Gunnell, K. E. !"#$%& (2013) “Psychological need satisfaction and thwarting: A test of
Basic Psychological Needs Theory in physical activity contexts,” 20B*()%)-B#)1#3.)/"#
$,6#FG!/*+0!, 14(5), pp. 599–607. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.03.007.
Haines, S., Baker, T. and Donaldson, M. (2013) “Development of a physical
performance assessment checklist for athletes who sustained a lower extremity injury
in preparation for return to sport: a delphi study.,” <,"!/,$"+),$%# D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"0#
2(B0+*$%#P(!/$.B, 8(1), pp. 44–53.
Harden, R. M. and Stamper, N. (1999) “What is a spiral curriculum?,” N!6+*$%#
P!$*(!/, 21(2), pp. 1–4.
Hasson, F. and Keeney, S. (2011) “Enhancing rigour in the Delphi technique
research,” P!*(,)%)-+*$%#1)/!*$0"+,-#$,6#0)*+$%#*($,-!, 78(9), pp. 1695–1704. doi:
10.1016/j.techfore.2011.04.005.
Hasson, F., Keeney, S. and McKenna, H. (2008) “Research guidelines for the Delphi
survey technique,” D)8/,$%# )1# C6=$,*!6# I8/0+,-, 32(4), pp. 1008–1015. doi:
10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.t01-1-01567.x.
Hastie, P. A., Martinez, D. and Calderón, A. (2011) “A review of research on Sport
Education: 2004 to the present,” 2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#$,6#3.)/"#2!6$-)-B, 16(2), pp.
103–132. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2010.535202.
Hawkins, A. (2019) mR(!/!]0#"(!+/#*/!6+?+%+"B]Z#C#0"86B#)1#.)%+*!#"/$+,!/#*/!6+?+%+"B#$,6#
+"0#+,1%8!,*!#),#%!$/,+,-#$,6#6!=!%).9!,"&
Headrick, J. !"#$%& (2015) “The dynamics of expertise acquisition in sport: The role of
affective learning design,” 20B*()%)-B# )1# 3.)/"# $,6# FG!/*+0!, 16, pp. 83–90. doi:
10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.08.006.
Heil, V., Staller, M. S. and Körner, S. (2017a) “Conceptions of reality in self-defence
training: Impulses for discussion.” 4),1!/!,*!#mN$/"+$%#C/"0#$0#$#4($%%$,-!#1)/#<,"!/O#
$,6#P/$,06+0*+.%+,$/B#H!0!$/*(L] Lüneburg.
!
255
Heil, V., Staller, M. S. and Körner, S. (2017b) “Motive in der Selbstverteidigung – Eine
qualitative und quantitative Studie am Beispiel Krav Maga und Wing Chun [Motives
in self-defense training - A qualitative and quantitative study of krav maga and wing
chun],” in Körner, S. and Istas, L. (eds) N$/"+$%#C/"0#$,6#3)*+!"B/#-!0!%%0*($1"%+*(!,#
T!6!8"8,-# =),# E$9.1:8,0"L# E$9.10.)/"# 8,6# 3!%?0"=!/"!+6+-8,-. Hamburg:
Czwalina, pp. 146–159.
Heil, V., Staller, M. S. and Körner, S. (2019) “Konzeption von Realität im
Selbstverteidigungstraining – Welche Parameter sind für Trainierende bedeutend?
[Conception of reality in self-defence training - Which parameters are important for
trainees?],” in Niehaus, A. (ed.) C?0"/$*"0# )1# "(!# k"(# C,,8$%# 4),1!/!,*!# )1# "(!#
4)99+""!!#1)/#N$/"+$%#C/"0#3"86+!0#+,#"(!#_!/9$,#C00)*+$"+),#)1#3.)/"#jFG.!/+!,*+,-L#
P/$+,+,-#$,6#P(+,:+,-#"(!#T)6B#+,#N$/"+$%#C/"0#$,6#N$/"+$%#3.)/"0lL#I)=!9?!/#dnOdkL#
bcdfL#_(!,"L#T!%-+89. Journal of Martial Arts Research, 2(2), p. 16.
Hendy, R. (2018) “Switching on, switching off: reflections of a practitioner researcher
examining the operational behaviour of police officers,” 2)%+*!#2/$*"+*!#$,6#H!0!$/*(,
21(1), pp. 1–16. doi: 10.1080/15614263.2018.1558585.
Hennik, M., Hutter, I. and Bailey, A. (2010) A8$%+"$"+=!#/!0!$/*(#9!"()60. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hessische Hochschule für Polizei und Verwaltung (2016) N)68%?8*(# 1i/# 6!,#
3"86+!,-$,-#T$*(!%)/#)1#C/"0#j3*(8"K.)%+K!+l#>N)68%!#?)):#1)/#"(!#*)8/0!#)1#0"86+!0#
T$*(!%)/#)1#C/"0#o3*(8"K.)%+K!+p@. Wiesbaden: Hessische Hochschule für Polizei und
Verwaltung.
Hessisches Ministerium des Innen und für Sport (2016) “Ausbildungs- und
Prüfungsordnung für den gehobenen Polizeivollzugsdienst für die Studiengänge
Bachelor of Arts Polizeivollzugsdienst „Schutzpolizei“ und „Kriminalpolizei“
(APOgPVD) [Training and examination regulations for the upper level police force for
the study Bachelor of Arts Police Force ‘Schutzpolizei’ and ‘Kriminalpolizei’
(APOgPVD)],” 3"$$"0$,K!+-!/#1i/#6$0#Q$,6#[!00!,, 2016(30), pp. 776–792.
Heuvel, C. van den, Alison, L. and Power, N. (2012) “Coping with uncertainty: police
strategies for resilient decision-making and action implementation,” 4)-,+"+),L#
P!*(,)%)-B#Y#R)/:, 16(1), pp. 25–45. doi: 10.1007/s10111-012-0241-8.
!
256
Hine, K. A. !"# $%& (2016) “The understated ugly side of police–citizen encounters:
situation, suspect, officer, decision-making, and force predictors of officer injuries,”
2)%+*+,-#$,6#3)*+!"B, 28(6), pp. 665–683. doi: 10.1080/10439463.2016.1251430.
Hochschule der Sächsischen Polizei (2016) N)68%($,6?8*(# 1i/# 6!,# 3"86+!,-$,-#
jT$*(!%)/#)1#C/"0#\T&C&^#O#2)%+K!+=)%%K8-06+!,0"l#+9#bJ"86+!,7$(/-$,-#\bcdqhbcdr^#
>N)68%!#9$,8$%#1)/#"(!#*)8/0!#)1#0"86+!0#jT$*(!%)/#)1#C/"0#\T&C&^#O#Q$'#F,1)/*!9!,"#
3!/=+*!l# +,# "(!# bJ"(# B!$/# )1# 0"86B# \bcdqhbcdr^@. Rothenburg: Hochschule der
Sächsischen Polizei.
Hochschule des Bundes für öffentliche Verwaltung (2015) N)68%($,6?8*(#1i/# 6!,#
T$*(!%)/0"86+!,-$,-# \T&C&^# E/+9+,$%=)%%K8-06+!,0"# +9# T8,6!0:/+9+,$%$9"# >N)68%!#
N$,8$%#1)/#"(!#T$*(!%)/]0#2/)-/$99!#\T&C&^#4/+9+,$%#D80"+*!#3!/=+*!#$"#"(!#S!6!/$%#
4/+9+,$%# 2)%+*!# M11+*!. Brühl: Hochschule des Bundes für öffentliche Verwaltung,
Fachbereich Kriminalpolizei, Bundeskriminalamt Wiesbaden.
Holdaway, S. (1988) “Blue jokes: Humour in police work,” in [89)8/# +,# 0)*+!"B;#
H!0+0"$,*!#$,6#*),"/)%. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 106–122. doi: 10.1007/978-
1-349-19193-2_6.
Honess, R. (2016) P(!# 9$,6$")/B# 6!%+=!/B# )1# ),-)+,-# "/$+,+,-# '+"(+,# "(!# .)%+*!#
0!/=+*!#)1#F,-%$,6#$,6#R$%!0#$,6#+"0#/!%$"+),0(+.#")#"(!#$6/$-)-+*$%#./+,*+.%!#)1#0!%1O
9)"+=$"+),#\5,.8?%+0(!6#6+00!/"$"+),^.
Honess, R. (2020) “Mandatory police training: The epitome of dissatisfaction and
demotivation?,” 2)%+*+,-;# C# D)8/,$%# )1# 2)%+*B# $,6# 2/$*"+*!. doi:
10.1093/police/paz076.
Howe, K. R. (1988) “Against the Quantitative-Qualitative Incompatibility Thesis or
Dogmas Die Hard,” F68*$"+),$%# H!0!$/*(!/, 17(8), pp. 10–16. doi:
10.3102/0013189x017008010.
Hoy, A. W. and Murphy, P. K. (2001) “Teaching educational psychology to the implicit
mind,” in Torff, B. and Sternberg, R. J. (eds) 5,6!/0"$,6+,-#$,6#"!$*(+,-#"(!#+,"8+"+=!#
9+,6. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 145–184.
Huesmann, L. R. (2018a) “An integrative theoretical understanding of aggression: a
brief exposition,” 48//!,"# M.+,+),# +,# 20B*()%)-B, 19, pp. 119–124. doi:
10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.04.015.
!
257
Huesmann, L. R. (2018b) “The contagion of violence,” in Vazsonyi, A. T. et al. (eds)
P(!# 4$9?/+6-!# ($,6?)):# )1# =+)%!,"# ?!($=+)/# $,6# $--/!00+),. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 527–556.
Hughes, C., Lee, S. and Chesterfield, G. (2009) “Innovation in sports coaching: the
implementation of reflective cards,” H!1%!*"+=!# 2/$*"+*!, 10(3), pp. 367–384. doi:
10.1080/14623940903034895.
Hunold, D. (2019) “„Wer hat jetzt die größeren Eier?!“ – Polizeialltag, hegemoniale
Männlichkeit und reflexive Ethnografie ["Who’s got the bigger balls now?!" - Everyday
police life, hegemonic masculinity and reflective ethnography],” in Howe, C. and
Ostermeier, L. (eds) 2)%+K!+# 8,6# _!0!%%0*($1"# O# P/$,06+0K+.%+,V/!# 2!/0.!:"+=!,# K8#
N!"()6!,L# P(!)/+!# 8,6# F9.+/+!# /!1%!G+=!/# 2)%+K!+1)/0*(8,-. Wiesbaden: Springer
Fachmedien, pp. 47–69. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-22382-3_3.
Hutchinson, S. A. and Wilson, H. (1992) “Validity threats in scheduled semistructured
research interviews.,” D)8/,$%#)1#2!/0),$%+"B#$,6#3)*+$%#20B*()%)-B, 41(2), pp. 117–
119.
Irwin, G., Hanton, S. and Kerwin, D. (2010) “Reflective practice and the origins of elite
coaching knowledge,” H!1%!*"+=!# 2/$*"+*!, 5(3), pp. 425–442. doi:
10.1080/1462394042000270718.
Isaieva, I. (2019) “Police Training in the System of Professional Training for Federal
Police Force in Germany,” 4)9.$/$"+=!#2/)1!00+),$%#2!6$-)-B, 8(4), pp. 54–59. doi:
10.2478/rpp-2018-0054.
Jackson-Jacobs, C. (2013) “Constructing Physical Fights: An Interactionist Analysis
of Violence among Affluent, Suburban Youth,” A8$%+"$"+=!#0)*+)%)-B, 36(1), pp. 23–
52. doi: 10.1007/s11133-012-9244-2.
Jaeckle, T., Benoliel, B. and Nickel, O. (2019) “Police use of force decisions: A gender
perspective,” in R$%6!,#5,+=!/0+"B#H!0!$/*(#3B9.)0+89#O#bcdr#2/)-/$9#Y#2)0"!/0L#
be. Minneapolis: Walden University.
Jager, J., Klatt, T. and Bliesener, T. (2013) IHRO3"86+!;# _!'$%"# -!-!,#
2)%+K!+?!$9"+,,!,# 8,6# 2)%+K!+?!$9"!# >I)/"(# H(+,!OR!0".($%+$,#0"86B;# a+)%!,*!#
$-$+,0"#.)%+*!#)11+*!/0@. Kiel: Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel.
!
258
Jakobsson, B. T., Lundvall, S. and Redelius, K. (2014) “Reasons to Stay in Club Sport
According to 19-Year-Old Swedish Participants: A Salutogenic Approach,” 3.)/"#
3*+!,*!#H!=+!', 23(5–6), pp. 205–224. doi: 10.1515/ssr-2015-0002.
James, W. (1907) 2/$-9$"+09;#C#,!'#,$9!#1)/#0)9!#)%6#'$B0#)1#"(+,:+,-& New York,
NY: Longmans, Green and Co. doi: 10.1037/10851-000.
Jasch, M. (2019) “Kritische Lehre und Forschung in der Polizeiausbildung [Critical
teaching and research in police training],” in Howe, C. and Ostermeier, L. (eds) 2)%+K!+#
8,6#_!0!%%0*($1"#O#P/$,06+0K+.%+,V/!#2!/0.!:"+=!,#K8#N!"()6!,L#P(!)/+!#8,6#F9.+/+!#
/!1%!G+=!/# 2)%+K!+1)/0*(8,-. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, pp. 231–250. doi:
10.1007/978-3-658-22382-3_10.
Jenkins, S. P. (2017) “Beyond ‘crude pragmatism’ in sports coaching: Insights from
C.S. Peirce, William James and John Dewey,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0#3*+!,*!#
Y#4)$*(+,-, 12(1), pp. 8–19. doi: 10.1177/1747954116684028.
Jensen, P. R. and Simpson, D. (2014) “A Qualitative Analysis of the Experience and
Impact of Killing in Hand-to-Hand Combat,” D)8/,$%#)1#P/$89$"+*# 3"/!00, 27(4), pp.
468–473. doi: 10.1002/jts.21938.
Jensen, P. R. and Wrisberg, C. A. (2014) “Performance under acute stress: A
qualitative study of soldiers’ experiences of hand-to-hand combat.,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#
D)8/,$%#)1#3"/!00#N$,$-!9!,", 21(4), pp. 406–423. doi: 10.1037/a0037998.
Johnson, J. G. (2006) “Cognitive modeling of decision making in sports,” 20B*()%)-B#
)1#3.)/"#$,6#FG!/*+0!, 7(6), pp. 631–652. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.03.009.
Johnson, O. N. !"#$%& (2016) “Preparing civilians to survive an active shooter event,”
P(!#D)8/,$%#)1#Q$'#F,1)/*!9!,", 5(2).
Jones, R. L., Armour, K. M. and Potrac, P. (2010) “Constructing expert knowledge: A
case study of a top-level professional soccer coach,” 3.)/"L#F68*$"+),#$,6#3)*+!"B,
8(2), pp. 213–229. doi: 10.1080/13573320309254.
Jones, R. L., Bailey, J. and Thompson, A. (2013) “Ambiguity, noticing, and
orchestration: Further thoughts on managing the complex coaching context,” in
Potrac, P. et al. (eds) P(!# H)8"%!6-!# ($,6?)):# )1# 0.)/"0# *)$*(+,-. New York:
Routledge, pp. 271–283.
!
259
Jordan, J. and Mossman, E. (2017a) “‘Back Off Buddy, This Is My Body, Not Yours’:
Empowering Girls Through Self-Defense,” a+)%!,*!# C-$+,0"# R)9!,, 15(13), p.
107780121774121. doi: 10.1177/1077801217741217.
Jordan, J. and Mossman, E. (2017b) “‘Don’t Ever Give Up!’ Resisting Victimhood
Through Self-Defense,” D)8/,$%# )1# <,"!/.!/0),$%# a+)%!,*!, 15(1), p.
088626051774476. doi: 10.1177/0886260517744760.
Jordan, J. and Mossman, E. (2018) “‘Get Out of My Home and Don’t Come Back!’
Empowering Women Through Self-Defense,” a+)%!,*!# C-$+,0"#R)9!,, 117(1206),
p. 107780121876871. doi: 10.1177/1077801218768712.
Jorgensen, D. L. (2015) “Participant observation,” in Scott, R. A. and Kosslyn, S. M.
(eds) F9!/-+,-#"/!,60#+,#"(!#0)*+$%#$,6#?!($=+)/$%#0*+!,*!0. Hoboken, NY: Wiley, pp.
1–15. doi: 10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0247.
Kaminski, R. J. and Martin, J. A. (2000) “An analysis of police officer satisfaction with
defense and control tactics,” 2)%+*+,-, 23(2), pp. 132–153. doi:
10.1108/13639510010333697.
Kanfer, R. (1996) “Self-regulatory and other non-ability determinants of skill
acquisition.,” in Gollwitzer, P. M. and Bargh, J. A. (eds) P(!# .0B*()%)-B# )1# $*"+),#
%+,:+,-#*)-,+"+),#$,6#9)"+=$"+),#")#?!($=+)/. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 404–423.
Karp, S. and Stenmark, H. (2011) “Learning to be a police officer. Tradition and
change in the training and professional lives of police officers,” 2)%+*!#2/$*"+*!#$,6#
H!0!$/*(, 12(1), pp. 4–15. doi: 10.1080/15614263.2010.497653.
Katerndahl, D. !"#$%& (2014) “Dynamics of violence,” D)8/,$%#)1#F=$%8$"+),#+,#4%+,+*$%#
2/$*"+*!, 20(5), pp. 695–702. doi: 10.1111/jep.12151.
Keeney, S., Hasson, F. and McKenna, H. P. (2001) “A critical review of the Delphi
technique as a research methodology for nursing,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1# I8/0+,-#
3"86+!0, 38(2), pp. 195–200. doi: 10.1016/s0020-7489(00)00044-4.
Kelly, S. !"# $%& (2018) “Psychological support for sport coaches: an exploration of
practitioner psychologist perspectives.,” D)8/,$%#)1#0.)/"0#0*+!,*!0, 36(16), pp. 1852–
1859. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2018.1423854.
!
260
Kiely, J. (2012) “Periodization Paradigms in the 21st Century: Evidence-Led or
Tradition-Driven?,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#7)8/,$%#)1#0.)/"0#.(B0+)%)-B#$,6#.!/1)/9$,*!, 7(3),
pp. 242–250. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.7.3.242.
Kitzinger, J. (1995) “Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups,” T/+"+0(#N!6+*$%#
D)8/,$%, 311(7000), pp. 299–302. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299.
Klein, G. A., Calderwood, R. and Clinton-Cirocco, A. (1986) “Rapid decision making
on the fire ground,” 2/)*!!6+,-0# )1# "(!# [89$,# S$*")/0# $,6# F/-),)9+*0# 3)*+!"B#
C,,8$%#N!!"+,-, 30(6), pp. 576–580. doi: 10.1177/154193128603000616.
Kleynen, M. !"#$%& (2014) “Using a Delphi Technique to Seek Consensus Regarding
Definitions, Descriptions and Classification of Terms Related to Implicit and Explicit
Forms of Motor Learning,” 2Q)3# MIF, 9(6), p. e100227. doi:
10.1371/journal.pone.0100227.
Klukkert, A., Ohlemacher, T. and Feltes, T. (2008) “Torn between two targets:
German police officers talk about the use of force,” 4/+9!L#Q$'#$,6#3)*+$%#4($,-!,
52(2), pp. 181–206. doi: 10.1007/s10611-008-9178-5.
Knesebeck, O. von dem, David, K. and Siegrist, J. (2005) “Psychosoziale
Arbeitsbelastungen und muskulo-skeletale Beschwerden bei Spezialeinheiten der
Polizei,” U$0# _!08,6(!+"0'!0!,, 67(08/09), pp. 674–679. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-
858607.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F. and Swanson, R. A. (2005) P(!# $68%"# %!$/,!/;# P(!#
6!1+,+"+=!#*%$00+*#+,#$68%"#!68*$"+),#$,6#(89$,#/!0)8/*!#6!=!%).9!,". Boston, MA:
Elsevier.
Knowles, Z., Borrie, A. and Telfer, H. (2007) “Towards the reflective sports coach:
issues of context, education and application,” F/-),)9+*0, 48(11–14), pp. 1711–
1720. doi: 10.1080/00140130500101288.
Koedijk, M. !"#$%& (2019) “Training for the job: Evaluation of a self-defence training
program for correctional officers,” F/-),)9+*0, 62(12), pp. 1585–1597. doi:
10.1080/00140139.2019.1677947.
Koerner, S., Staller, M. S. and Kecke, A. (2020) “‘There must be an ideal solution...’:
Assessing linear and nonlinear pedagogical approaches to knife defence
!
261
performance of police recruits,” 2)%+*+,-;# C,# <,"!/,$"+),$%# D)8/,$%. doi:
10.1108/pijpsm-08-2020-0138.
Köhler, K. (2013) Q!/,!,#8,"!/#3"/!00#O#F/1$(/8,-!,#$80#6!9#3!9+,$/#j3*(,+""0"!%%!#
F+,0$"K1$(/"l# >Q!$/,+,-# 8,6!/# 0"/!00# O# FG.!/+!,*!0# 1/)9# "(!# 0!9+,$/# j<,"!/1$*!#
).!/$"+),$%# 6/+=+,-l@&# 2/!0!,"$"+),# $"# jE),1!/!,K# U+6$:"+:# 6!0# F+,0$"K"/$+,+,-0lL#
T8,6!0:/+9+,$%$9"L#D8,!#bcde. Wiesbaden.
Körner, S. !"# $%& (2018) “Professionalization in progress: Police use of force self-
defense training in Germany,” N)=!9!,"# O# D)8/,$%# )1# 2(B0+*$%# F68*$"+),# 3.)/"#
3*+!,*!0, 11(3), pp. 102–103.
Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2017) “Pädagogik und Polizei!? - Forschung zur
Professionalisierung polizeilichen Einsatztrainings [Pedagogy and police? - Research
in the context of professionalisation of police use of force training],” <9.8%0!, 2017(1),
pp. 34–39.
Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2018a) “From system to pedagogy: Towards a nonlinear
pedagogy of self-defense training in the police and the civilian domain,” 3!*8/+"B#
D)8/,$%, 31(2), pp. 645–659. doi: 10.1057/s41284-017-0122-1.
Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2018b) “System oder Pädagogik? Auf dem Weg zu einer
nichtlinearen Pädagogik im polizeilichen Einsatztraining [System or pedagogy? On
the way to a non-linear pedagogy in police training],” 2)%+K!+#Y#R+00!,0*($1", (1), pp.
13–25.
Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2019a) “Quellen, Themen und Wissenseinsatz von
Einsatztrainer*innen,” in Niehaus, A. (ed.) C?0"/$*"0#)1#"(!#k"(#C,,8$%#4),1!/!,*!#)1#
"(!# 4)99+""!!# 1)/# N$/"+$%# C/"0# 3"86+!0# +,# "(!# _!/9$,# C00)*+$"+),# )1# 3.)/"#
jFG.!/+!,*+,-L#P/$+,+,-# $,6# P(+,:+,-# "(!#T)6B# +,# N$/"+$%# C/"0#$,6# N$/"+$%# 3.)/"0lL#
I)=!9?!/#dnOdkL#bcdfL#_(!,"L#T!%-+89. Journal of Martial Arts Research, 2(2), p. 20.
Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2019b) “Situativität im Coaching [Situativeness in
coaching],” in Meyer, M. and Staller, M. S. (eds) jQ!(/!,#+0"#Q!/,!,;#N!"()6!,L#<,($%"!#
8,6# H)%%!,9)6!%%!# +,# 6!/# U+6$:"+:# 6!0# EV9.1!,0ls;# +,"!/,$"+),$%!0# 3B9.)0+89t# f&#
D$(/!0"$-8,-#6!/#6=0#E)99+00+),#jE$9.1:8,0"#8,6#E$9.10.)/"l#=)9#e&#O#n&#M:")?!/#
bcdr#$,#6!/#5,+=!/0+"V"#a!*("$t#C?0"/$*"?$,6. Hamburg: Deutsche Vereinigung für
Sportwissenschaften (dvs), p. 43.
!
262
Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2019c) “Zwischen Irritation und Indifferenz – Die Polizei
als lernende Organisation? Eine Fallanalyse [Between Irritation and Indifference - The
Police as a Learning Organisation? A Case Analysis],” in Meyer, M. and Staller, M. S.
(eds) jQ!(/!,#+0"# Q!/,!,;#N!"()6!,L#<,($%"!#8,6# H)%%!,9)6!%%!#+,#6!/#U+6$:"+:#6!0#
EV9.1!,0ls;# +,"!/,$"+),$%!0# 3B9.)0+89t# f&# D$(/!0"$-8,-# 6!/# 6=0# E)99+00+),#
jE$9.1:8,0"#8,6#E$9.10.)/"l#=)9#e&#O#n&#M:")?!/#bcdr#$,# 6!/#5,+=!/0+"V"#a!*("$t#
C?0"/$*"?$,6. Hamburg: Deutsche Vereinigung für Sportwissenschaften (dvs), pp.
52–53.
Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2020a) “Begrenzen für mehr Freiheit: Der Constraints-
Led Approach als trainingspädagogische Perspektive auf das Design von Lehr-
Lernsettings in- und außerhalb des Sports,” in Vogt, T. (ed.) a!/9+""%8,-0:)9.!"!,K#
+,#3.)/"L#3.+!%#8,6# T!'!-8,-;#3.)/"$/"0.!K+1+0*(!#2!/0.!:"+=!,. Aachen: Meyer &
Meyer (Vermittlungskompetenz in Sport, Spiel und Bewegung Sportartspezifische
Perspektiven), pp. 276–298.
Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2020b) “Training für den Einsatz I: Plädoyer für ein
evidenzbasiertes polizeiliches Einsatztraining [Training for deployment I: Plea for
evidence-based police training],” U+!#2)%+K!+, 111(5), pp. 165–173.
Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2020c) P/$+,+,-0.V6$-)-+0*(!#3B0"!9$,$%B0!#_3_r#
>P/$+,+,-# .!6$-)-+*$%# 0B0"!9# $,$%B0+0# _3_r@. Langen: Institut für Professionelles
Konfliktmanagement.
Körner, S., Staller, M. S. and Kecke, A. (2019a) “„Das ist anders geworden...“ –
Sichtweisen von Einsatztrainer*innen auf Polizeianwärter*innen ["Things have
changed..." - Perspectives of police trainers on police trainees],” in Meyer, M. and
Staller, M. S. (eds) jQ!(/!,#+0"#Q!/,!,;#N!"()6!,L#<,($%"!#8,6#H)%%!,9)6!%%!#+,#6!/#
U+6$:"+:# 6!0# EV9.1!,0ls;# +,"!/,$"+),$%!0# 3B9.)0+89t# f&# D$(/!0"$-8,-# 6!/# 6=0#
E)99+00+),# jE$9.1:8,0"# 8,6# E$9.10.)/"l# =)9# e&# O# n&# M:")?!/# bcdr# $,# 6!/#
5,+=!/0+"V"# a!*("$t# C?0"/$*"?$,6. Hamburg: Deutsche Vereinigung für
Sportwissenschaften (dvs), pp. 29–30.
Körner, S., Staller, M. S. and Kecke, A. (2019b) “„Es ist ja immer irgendwie eine
andere Situation...“ – Konflikt- versus Trainingserfahrungen von Polizist*innen ["It’s
always some other situation..." - Conflict versus training experiences of police
officers],” in Meyer, M. and Staller, M. S. (eds) jQ!(/!,#+0"#Q!/,!,;#N!"()6!,L#<,($%"!#
8,6# H)%%!,9)6!%%!# +,# 6!/# U+6$:"+:# 6!0# EV9.1!,0ls;#+,"!/,$"+),$%!0# 3B9.)0+89t# f&#
!
263
D$(/!0"$-8,-#6!/#6=0#E)99+00+),#jE$9.1:8,0"#8,6#E$9.10.)/"l#=)9#e&#O#n&#M:")?!/#
bcdr#$,#6!/#5,+=!/0+"V"#a!*("$t#C?0"/$*"?$,6. Hamburg: Deutsche Vereinigung für
Sportwissenschaften (dvs), pp. 25–26.
Körner, S., Staller, M. S. and Kecke, A. (2019c) “Geht da mehr? – Vergleich linearer
und nicht-linearer Trainingspädagogik im Einsatztraining von Polizist*innen,” in
Meyer, M. and Staller, M. S. (eds) jQ!(/!,# +0"# Q!/,!,;# N!"()6!,L# <,($%"!# 8,6#
H)%%!,9)6!%%!# +,# 6!/# U+6$:"+:# 6!0# EV9.1!,0ls;# +,"!/,$"+),$%!0# 3B9.)0+89t# f&#
D$(/!0"$-8,-#6!/#6=0#E)99+00+),#jE$9.1:8,0"#8,6#E$9.10.)/"l#=)9#e&#O#n&#M:")?!/#
bcdr#$,#6!/#5,+=!/0+"V"#a!*("$t#C?0"/$*"?$,6. Hamburg: Deutsche Vereinigung für
Sportwissenschaften (dvs), pp. 21–22.
Körner, S., Staller, M. S. and Kecke, A. (2019d) “„Pädagogik..., hat man oder hat man
nicht...“ – Zur Rolle von Pädagogik im Einsatztraining der Polizei ["Pedagogy... did
you or did you not..." - The role of pedagogy in police training],” in Meyer, M. and
Staller, M. S. (eds) jQ!(/!,#+0"#Q!/,!,;#N!"()6!,L#<,($%"!#8,6#H)%%!,9)6!%%!#+,#6!/#
U+6$:"+:# 6!0# EV9.1!,0ls;# +,"!/,$"+),$%!0# 3B9.)0+89t# f&# D$(/!0"$-8,-# 6!/# 6=0#
E)99+00+),# jE$9.1:8,0"# 8,6# E$9.10.)/"l# =)9# e&# O# n&# M:")?!/# bcdr# $,# 6!/#
5,+=!/0+"V"# a!*("$t# C?0"/$*"?$,6. Hamburg: Deutsche Vereinigung für
Sportwissenschaften (dvs), pp. 13–14.
Körner, S., Staller, M. S. and Kecke, A. (2019e) “„Weil mein Background da war ...“ –
Biographische Effekte bei Einsatztrainern*innen ["Because my background was... -
Biographical effects for police trainers],” in Meyer, M. and Staller, M. S. (eds) jQ!(/!,#
+0"# Q!/,!,;# N!"()6!,L# <,($%"!# 8,6# H)%%!,9)6!%%!# +,# 6!/# U+6$:"+:# 6!0# EV9.1!,0ls;#
+,"!/,$"+),$%!0#3B9.)0+89t#f&#D$(/!0"$-8,-#6!/#6=0#E)99+00+),#jE$9.1:8,0"#8,6#
E$9.10.)/"l# =)9# e&# O# n&# M:")?!/# bcdr# $,# 6!/# 5,+=!/0+"V"# a!*("$t# C?0"/$*"?$,6.
Vechta: Deutsche Vereinigung für Sportwissenschaften (dvs), pp. 17–18.
Körner, S., Staller, M. S. and Kecke, A. (2020) “„Eine Technik wäre nicht schlecht
gewesen...“ Lineare versus nichtlineare Vermittlung im Einsatztraining,” <9.8%0!, (1),
pp. 38–45.
Kovacs, L. and Corrie, S. (2017) “Building reflective capability to enhance coaching
practice,” P(!#4)$*(+,-#20B*()%)-+0", 13(1), pp. 4–12.
Kratzig, G. P. (2013) “Simulated pistol training: The future of law enforcement
training?,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#2)%+*!#P/$+,+,-#D)8/,$%, (5), pp. 4–7.
!
264
Kratzig, G. P. (2014) “Pistol Skill Acquisition and Retention: A 3-Year Longitudinal
Study,” in <,"!/0!/=+*!<,680"/B# P/$+,+,-L# 3+98%$"+),L# $,6# F68*$"+),# 4),1!/!,*!#
<<P3F4. Orlando: National Training and Simulation Association, pp. 1–10.
Krause, L. !"# $%& (2017) “Helping coaches apply the principles of representative
learning design: validation of a tennis specific practice assessment tool,” D)8/,$%#)1#
3.)/"0#3*+!,*!0, 5(1), pp. 1–10. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2017.1374684.
Krause, L. !"#$%& (2019) “Application of representative learning design for assessment
of common practice tasks in tennis,” 20B*()%)-B#)1#3.)/"#$,6#FG!/*+0!, 41, pp. 36–
45. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.11.008.
Kuckartz, U. (2016) A8$%+"$"+=!# <,($%"0$,$%B0!;# N!"()6!,L# 2/$G+0L#
4)9.8"!/8,"!/0"i"K8,-# >A8$%+"$"+=!# *),"!,"# $,$%B0+0;# N!"()60L# ./$*"+*!L#
*)9.8"!/08..)/"@. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa.
Kukic, F. !"#$%& (2018) “Use of Human Body Morphology as an Indication of Physical
Fitness: Implications for Police Officers,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#N)/.()%)-B, 36(4),
pp. 1407–1412. doi: 10.4067/s0717-95022018000401407.
Landeta, J. (2006) “Current validity of the Delphi method in social sciences,”
P!*(,)%)-+*$%# 1)/!*$0"+,-# $,6# 0)*+$%# *($,-!, 73(5), pp. 467–482. doi:
10.1016/j.techfore.2005.09.002.
Langdon, S. W. (2007) “Conceptualizations of respect: Qualitative and quantitative
evidence of four (five) themes,” P(!#D)8/,$%#)1#20B*()%)-B, 141(5), pp. 469–484. doi:
10.3200/jrlp.141.5.469-484.
Lara-Bercial, S. !"# $%& (2017) F8/).!$,# 0.)/"# *)$*(+,-# 1/$9!')/:. Champaign:
Human Kinetics.
Lara-Bercial, S. and Mallett, C. J. (2016) “The Practices and Developmental Pathways
of Professional and Olympic Serial Winning Coaches,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#3.)/"#4)$*(+,-#
D)8/,$%, 3(3), pp. 221–239. doi: 10.1123/iscj.2016-0083.
Lara-Bercial, S. and McKenna, J. (2017) “No coach, no gain: The central role of the
coach in the personal development of youth performance athletes,” D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"#
20B*()%)-B, 27(3), pp. 50–59.
!
265
Leary, M. R. and Kowalski, R. M. (1990) “Impression management: A literature review
and two-component model.,” 20B*()%)-+*$%#T8%%!"+,, 107(1), pp. 34–47.
Lee, R. M. and Renzetti, C. M. (1990) “The Problems of Researching Sensitive
Topics,” C9!/+*$,# T!($=+)/$%# 3*+!,"+0", 33(5), pp. 510–528. doi:
10.1177/0002764290033005002.
Leitfaden371 (2002) Q!+"1$6!,# ekd;# F+-!,0+*(!/8,-# >_8+6!%+,!# ekd;# 2!/0),$%#
./)"!*"+),@. Berlin: Innenministerkonferenz.
Lemyre, F., Trudel, P. and Durand-Bush, N. (2007) “How youth-sport coaches learn
to coach,” 3.)/"#20B*()%)-+0", 21(2), pp. 191–209.
Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. G. (2000) “Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions,
and emerging confluences,” in Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds) [$,6?)):#)1#
g8$%+"$"+=!#/!0!$/*(. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 163–188.
Lindberg, O. and Rantatalo, O. (2014) “Competence in professional practice: A
practice theory analysis of police and doctors,” [89$,#H!%$"+),0, 68(4), pp. 561–582.
Lindgren, C. (2012) “Do You Know Your Outcome of Realistic Scenario Training?,”
2/)*!6+$# O# 3)*+$%# $,6# T!($=+)/$%# 3*+!,*!0, 46, pp. 863–869. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.214.
Linstone, H. A. and Turoff, M. (2002) “Introduction,” in Linestone, H. A. and Turoff,
Murray (eds) P(!# U!%.(+# 9!"()6;# P!*(,+g8!0# $,6# $..%+*$"+),. Boston: Addison-
Wesley Publishing Company, pp. 3–12.
Loturco, I. !"#$%& (2014) “Predicting punching acceleration from selected strength and
power variables in elite karate athletes,” D)8/,$%# )1# 3"/!,-"(# $,6# 4),6+"+),+,-#
H!0!$/*(, 28(7), pp. 1826–1832. doi: 10.1519/jsc.0000000000000329.
Loturco, I. !"# $%& (2016) “Strength and power qualities are highly associated with
punching impact in elite amateur boxers,” D)8/,$%# )1# 3"/!,-"(# $,6# 4),6+"+),+,-#
H!0!$/*(, 30(1), pp. 109–116.
Luhmann, N. (1996) 3)*+$%#0B0"!90. Stanford: University Press.
Luhmann, N. (2009) “Zur Komplexität von Entscheidungssituationen,” 3)K+$%!#
3B0"!9!, 15(1), pp. 3–35.
!
266
Lyle, J. (2002) 3.)/"0#*)$*(+,-#*),*!."0;#$#1/$9!')/:#1)/#*)$*(!0]#?!($=+)8/. New
York: Routledge.
Lyle, J. (2018a) “Reflecting on the development of a conceptual framework for sport
coaching,” <,"!/,$"+),$%# 3.)/"# 4)$*(+,-# D)8/,$%. Edited by M. Meyer and M. S.
Staller, 5(1), pp. 90–98. doi: 10.1123/iscj.2017-0085.
Lyle, J. (2018b) “The transferability of sport coaching research: A critical
commentary,” A8!0", 6(2), pp. 1–19. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2018.1453846.
Lynch, C. G. (2017) “Don’t let them kill you on some dirty roadway: survival, entitled
violence, and the culture of modern American policing,” 4),"!9.)/$/B# D80"+*!#
H!=+!', 21(1), pp. 1–11. doi: 10.1080/10282580.2018.1415045.
MacIntosh, A. R. and Desmoulin, G. T. (2019) “Police Officer performance and
perception using light, medium and heavy weight tactical batons,” C..%+!6#
F/-),)9+*0, 75(Ergonomics 48 2005), pp. 178–183. doi:
10.1016/j.apergo.2018.10.004.
MacNamara, Á. !"# $%& (2011) “Promoting lifelong physical activity and high level
performance: Realising an achievable aim for physical education,” 2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#
$,6#3.)/"#2!6$-)-B, 16(3), pp. 265–278. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2010.535200.
Mageau, G. A. and Vallerand, R. J. (2003) “The coach–athlete relationship: a
motivational model,” D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!0, 21(11), pp. 883–904. doi:
10.1080/0264041031000140374.
Makin, D. A. !"#$%& (2018) “Contextual determinants of observed negative emotional
states in police–community interactions,” 4/+9+,$%#D80"+*!# $,6#T!($=+)/, 102(1), p.
009385481879605. doi: 10.1177/0093854818796059.
Mallett, C. J. !"#$%& (2009) “Formal vs. informal coach education,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#
)1# 3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!# Y# 4)$*(+,-, 4(3), pp. 325–364. doi:
10.1260/174795409789623883.
Mallett, C. J. and Dickens, S. (2009) “Authenticity in formal coach education: Online
studies in sports coaching at The University of Queensland,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#
4)$*(+,-#3*+!,*!, 3(2), pp. 79–90.
!
267
Maloney, M. !"# $%& (2018) “Taekwondo fighting in training does not simulate the
affective and cognitive demands of competition: Implications for behaviour and
transfer,” S/),"+!/0#+,#20B*()%)-B, 9. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00025.
Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D. and Guassora, A. D. (2016) “Sample size in qualitative
interview studies: Guided by information power,” A8$%+"$"+=!#[!$%"(#H!0!$/*(, 26(13),
pp. 1753–1760. doi: 10.1177/1049732315617444.
Marenin, O. (2016) “Cheapening Death: Danger, Police Street Culture, and the Use
of Deadly Force,” 2)%+*!# A8$/"!/%B, 19(4), pp. 461–487. doi:
10.1177/1098611116652983.
Mars, H. van der (2006) “Time and learning in physical education,” in Kirk, D. et al.
(eds) P(!#($,6?)):#)1#.(B0+*$%#!68*$"+),. London: Routledge, pp. 191–213.
Marshall, B. !"#$%& (2015) “Does sample size matter in qualitative research?: A review
of qualitative interviews in is research,” D)8/,$%#)1# 4)9.8"!/#<,1)/9$"+),# 3B0"!90,
54(1), pp. 11–22. doi: 10.1080/08874417.2013.11645667.
Martin, M. M., Chesebro, J. L. and Mottet, T. P. (1997) “Students’ perceptions of
instructors’ socio-communicative style and the influence on instructor credibility and
situational motivation,” 4)998,+*$"+),#H!0!$/*(# H!.)/"0, 14(4), pp. 431–440. doi:
10.1080/08824099709388686.
Martindale, A. and Collins, D. J. (2012) “A professional judgment and decision making
case study: Reflection-in-action research,” P(!#3.)/"#20B*()%)-+0", 26(4), pp. 500–
518. doi: 10.1123/tsp.26.4.500.
Martindale, A. and Collins, D. J. (2013) “The Development of Professional Judgment
and Decision Making Expertise in Applied Sport Psychology,” P(!#3.)/"#20B*()%)-+0",
27(4), pp. 390–399. doi: 10.1123/tsp.27.4.390.
Martinie, M.-A. and Fointiat, V. (2006) “Self-esteem, trivialization, and attitude
change,” 3'+00#D)8/,$%#)1#20B*()%)-B, 65(4), pp. 221–225.
Mason, M. (2010) “Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative
interviews,” S)/89#A8$%+"$"+=!#3)*+$%#H!0!$/*(, 11(3).
!
268
Mathieu, J. E. and Martineau, J. W. (1997) “Individual and situational influences on
training motivation,” in Ford, J. K. et al. (eds). Erlbaum (Improving training
effectiveness in work organizations), pp. 193–221.
Mayring, P. (2015) A8$%+"$"+=!# <,($%"0$,$%B0!;# _/8,6%$-!,# 8,6# P!*(,+:!,. 12.
aktualisierte Auflage. Beltz (Beltz).
McLean, K. !"#$%& (2019) “Police officers as warriors or guardians: empirical reality or
intriguing rhetoric?,” D80"+*!# A8$/"!/%B, 19(3), pp. 1–23. doi:
10.1080/07418825.2018.1533031.
McMains, M. J. (2002) “Active listening: The aspirin of negotiations,” D)8/,$%#)1#2)%+*!#
4/+0+0#I!-)"+$"+),0, 2(2), pp. 69–74.
McPherson, S. L. and Thomas, J. R. (1989) “Relation of knowledge and performance
in boys’ tennis: Age and expertise,” D)8/,$%#)1#FG.!/+9!,"$%#4(+%6#20B*()%)-B, 48(2),
pp. 190–211. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(89)90002-7.
Metcalfe, J. (2017) “Learning from Errors,” C,,8$%#H!=+!'#)1#20B*()%)-B, 68(1), pp.
465–489. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044022.
Metzler, M. (2017) <,0"/8*"+),$%#9)6!%0#1)/#.(B0+*$%#!68*$"+),. New York: Routledge.
Meyrick, J. de (2003) “The Delphi method and health research,” [!$%"(# F68*$"+),,
103(1), pp. 7–16. doi: 10.1108/09654280310459112.
Miller, L. (2007) NFPPQF;#N!,"$%#")8-(,!00#"/$+,+,-#1)/#%$'#!,1)/*!9!,". Flushing,
NY: Looseleaf Law Publications.
Mitchell, R. J. and Lewis, S. (2017) “Intention is not method, belief is not evidence,
rank is not proof: ethical policing needs evidence-based decision making,”
<,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#F9!/-!,*B#3!/=+*!0. Edited by J. Smith, 31(3), pp. 188–199.
doi: 10.1108/ijes-04-2017-0018.
Morabito, M. S. !"# $%& (2012) “Crisis Intervention Teams and People With Mental
Illness: Exploring the Factors That Influence the Use of Force,” 4/+9!#Y#U!%+,g8!,*B,
58(1), pp. 57–77. doi: 10.1177/0011128710372456.
!
269
Morgan, K. (2016) “Reconceptualizing motivational climate in physical education and
sport coaching: An interdisciplinary perspective,” A8!0", 69(1), pp. 95–112. doi:
10.1080/00336297.2016.1152984.
Morrison, J. E. and Meliza, L. L. (1999) S)8,6$"+),0#)1#"(!#C1"!/#C*"+),#H!.)/". United
States Army Research Institute for the Behavioural and Social Sciences.
Moy, B. !"# $%& (2015) “Overcoming acculturation: physical education recruits’
experiences of an alternative pedagogical approach to games teaching,” 2(B0+*$%#
F68*$"+),# $,6# 3.)/"# 2!6$-)-B, 21(4), pp. 386–406. doi:
10.1080/17408989.2015.1017455.
Moy, B., Renshaw, I. and Davids, K. (2014) “Variations in acculturation and Australian
physical education teacher education students’ receptiveness to an alternative
pedagogical approach to games teaching,” 2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#$,6#3.)/"#2!6$-)-B,
19(4), pp. 349–369. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2013.780591.
Moy, B., Renshaw, I. and Davids, K. (2016) “The impact of nonlinear pedagogy on
physical education teacher education students’ intrinsic motivation,” 2(B0+*$%#
F68*$"+),# $,6# 3.)/"# 2!6$-)-B, 21(5), pp. 517–538. doi:
10.1080/17408989.2015.1072506.
Muir, B. !"#$%& (2011) “Developmentally appropriate approaches to coaching children,”
in Stafford, I. (ed.) 4)$*(+,-#*(+%6/!,#+,#0.)/". New York: Routledge, pp. 39–59.
Muir, B. !"#$%& (2015) “A framework for planning your practice: A coach’s perspective,”
in Till, K. and Jones, B. (eds) P(!# 0*+!,*!#)1# 0.)/"#/8-?B. Wiltshire: The Crowood
Press, pp. 161–175.
Murray, K. R. (2004) P/$+,+,-#$"#"(!#0.!!6#)1#%+1!L#=)%89!#),!;#P(!#6!1+,+"+=!#"!G"?)):#
1)/# 9+%+"$/B# $,6# %$'# !,1)/*!9!,"# /!$%+"B# ?$0!6# "/$+,+,-. Gotha, FL: Armiger
Publications.
Myhill, A. and Bradford, B. (2013) “Overcoming cop culture? Organizational justice
and police officers’ attitudes toward the public,” 2)%+*+,-, 36(2), pp. 338–356. doi:
10.1108/13639511311329732.
!
270
Nakamura, J. and Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014) “The concept of flow,” in
Csikszentmihalyi, M (ed.). New York: Springer (Flow and the foundations of positive
psychology), pp. 239–263. doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8_16.
Nash, C. S. !"#$%& (2012) “Parameterising expertise in coaching: Past, present and
future,” D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!0, 30(10), pp. 985–994. doi:
10.1080/02640414.2012.682079.
Nash, C. S. and Collins, D. J. (2006) “Tacit Knowledge in Expert Coaching: Science
or Art?,” A8!0", 58(4), pp. 465–477. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2006.10491894.
Nash, C. S., Sproule, J. and Horton, P. (2011) “Excellence in coaching: The art and
skill of elite practitioners,” H!0!$/*(#A8$/"!/%B#1)/#FG!/*+0!#$,6#3.)/", 82(2), pp. 229–
238.
Nassauer, A. (2018) “How Robberies Succeed or Fail: Analyzing Crime Caught on
CCTV,” D)8/,$%# )1# H!0!$/*(# +,# 4/+9!# $,6# U!%+,g8!,*B, 55(1), pp. 1–30. doi:
10.1177/0022427817715754.
Nassauer, A. and Legewie, N. M. (2018) “Video Data Analysis,” 3)*+)%)-+*$%#N!"()60#
Y#H!0!$/*(, 8(3), pp. 004912411876909–40. doi: 10.1177/0049124118769093.
Nassauer, A. and Legewie, N. M. (2019) “Analyzing 21st Century Video Data on
Situational Dynamics—Issues and Challenges in Video Data Analysis,” 3)*+$%#
3*+!,*!0, 8(3), pp. 100–21. doi: 10.3390/socsci8030100.
Nelson, L., Cushion, C. and Potrac, P. (2013) “Enhancing the provision of coach
education: the recommendations of UK coaching practitioners,” 2(B0+*$%# F68*$"+),#
$,6#3.)/"#2!6$-)-B, 18(2), pp. 204–218. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2011.649725.
Ng, D. and Ogle, A. (2016) “Research gatekeepers: The travelogue of two cities,” in
F45# T80+,!00# U)*")/$%# $,6# F9!/-+,-# 3*()%$/0# 4)%%)g8+89# bcdq. Perth: Edith
Cowan University, pp. 180–182.
Nieuwenhuys, A. !"#$%& (2016) “Sitting duck or scaredy-cat? Effects of shot execution
strategy on anxiety and police officers’ shooting performance under high threat,” Q!-$%#
$,6#4/+9+,)%)-+*$%#20B*()%)-B, 22(2). doi: 10.1111/lcrp.12099.
!
271
Nieuwenhuys, A., Cañal-Bruland, R. and Oudejans, R. R. D. (2012) “Effects of threat
on police officers’ shooting behavior: Anxiety, action specificity, and affective
influences on perception,” C..%+!6# 4)-,+"+=!# 20B*()%)-B, 26(4), pp. 608–615. doi:
10.1002/acp.2838.
Nieuwenhuys, A. and Oudejans, R. R. (2017) “Anxiety and performance: perceptual-
motor behavior in high-pressure contexts,” 48//!,"#M.+,+),# +,# 20B*()%)-B, 16, pp.
28–33. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.019.
Nieuwenhuys, A. and Oudejans, R. R. D. (2010) “Effects of anxiety on handgun
shooting behavior of police officers: A pilot study,” C,G+!"BL#3"/!00#$,6#4).+,-, 23(2),
pp. 225–233. doi: 10.1080/10615800902977494.
Nieuwenhuys, A. and Oudejans, R. R. D. (2011a) “Anxiety and perceptual-motor
performance: Toward an integrated model of concepts, mechanisms, and processes,”
20B*()%)-+*$%#H!0!$/*(, 76(6), pp. 747–759. doi: 10.1007/s00426-011-0384-x.
Nieuwenhuys, A. and Oudejans, R. R. D. (2011b) “Training with anxiety: Short- and
long-term effects on police officers’ shooting behavior under pressure,” 4)-,+"+=!#
2/)*!00+,-, 12(3), pp. 277–288. doi: 10.1007/s10339-011-0396-x.
Noe, R. A. (1986) “Trainees’ attributes and attitudes: neglected influences on training
effectiveness,” C*$6!9B# )1# N$,$-!9!,"# H!=+!', 11(4), pp. 736–749. doi:
10.5465/amr.1986.4283922.
North, J. (2013) “Philosophical underpinnings of coaching practice research,” A8!0",
65(3), pp. 278–299. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2013.773524.
Nota, P. M. D. and Huhta, J.-M. (2019) “Complex motor learning and police training:
Applied, cognitive, and clinical perspectives,” S/),"+!/0#+,#20B*()%)-B, 10, pp. 167–
20. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01797.
Oberfield, Z. W. (2012) “Socialization and self-selection: How police officers develop
their views about using force,” C69+,+0"/$"+),# Y# 3)*+!"B, 44(6), pp. 702–730. doi:
10.1177/0095399711420545.
Occhino, J. L. !"#$%& (2014) “Autonomy-Supportive Pedagogical Approach to Sports
Coaching: Research, Challenges and Opportunities,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0#
3*+!,*!#Y#4)$*(+,-, 9(2), pp. 401–415. doi: 10.1260/1747-9541.9.2.401.
!
272
Oliva, J. R., Morgan, R. and Compton, M. T. (2010) “A practical overview of de-
escalation skills in law enforcement: Helping individuals in crisis while reducing police
liability and injury,” D)8/,$%#)1#2)%+*!#4/+0+0#I!-)"+$"+),0, 10(1), pp. 15–29.
Orr, R. !"#$%& (2017) “It is my job, not my age: Fitness loss between police cadets and
officers not explained by age,” D)8/,$%#)1#3*+!,*!#$,6#N!6+*+,!#+,#3.)/", 20, p. 58.
doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2017.09.311.
Orr, R. M. !"# $%& (2018) “Assessing Differences in Anthropometric and Fitness
Characteristics Between Police Academy Cadets and Incumbent Officers.,” D)8/,$%#
)1# 0"/!,-"(# $,6# *),6+"+),+,-# /!0!$/*(, 32(9), pp. 2632–2641. doi:
10.1519/jsc.0000000000002328.
Orth, D., Kamp, J. van der and Button, C. (2018) “Learning to be adaptive as a
distributed process across the coach–athlete system: situating the coach in the
constraints-led approach,” 2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#$,6#3.)/"#2!6$-)-B, 24(2), pp. 146–
161. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2018.1557132.
Otte, F. W., Millar, S.-K. and Klatt, S. (2019) “Skill Training Periodization in ‘Specialist’
Sports Coaching—An Introduction of the ‘PoST’ Framework for Skill Development,”
S/),"+!/0#+,#3.)/"0#$,6#C*"+=!#Q+=+,-, 1, pp. 7–17. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2019.00061.
Patton, M. Q. (1990) A8$%+"$"+=!#H!0!$/*(+,-. London: Sage Publications.
Patton, M. Q. (2002) A8$%+"$"+=!# /!0!$/*(# $,6# !=$%8$"+),# 9!"()60. 3rd edn. New
York: Sage.
PDV211 (2014) 2Ua#bdd;#3*(+!u"/$+,+,-#+,#6!/#C80O#8,6#S)/"?+%68,-#O#C80-$?!#bccn#
>2Ua#bdd;#3())"+,-# "/$+,+,-#+,#?$0+*#$,6#$6=$,*!6# "/$+,+,-#O#bccn# !6+"+),@. Berlin:
Innenminister Konferenz.
Perry, L. R. (2011) P'!,"BOS+/0"#4!,"8/B#2)%+*!#P/$+,+,-;#H!*/8+"0]#2/)?%!9O3)%=+,-#
3:+%%0#S)%%)'+,-#3*!,$/+)OT$0!6#P/$+,+,-.
Pester, L., Körner, S. and Staller, M. S. (2019) “Motivationale Grundbedürfnisse von
Polizeibeamten beim Einsatztraining,” in Niehaus, A. (ed.) C?0"/$*"0#)1#"(!#k"(#C,,8$%#
4),1!/!,*!#)1#"(!#4)99+""!!#1)/#N$/"+$%#C/"0#3"86+!0#+,#"(!#_!/9$,#C00)*+$"+),#)1#
3.)/"# jFG.!/+!,*+,-L# P/$+,+,-# $,6# P(+,:+,-# "(!# T)6B# +,# N$/"+$%# C/"0# $,6# N$/"+$%#
!
273
3.)/"0lL#I)=!9?!/#dnOdkL#bcdfL#_(!,"L#T!%-+89. Journal of Martial Arts Research,
2(2), p. 27.
Piggott, D. (2007) “Psychology of Learning and ‘Smart Coaching’: the theory behind
‘managing mistakes,’” <,0+-(";#P(!#M,%+,!#D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"#20B*()%)-B, pp. 80–85.
Pinder, R. A. !"# $%& (2011) “Representative learning design and functionality of
research and practice in sport,” D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"#Y#FG*!/*+0!#20B*()%)-B, 33, pp. 146–
155.
Pinder, R. A. !"# $%& (2014) “Skill acquisition and representative task design,” in
Hristovski, R. et al. (eds) 4)9.%!G# 0B0"!90#+,# 0.)/". London: Routledge, pp. 319–
333.
Powell, C. (2003) “The Delphi technique: myths and realities,” D)8/,$%#)1#C6=$,*!6#
I8/0+,-, 41(4), pp. 376–382. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02537.x.
Preddy, J. E., Stefaniak, J. E. and Katsioloudis, P. (2019a) “Building a cognitive
readiness for violent police-citizen encounters: A task analysis,” 2!/1)/9$,*!#
<9./)=!9!,"#A8$/"!/%B, 5(4), pp. 1–22. doi: 10.1002/piq.21288.
Preddy, J. E., Stefaniak, J. E. and Katsioloudis, P. (2019b) “The convergence of
psychological conditioning and cognitive readiness to inform training strategies
addressing violent police-public encounters,” 2!/1)/9$,*!# <9./)=!9!,"# A8$/"!/%B,
5(4), pp. 1–32. doi: 10.1002/piq.21300.
Price, A. !"# $%& (2017) “Learning to Play Soccer: Lessons on Meta-cognition from
Video Game Design,” A8!0", 70(3), pp. 1–13. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2017.1386574.
Price, A. !"#$%& (2019) “Coaching Games: Comparisons and Contrasts,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#
3.)/"#4)$*(+,-#D)8/,$%, 6(1), pp. 126–131. doi: 10.1123/iscj.2018-0015.
Prokos, A. and Padavic, I. (2002) “‘There oughtta be a law against bitches’:
Masculinity lessons in police academy training,” _!,6!/L#R)/:#Y#M/-$,+K$"+),, 9(4),
pp. 439–459. doi: 10.1111/1468-0432.00168.
Raab, M. (2003) “Decision making in sports: Influence of complexity on implicit and
explicit learning,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1# 3.)/"#$,6#FG!/*+0!# 20B*()%)-B, 1(4), pp.
406–433. doi: 10.1080/1612197x.2003.9671728.
!
274
Raab, M. !"#$%& (2019) “The past, present and future of research on judgment and
decision making in sport,” 20B*()%)-B# )1# 3.)/"# $,6# FG!/*+0!, 42, pp. 25–32. doi:
10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.10.004.
Rahr, S. and Rice, S. K. (2015) “From warriors to guardians: recommitting american
police culture to democratic ideals,” I!'# 2!/0.!*"+=!0# +,# 2)%+*+,-# T8%%!"+,, (April
2015), pp. 1–15.
Rajakaruna, N. !"# $%& (2017) “Ensuring the validity of police use of force training,”
2)%+*!# 2/$*"+*!# $,6# H!0!$/*(, 18(5), pp. 507–521. doi:
10.1080/15614263.2016.1268959.
Rantatalo, O., Sjöberg, D. and Karp, S. (2018) “Supporting roles in live simulations:
how observers and confederates can facilitate learning,” D)8/,$%# )1# a)*$"+),$%#
F68*$"+),#Y#P/$+,+,-, 3, pp. 1–18. doi: 10.1080/13636820.2018.1522364.
Reade, I., Rodgers, W. and Hall, N. (2008) “Knowledge Transfer: How do High
Performance Coaches Access the Knowledge of Sport Scientists?,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#
D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!# Y# 4)$*(+,-, 3(3), pp. 319–334. doi:
10.1260/174795408786238470.
Reade, I., Rodgers, W. and Spriggs, K. (2008) “New ideas for high performance
coaches: A case study of knowledge transfer in sport science,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#
)1# 3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!# Y# 4)$*(+,-, 3(3), pp. 335–354. doi:
10.1260/174795408786238533.
Reddy, L. A. !"#$%& (2013) “Violence Against Teachers: Case Studies from the APA
Task Force,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#3*())%#Y#F68*$"+),$%#20B*()%)-B, 1(4), pp. 231–
245. doi: 10.1080/21683603.2013.837019.
Renden, P. G., Nieuwenhuys, A., !"#$%& (2015) “Dutch police officers’ preparation and
performance of their arrest and self-defence skills: A questionnaire study,” C..%+!6#
F/-),)9+*0. Edited by M. Meyer and M. S. Staller, 49(c), p. 8 17. doi:
10.1016/j.apergo.2015.01.002.
Renden, P. G., Landman, A., !"# $%& (2015) “Police arrest and self-defence skills:
Performance under anxiety of officers with and without additional experience in
martial arts.,” F/-),)9+*0, 58(9), pp. 1–11. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1013578.
!
275
Renden, P. G., Savelsbergh, G. J. P. and Oudejans, R. R. D. (2016) “Effects of reflex-
based self-defence training on police performance in simulated high-pressure arrest
situations,” F/-),)9+*0, 60(5), pp. 1–11. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2016.1205222.
Renshaw, I. !"# $%& (2019) “Evaluating weaknesses of ‘perceptual-cognitive training’
and ‘brain training’ methods in sport: An ecological dynamics critique,” S/),"+!/0# +,#
20B*()%)-B, 9, p. 245. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02468.
Renshaw, I. and Chow, J. Y. (2019) “A constraint-led approach to sport and physical
education pedagogy,” 2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#$,6#3.)/"#2!6$-)-B, 24(2), pp. 103–116.
doi: 10.1080/17408989.2018.1552676.
Renshaw, I. and Moy, B. (2018) “A Constraint-Led Approach to Coaching and
Teaching Games: Can going back to the future solve the «they need the basics before
they can play a game» argument?,” v-)/$# .$/$#%$# F68*$*+w,# Sx0+*$#B# !%# U!.)/"!,
20(1), pp. 1–26. doi: 10.24197/aefd.1.2018.1-26.
Reuter, J. (2014) 2)%+K!+# 8,6# _!'$%"# >2)%+*!# $,6# =+)%!,*!@. Frankfurt: Verlag für
Polizeiwissenschaft.
Roberts, A. P. J. (2012) yP(!# ')/:+,-# 9!9)/B# 18,*"+),# )1# $8"()/+0!6# 1+/!$/90#
)11+*!/0#68/+,-#0+98%$"!6#$/9!6#*),1/),"$"+),0#\5,.8?%+0(!6#6)*")/$%#6+00!/"$"+),^.
Robertson, S. !"# $%& (2018) “A rule induction framework for the determination of
representative learning design in skilled performance,” D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!0,
37(11), pp. 1280–1285. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2018.1555905.
Robinson, J. !"#$%& (2018) “Aerobic Fitness is of Greater Importance than Strength and
Power in the Load Carriage Performance of Specialist Police.,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#7)8/,$%#
)1#!G!/*+0!#0*+!,*!, 11(4), pp. 987–998.
Roca, A. !"#$%& (2013) “Perceptual-cognitive skills and their interaction as a function of
task constraints in soccer.,” D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"# $,6# FG!/*+0!# 20B*()%)-B, 35(2), pp.
144–155.
Roca, A. and Williams, A. M. (2016) “Expertise and the interaction between different
perceptual-cognitive skills: Implications for testing and training,” S/),"+!/0# +,#
20B*()%)-B, 7(1518), p. 353. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00792.
!
276
Rojek, J., Alpert, G. and Smith, H. (2012) “The utilization of research by the police,”
2)%+*!# 2/$*"+*!# $,6# H!0!$/*(, 13(4), pp. 329–341. doi:
10.1080/15614263.2012.671599.
Ronglan, L. T. and Aggerholm, K. (2014) “‘Humour helps’: Elite sports coaching as a
balancing act,” 3.)/"0# 4)$*(+,-# H!=+!', 3(1), pp. 33–45. doi:
10.1080/21640629.2014.885776.
Rorty, R. (1991) M?7!*"+=+"BL# /!$%+"+=+09L#$,6# "/8"(;#2(+%)0).(+*$%# .$.!/0L#a)%89!# d.
Cambridge: Cambridge Universtiy Press.
Rosenbaum, D. P. (2010) “Police research: Merging the policy and action research
traditions,” 2)%+*!# 2/$*"+*!# $,6# H!0!$/*(, 11(2), pp. 144–149. doi:
10.1080/15614261003593203.
Rothwell, M. !"# $%& (2020) “A Department of Methodology Can Coordinate
Transdisciplinary Sport Science Support,” D)8/,$%#)1#FG.!/"+0!, 3(1), pp. 55–65.
Rutter, M. (2020) “Resilience in the Face of Adversity,” T/+"+0(#D)8/,$%#)1#20B*(+$"/B,
147(6), pp. 598–611. doi: 10.1192/bjp.147.6.598.
Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000) “Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.,” C9!/+*$,# 20B*()%)-+0",
55(1), pp. 68–78. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68.
Rynne, S. B. and Mallett, C. J. (2014) “Coaches’ learning and sustainability in high
performance sport,” H!1%!*"+=!# 2/$*"+*!, 15(1), pp. 12–26. doi:
10.1080/14623943.2013.868798.
Sagar, S. S. and Jowett, S. (2012) “Communicative acts in coach–athlete interactions:
When losing competitions and when making mistakes in training,” R!0"!/,#D)8/,$%#)1#
4)998,+*$"+),, 76(2), pp. 148–174. doi: 10.1080/10570314.2011.651256.
Salas, E. !"#$%& (2012) “The science of training and development in organizations,”
20B*()%)-+*$%# 3*+!,*!# +,# "(!# 28?%+*# <,"!/!0", 13(2), pp. 74–101. doi:
10.1177/1529100612436661.
!
277
Salas, E. and Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2001) “The Science of Training: A Decade of
Progress,” C,,8$%# H!=+!'# )1# 20B*()%)-B, 52(1), pp. 471–499. doi:
10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.471.
Sanchez, C. and Dunning, D. (2018) “Overconfidence among beginners: Is a little
learning a dangerous thing?,” D)8/,$%#)1#2!/0),$%+"B#$,6#3)*+$%#20B*()%)-B, 114(1),
pp. 10–28. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000102.
Saus, E. R. !"#$%& (2006) “The effect of brief situational awareness training in a police
shooting simulator: An experimental study,” N+%+"$/B#20B*()%)-B, 18(Suppl.), pp. S3–
S21. Available at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327876mp1801s_2.
Schakel, J. K., Fenema, P. C. van and Faraj, S. (2016) “Shots fired! Switching
between practices in police work,” M/-$,+K$"+),# 3*+!,*!, 27(2), pp. 1–20. doi:
10.1287/orsc.2016.1048.
Schiepek, G. (2017) “Komplexität, Berechenbarkeit und Big Data in der Psychologie
[Complexity, predictability and big data in psychology],” in Pietsch, W. et al. (eds)
T!/!*(!,?$/:!+"# 6!/# R!%"Z Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, pp. 311–331. doi:
10.1007/978-3-658-12153-2_16.
Schmalzl, H. P. (2008) F+,0$"K:)9.!"!,K#>4)9.!"!,*!#),#68"B@. Frankfurt: Verlag
für Polizeiwissenschaft.
Schmidt, R. A. and Lee, T. D. (2005) N)")/# *),"/)%# $,6# %!$/,+,-;# C# ?!($=+)/$%#
!9.($0+0. 4th edn. Champaign: Human Kinetics.
Schmidtke, A., Fricke, S. and Lester, D. (1999) “Suicide among German federal and
state police officers,” 20B*()%)-+*$%# H!.)/"0, 84(1), pp. 157–166. doi:
10.2466/pr0.84.1.157-166.
Schöllhorn, W. (1999) “Individualität - ein vernachlässigter Parameter?,”
Q!+0"8,-00.)/", (2), pp. 7–12.
Schöllhorn, W., Hegen, P. and Davids, K. (2012) “The nonlinear nature of learning -
A differential learning approach,” P(!#M.!,#3.)/"0#3*+!,*!0#D)8/,$%, 5(1), pp. 100–
112.
!
278
Schön, D. A. (1983) P(!#/!1%!*"+=!#./$*"+"+),!/;#[)'#./)1!00+),$%0#"(+,:#+,#$*"+),. New
York: Basic Books.
Schram, B. !"#$%& (2019) “Risk factors for development of lower limb osteoarthritis in
physically demanding occupations: A narrative umbrella review.,” D)8/,$%# )1#
)**8.$"+),$%#(!$%"(, 62(1). doi: 10.1002/1348-9585.12103.
Schram, B. !"#$%& (2020) “The effects of body armour on mobility and postural control
of police officers.,” D)8/,$%# )1# T)6B')/:# $,6# N)=!9!,"# P(!/$.+!0. doi:
10.1016/j.jbmt.2020.03.001.
Schreier, M. (2012) A8$%+"$"+=!#4),"!,"#C,$%B0+0#+,#2/$*"+*!. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Schreier, M. (2014) “Varianten qualitativer Inhaltsanalyse:!Ein Wegweiser im Dickicht
der Begrifflichkeiten [Variants of qualitative content analysis: A guide in the jungle of
terms],” S)/89# A8$%+"$"+=!# 3)*+$%# H!0!$/*(, 15(1). Available at:
http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2043/3636.
Schwering, M. !"# $%& (2019) “Der Umgang von Polizeikommissaranwärter*innen mit
der Schusswaffe im Verlauf der Ausbildung [The handling of weapons of police
recruits during academy training],” in Meyer, M. and Staller, M. S. (eds) P!$*(+,-#+0#
%!$/,+,-;# N!"()60L# *),"!,"0# $,6# /)%!# 9)6!%0# +,# "(!# 6+6$*"+*0# )1# 9$/"+$%# $/"0# O# f"(#
C,,8$%#3B9.)0+89#)1#"(!#6=0#E)9+00+),#jE$9.1:8,0"#8,6#E$9.10.)/"&l Vechta, pp.
27–28.
Seifert, L. !"#$%& (2019) “Skill transfer, expertise and talent development: An ecological
dynamics perspective,” N)=!9!,"#Y#3.)/"#3*+!,*!0#O#3*+!,*!#Y#N)"/+*+"z, 19(6), pp.
705–11. doi: 10.1051/sm/2019010.
Sengupta, A. (2006) “Chaos, nonlinearity, complexity: a unified perspective,” in
Sengupta, A. (ed.) 4($)0L# ,),%+,!$/+"BL# *)9.%!G+"B;# P(!# 6B,$9+*$%# .$/$6+-9# )1#
,$"8/!. Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 270–352.
Senn, C. Y. !"#$%& (2015) “Efficacy of a sexual assault resistance program for university
women,” P(!# I!'# F,-%$,6# 7)8/,$%# )1# 9!6+*+,!, 372(24), pp. 2326–2335. doi:
10.1056/nejmsa1411131.
Sepur, N. M. (2015) “Unendliche Coinz,” in E/B."),#4)9+*#4)%%!*"+),. Home: Follow
Up Publications, pp. 12–20.
!
279
Sherman, L. W. (2015) “A Tipping Point for ‘Totally Evidenced Policing,’” <,"!/,$"+),$%#
4/+9+,$%#D80"+*!#H!=+!', 25(1), pp. 11–29. doi: 10.1177/1057567715574372.
Shi, B. (2019) “Design and realization of shooting training system for police force,” in
C6=$,*!0#+,#[89$,#S$*")/0#$,6#3B0"!90#<,"!/$*"+),. New York: Springer, pp. 175–
183. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-94334-3_19.
Shipton, B. (2009) “Problem based learning: Does it provide appropriate levels of
guidance and flexibility for use in police recruit education?,” D)8/,$%# )1# Q!$/,+,-#
U!0+-,, 3(1), pp. 57–67. doi: 10.5204/jld.v3i1.55.
Shipton, B. (2012) “Expanding police educators’ understanding of teaching, are they
as learner-centred as they think?,” D)8/,$%#)1#Q!$/,+,-#U!0+-,, 4(2), pp. 1–19. doi:
10.5204/jld.v4i2.71.
Shipton, B. L. (2019) “Police educators’ experiences of teaching and teaching
development: implications for developing police academy staff,” D)8/,$%# )1#
4/+9+,)%)-+*$%# H!0!$/*(L# 2)%+*B# $,6# 2/$*"+*!, 32(1), p. 21. doi: 10.1108/jcrpp-11-
2018-0037.
Shultz, T. R. and Lepper, M. R. (1996) “Cognitive dissonance reduction as constraint
satisfaction.,” D)8/,$%#)1#2!/0),$%+"B#$,6#3)*+$%#20B*()%)-B, 103(2), pp. 219–240. doi:
10.1037/0033-295x.103.2.219.
Sim, J. (1998) “Collecting and analysing qualitative data: Issues raised by the focus
group,” D)8/,$%# )1# C6=$,*!6# I8/0+,-, 28(2), pp. 345–352. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-
2648.1998.00692.x.
Simon, F. B. (2015) F+,1i(/8,-#+,#3B0"!9"(!)/+!#8,6#E),0"/8:"+=+0980#><,"/)68*"+),#
+,#0B0"!9#"(!)/B#$,6#*),0"/8*"+=+90@. Heidelberg: Carl Auer.
Simons, J., Dewitte, S. and Lens, W. (2003) “‘Don’t do it for me. Do it for yourself!’
Stressing the personal relevance enhances motivation in physical education,” D)8/,$%#
)1#3.)/"#$,6#FG!/*+0!#20B*()%)-B, 25(2), pp. 145–160.
Sitzmann, T. !"#$%& (2009) “A cyclical model of motivational constructs in web-based
courses,” N+%+"$/B# 20B*()%)-B, 21(4), pp. 534–551. doi:
10.1080/08995600903206479.
!
280
Sjöberg, D. and Karp, S. (2012) “Video–based debriefing enhances reflection,
motivation and performance for police students in realistic scenario training,” 2/)*!6+$#
O# 3)*+$%# $,6# T!($=+)/$%# 3*+!,*!0, 46, pp. 2816–2824. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.570.
Sjöberg, D., Karp, S. and Rantatalo, O. (2016) “Acting in scenario training as a tool
for developing professional knowing in police education.” I)/6+*# 2)%+*!# H!0!$/*(#
3!9+,$/#bcdq#O#\2)%+*!^#H!1)/90#$,6#4($,-!0#+,#"(!#2)%+*!, Oslo.
Skulmoski, G., Hartman, F. and Krahn, J. (2007) “The Delphi method for graduate
research,” D)8/,$%#)1#<,1)/9$"+),#P!*(,)%)-B#F68*$"+),, 6.
Smith, A. and Parr, M. (2006) “Young people’s views on the nature and purposes of
physical education: a sociological analysis,” 3.)/"L#F68*$"+),#$,6#3)*+!"B, 12(1), pp.
37–58.
Smith, B. and Caddick, N. (2012) “Qualitative methods in sport: A concise overview
for guiding social scientific sport research,” C0+$#2$*+1+*#D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"#$,6#3)*+$%#
3*+!,*!, 1(1), pp. 60–73. doi: 10.1080/21640599.2012.701373.
Smith, L. (1992) “Ethical issues in interviewing,” D)8/,$%#)1#C6=$,*!6#I8/0+,-, 17(1),
pp. 98–103. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1992.tb01823.x.
Spence, W. and Millott, J. (2014) “An exploration of attitudes and support needs of
police officer negotiators involved in suicide negotiation,” 2)%+*!# 2/$*"+*!# $,6#
H!0!$/*(, 17(1), pp. 5–21. doi: 10.1080/15614263.2014.961455.
Spencer, K. B., Charbonneau, A. K. and Glaser, J. (2016) “Implicit bias and policing,”
3)*+$%# $,6# 2!/0),$%+"B# 20B*()%)-B# 4)9.$00, 10(1), pp. 50–63. doi:
10.1111/spc3.12210.
Staller, M. S. (2015a) T/+6-+,-#"(!#-$.;#<,=!0"+-$"+,-# !11!*"+=!,!00#+,# 0!%1O6!1!,*!&#
2/!0!,"$"+),#$"#"(!d0"#N$/"+$%#C/"0#3"86+!0#4),1!/!,*!L#4$/6+11#5,+=!/0+"BL#D8,!#bcdn.
Staller, M. S. (2015b) “Differenzieren oder nicht? – Trainingsdidaktische
Überlegungen für gemischtgeschlechtliche Gruppen im polizeilichen Einsatztraining
[Differentiate or not? - Training didactical considerations for mixed-gender groups in
police training],” in Marquart, A. and Kuhn, P. (eds) a),#EV9.1!/,#8,6#EV9.1!/+,,!,#
!
281
O# E$9.1:8,0"# 8,6# E$9.10.)/"# $80# 6!/# _!,6!/.!/0.!:"+=!# E$9.1:8,0"# 8,6#
E$9.10.)/"#+,#S)/0*(8,-#8,6#Q!(/!. Hamburg: Czwalina, pp. 171–177.
Staller, M. S. (2015c) “Entscheiden und Handeln: Didaktische Überlegungen im
polizeilichen Einsatztraining anhand eines Reglermodells für motorische und
kognitive Anforderungen [Decision-making and action: Didactical considerations in
the police use of force training based on a controller-model for cognitive and motor
skills],” 2)%+K!+#Y#R+00!,0*($1", (2), pp. 24–36.
Staller, M. S. !"# $%& (2016) “Selbstverteidigung in Deutschland – Eine empirische
Studie zu trainingsdidaktischen Aspekten von 103 Selbstverteidigungssystemen
[Self-defence in Germany - A empirical study of pedagogical aspects in 103 self-
defence systems],” in Meyer, M. J. (ed.) N$/"+$%#C/"0#3"86+!0#+,#_!/9$,B#O#U!1+,+,-#
$,6#4/)00+,-#U+0*+.%+,$/B#T)8,6$/+!0. Hamburg: Czwalina, pp. 51–56.
Staller, M. S. (2016) 3+98%$"!6# \5,O^$/9!6# 4),1/),"$"+),0# $,6# 2)%+*!# U!*+0+),#
N$:+,-;#FG$9+,+,-#<,1%8!,*+,-#S$*")/0#),#P$*"+*$%#U!*+0+),#N$:+,-.
Staller, M. S., Abraham, A., !"# $%& (2017) “It’s not about the pain – it’s about the
feedback’: Krav maga experts’ views on self-defence performance and the experience
of contact, pain and injury in the process of skill development,” C/*(+=!0#)1#T86), 13,
pp. 35–49.
Staller, M. S., Cole, J. C., !"# $%& (2017) “Representative training with less risk: The
effects of non-lethal training and conventional ammunition in police use of force
training on heart rate variability,” 2)%+*+,-;#C#D)8/,$%#M1#2)%+*B#C,6#2/$*"+*!, pp. 1–15.
doi: 10.1093/police/pax054.
Staller, M. S., Abraham, A., !"#$%& (2018) “Avoidance, deescalation and attacking: An
expert coach consensus in self-defence practice,” N)=!9!,"#O# D)8/,$%#)1# 2(B0+*$%#
F68*$"+),#3.)/"#3*+!,*!0, 11(3), pp. 213–214.
Staller, M. S., Bertram, O., !"#$%& (2018) “Mehr Engagement im Trainingsprozess? Das
‘Sport Education Model’ im polizeilichen Einsatztraining [More commitment in the
training process? The ‘Sport Education Model’ in police training],” in Balz, E. and
Kuhlmann, D. (eds) 3.)/"'+00!,0*($1"# +,# .V6$-)-+0*(!9# <,"!/!00!. Hamburg:
Czwalina, pp. 122–124.
!
282
Staller, M. S., Körner, S., Heil, V., Klemmer, I., !"#$%& (2019a) “Die Trainingspraxis im
polizeilichen Einsatztraining: Eine Fallstudie [The practice of training in police training:
a case study],” in Niehaus, A. (ed.) C?0"/$*"0# )1#"(!# k"(#C,,8$%# 4),1!/!,*!#)1# "(!#
4)99+""!!#1)/#N$/"+$%#C/"0#3"86+!0#+,#"(!#_!/9$,#C00)*+$"+),#)1#3.)/"#jFG.!/+!,*+,-L#
P/$+,+,-#$,6#P(+,:+,-#"(!#T)6B#+,#N$/"+$%#C/"0#$,6#N$/"+$%#3.)/"0lL#I)=!9?!/#dnOdkL#
bcdfL#_(!,"L#T!%-+89. Journal of Martial Arts Research, 2(2).
Staller, M. S., Körner, S., Heil, V. and Kecke, A. (2019a) “Mehr gelernt als geplant?
Versteckte Lehrpläne im Einsatztraining [More learned than planed? The hidden
curriculum in police use of force training],” in Frevel, B. and Schmidt, P. (eds)
F9.+/+0*(!# 2)%+K!+1)/0*(8,-# {{<<# U!9):/$"+!# 8,6# N!,0*(!,/!*("!# O#
[!/$801)/6!/8,-!,#1i/#8,6# $,# 6+!#.)%+K!+%+*(!#T+%68,-0$/?!+". Frankfurt: Verlag für
Polizeiwissenschaft, pp. 132–149.
Staller, M. S., Körner, S., Heil, V. and Kecke, A. (2019b) “The negotiation of contact
and pain in pedagogical settings: Police recruits preferred levels of contact in police
use of force training,” D)8/,$%# )1# N$/"+$%# C/"0# H!0!$/*(, 2(1). doi:
10.15495/ojs_25678221_21_34.
Staller, M. S., Körner, S., Heil, V., Klemmer, I., !"#$%& (2019b) “„War ne Runde Sache“
– Die reflexive Coaching Praxis von polizeilichen Einsatztrainer*innen [„It was a round
thing" - The reflective coaching practice of police trainers],” in Meyer, M. and Staller,
M. S. (eds) jQ!(/!,#+0"#Q!/,!,;#N!"()6!,L#<,($%"!#8,6#H)%%!,9)6!%%!#+,#6!/#U+6$:"+:#
6!0#EV9.1!,0ls;# +,"!/,$"+),$%!0#3B9.)0+89t# f&#D$(/!0"$-8,-# 6!/#6=0# E)99+00+),#
jE$9.1:8,0"#8,6#E$9.10.)/"l#=)9#e&#O#n&#M:")?!/#bcdr#$,# 6!/#5,+=!/0+"V"#a!*("$t#
C?0"/$*"?$,6. Hamburg: Deutsche Vereinigung für Sportwissenschaft (dvs), pp. 15–
16.
Staller, M. S., Körner, S., Heil, V., Abraham, A., !"# $%& (2021a) “Police recruits’
perception of skill transfer from training to the field,” 2/!.$/!6#1)/#28?%+*$"+),.
Staller, M. S., Körner, S., Heil, V., Abraham, A., !"#$%& (2021b) “Police recruits ‘wants
and subjective needs in mandatory police training,” 2/!.$/!6#1)/#.8?%+*$"+),.
Staller, M. S., Körner, S., Heil, V., Abraham, A., !"# $%& (2021c) “The Planning and
Reflection of Police Training – A Case Study,” 2/!.$/!6#1)/#.8?%+*$"+),.
Staller, M. S., Körner, S., Heil, V., Klemmer, I., !"# $%& (2021) “The Structure and
delivery of police training – A Case Study,” 2/!.$/!6#1)/#.8?%+*$"+),.
!
283
Staller, M. S. and Abraham, A. (2016) “‘Work on your problem-solving’: krav maga
experts’ views on optimal learning environments for self-defence training,”
<,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#4)$*(+,-#3*+!,*!, 10(2), pp. 91–113.
Staller, M. S., Bertram, O. and Körner, S. (2017) “Weapon system selection in police
use-of-force training: Value to skill transfer categorisation matrix,” 3$%80#D)8/,$%, 5(2),
pp. 1–15.
Staller, M. S. and Körner, S. (2018) “Your partner makes you better: The partner
interaction paradigm in conflict training,” N)=!9!,"#O#D)8/,$%#)1#2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#
3.)/"#3*+!,*!0, 11(3), p. 169.
Staller, M. S. and Körner, S. (2019a) “Commentary: Complex Motor Learning and
Police Training: Applied, Cognitive, and Clinical Perspectives,” S/),"+!/0# +,#
20B*()%)-B, 10, p. 2444. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02444.
Staller, M. S. and Körner, S. (2019b) “Quo vadis Einsatztraining? [Quo vadis police
training?],” in Kühne, E. (ed.) U+!# X8:8,1"# 6!/# 2)%+K!+$/?!+"# O# 6+!# 2)%+K!+$/?!+"# 6!/#
X8:8,1"#O#P!+%# <<. Rothenburg: Eigenverlag der Hochschule der Sächsischen Polizei
(FH), pp. 321–364.
Staller, M. S. and Körner, S. (2020a) “Komplexe Gewaltprävention: Zum Umgang mit
Gewalt auf individueller Ebene [Complex Violence Prevention: Coping with Violence
on an Individual Level],” |0"!//!+*(+0*(!#X!+"0*(/+1"#1i/#3)K+)%)-+!, 45(S1), pp. 157–
174. doi: 10.1007/s11614-020-00413-0.
Staller, M. S. and Körner, S. (2020b) “Regression, Progression and Renewal: The
Continuous Redevelopment of Expertise in Police Use of Force Coaching,” F8/).!$,#
D)8/,$%#)1#3!*8/+"B#H!0!$/*(. doi: 10.1007/s41125-020-00069-7.
Staller, M. S. and Körner, S. (2020c) “Training für den Einsatz II: Plädoyer gegen das
Training isolierter Komponenten im polizeilichen Einsatztraining [Training for
deployment II: Plea against the training of isolated components in police deployment
training],” U+!#2)%+K!+, 111(6), pp. 223–231.
Staller, M. S., Körner, S. and Abraham, A. (2020) “Beyond technique – The limits of
books (and online videos) in developing self defense coaches’ professional
judgement and decision making in the context of skill development for violent
!
284
encounters,” C*"$# 2!/+)6+*$# U8!%%$")/89, 8(1), pp. 1–16. doi: 10.2478/apd-2020-
0009.
Staller, M. S., Körner, S. and Heil, V. (2019) “Das Partner-Interaktions-Modell für
physische Simulationen: Validierung durch Trainierende im polizeilichen
Einsatztraining [The partner interaction model for physical simulations: Validation by
trainees of police training],” in Meyer, M. and Staller, M. S. (eds) jQ!(/!,#+0"#Q!/,!,;#
N!"()6!,L#<,($%"!#8,6#H)%%!,9)6!%%!#+,#6!/#U+6$:"+:#6!0#EV9.1!,0ls;#+,"!/,$"+),$%!0#
3B9.)0+89t#f&#D$(/!0"$-8,-#6!/#6=0#E)99+00+),#jE$9.1:8,0"#8,6#E$9.10.)/"l#=)9#
e&#O#n&# M:")?!/#bcdr#$,# 6!/#5,+=!/0+"V"#a!*("$t# C?0"/$*"?$,6. Hamburg: Deutsche
Vereinigung für Sportwissenschaften (dvs), pp. 41–42.
Staller, M. S. and Zaiser, B. (2015a) “Auf dem Weg zur Expertise als Einsatztrainer:
Selbst-bestimmtes Lernen im Rahmen der regelmäßigen Dienstverrichtung [On the
way to expertise as a police use of force trainer: Self-directed learning in the context
of daily routine],” 2)%+K!+#Y#R+00!,0*($1", (4), pp. 39–49.
Staller, M. S. and Zaiser, B. (2015b) “Developing problem solvers: New perspectives
on pedagogical practices in police use of force training,” D)8/,$%#)1#Q$'#F,1)/*!9!,",
4(3), pp. 1–15.
Staller, M. S., Zaiser, B. and Körner, S. (2017) “From Realism to Representativeness:
Changing Terminology to Investigate Effectiveness in Self-Defence,” N$/"+$%# C/"0#
3"86+!0, (4), pp. 70–77. doi: 10.18573/j.2017.10187.
Stoszkowski, J. and Collins, D. J. (2014) “Communities of practice, social learning
and networks: exploiting the social side of coach development,” 3.)/"L#F68*$"+),#$,6#
3)*+!"B, 19(6), pp. 773–788. doi: 10.1080/13573322.2012.692671.
Stoszkowski, J. and Collins, D. J. (2015) “Sources, topics and use of knowledge by
coaches.,” D)8/,$%# )1# 3.)/"0# 3*+!,*!0, 34(9), pp. 1–9. doi:
10.1080/02640414.2015.1072279.
Stoughton, S. W. (2015) “Law enforcement’s ‘warrior’ problem,” [$/=$/6#Q$'#H!=+!'#
S)/89, 128(225), pp. 225–234.
Stoughton, S. W. (2016) “Principled policing: Warrior cops and guardian officers,”
R$:!#S)/!0"#Q$'#H!=+!', 51, pp. 611–667.
!
285
Sue, S. (1999) “Science, ethnicity, and bias: Where have we gone wrong?,” C9!/+*$,#
20B*()%)-+0", 54(12), pp. 1070–1077. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.54.12.1070.
Sutcliffe, J. T., Benson, A. J. and Bruner, M. W. (2019) “Parents value competence
more than warmth in competitive youth ice hockey coaches: Evidence based on the
innuendo effect,” 20B*()%)-B# )1# 3.)/"# $,6# FG!/*+0!, 43, pp. 82–89. doi:
10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.01.005.
Switzer, K. C. and Nagy, M. S. (2005) “The influence of training reputation, managerial
support, and self-efficacy on pre-training motivation and perceived training transfer,”
C..%+!6#[&#H&#N&#H!0!$/*(, 10(1), pp. 21–34.
Tan, C. W. K., Chow, J. Y. and Davids, K. (2012) “‘How does TGfU work?’: examining
the relationship between learning design in TGfU and a nonlinear pedagogy,” 2(B0+*$%#
F68*$"+),# $,6# 3.)/"# 2!6$-)-B, 17(4), pp. 331–348. doi:
10.1080/17408989.2011.582486.
Tannenbaum, S. I. and Yukl, G. (1992) “Training and development in work
organizations,” C,,8$%# H!=+!'# )1# 20B*()%)-B, 43(1), pp. 399–441. doi:
10.1146/annurev.ps.43.020192.002151.
Terrill, W. (2003) “Police use of force and suspect resistance: The micro process of
the police-suspect encounter,” 2)%+*!# A8$/"!/%B, 6(1), pp. 51–83. doi:
10.1177/1098611102250584.
Terrill, W. and Paoline, E. A. (2012) “Examining less lethal force policy and the force
continuum: Results from a national use-of-force study,” 2)%+*!#A8$/"!/%B, 16(1), pp.
38–65. doi: 10.1177/1098611112451262.
Thomas, G. (2011) “A typology for the case study in social science following a review
of definition, discourse, and structure,” A8$%+"$"+=!#<,g8+/B, 17(6), pp. 511–521. doi:
10.1177/1077800411409884.
Till, K. !"#$%& (2019) “A framework for decision-making within strength and conditioning
coaching,” 3"/!,-"(# $,6# 4),6+"+),+,-# D)8/,$%, 41(1), pp. 14–26. doi:
10.1519/ssc.0000000000000408.
!
286
Todak, N. and James, L. (2018) “A systematic social observation study of police de-
escalation tactics,” 2)%+*!# A8$/"!/%B, 18(2), p. 109861111878400. doi:
10.1177/1098611118784007.
Todak, N. and March, M. (2021) “De-Escalation in Policing: Preliminary Answers to
Key Questions,” in Dunham, R. G., Alpert, G. P., and McLean, K. D. (eds) 4/+"+*$%#
<008!0#+,#2)%+*+,-;#4),"!9.)/$/B#H!$6+,-0, pp. 398–415.
Todak, N. and White, M. D. (2019) “Expert officer perceptions of de-escalation in
policing,” 2)%+*+,-, 36(1), pp. 47–16. doi: 10.1108/pijpsm-12-2018-0185.
Tosey, P. (2016) “The Hunting of the Learning Organization,” N$,$-!9!,"#Q!$/,+,-,
36(3), pp. 335–352. doi: 10.1177/1350507605055350.
Tosey, P., Visser, M. and Saunders, M. N. (2012) “The origins and conceptualizations
of ‘triple-loop’ learning: A critical review,” N$,$-!9!,"#Q!$/,+,-, 43(3), pp. 291–307.
doi: 10.1177/1350507611426239.
Tracy, S. J. (2010) “Qualitative Quality: Eight ‘Big-Tent’ Criteria for Excellent
Qualitative Research,” A8$%+"$"+=!# <,g8+/B, 16(10), pp. 837–851. doi:
10.1177/1077800410383121.
Tracy, S. J. (2020) A8$%+"$"+=!# /!0!$/*(# 9!"()60;4)%%!*"+,-# !=+6!,*!L# */$1"+,-#
$,$%B0+0L#*)998,+*$"+,-#+9.$*". Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Tracy, S. J. and Hinrichs, M. M. (2017) “Big Tent Criteria for Qualitative Research,” in
Davis, C. S. and Potter, R. F. (eds) P(!#<,"!/,$"+),$%#F,*B*%).!6+$#)1#4)998,+*$"+),#
H!0!$/*(#N!"()60. John Wiley & Sons.
Trudel, P., Gilbert, W. and Werthner, P. (2010) “Coach education effectiveness,” in
Lyle, J. and Cushion, C. (eds) 3.)/"# *)$*(+,-;# 2/)1!00+),$%+0$"+),# $,6# ./$*"+*!.
London: Elsevier, pp. 135–152.
Tsai, W. C. and Tai, W. T. (2003) “Perceived importance as a mediator of the
relationship between training assignment and training motivation,” 2!/0),,!%#H!=+!',
32(2), pp. 151–163. doi: 10.1108/00483480310460199.
!
287
Turman, P. D. (2006) “Athletes’ perception of coach power use and the association
between playing status and sport satisfaction,” 4)998,+*$"+),# H!0!$/*(# H!.)/"0,
23(4), pp. 273–282. doi: 10.1080/08824090600962540.
Turnnidge, J., Cote, J. and Hancock, D. J. (2014) “Positive youth development from
sport to life: Explicit or implicit transfer?,” A8!0", 66(2), pp. 203–217. doi:
10.1080/00336297.2013.867275.
Uttl, B., White, C. A. and Gonzalez, D. W. (2017) “Meta-analysis of faculty’s teaching
effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not
related,” 3"86+!0# +,# F68*$"+),$%# F=$%8$"+),, 54, pp. 22–42. doi:
10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.007.
Vansteenkiste, M. !"#$%& (2004) “Motivating learning, performance, and persistence:
the synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts.,”
D)8/,$%#)1#2!/0),$%+"B#$,6#3)*+$%#20B*()%)-B, 87(2), pp. 246–260. doi: 10.1037/0022-
3514.87.2.246.
Vecchi, G. M. (2009) “Conflict & crisis communication: The behavioral influence
stairway model and suicide intervention,” 24 June, pp. 32–39.
Vickers, J. N. and Lewinski, W. J. (2012) “Performing under pressure: Gaze control,
decision making and shooting performance of elite and rookie police officers,” [89$,#
N)=!9!,"#3*+!,*!, 31(1), pp. 101–117. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2011.04.004.
Violanti, J. M., Charles, L. E. and McCaniels, E. (2017) “Police stressors and health:
a state-of-the-art review,” 2)%+*+,-;# C,# <,"!/,$"+),$%# D)8/,$%# )1# 2)%+*!# 3"/$"!-+!0# Y#
N$,$-!9!,", Volume 40(Issue 4). doi: 10.1108/pijpsm-06-2016-0097.
Visek, A. J. !"#$%& (2015) “The Fun Integration Theory: Toward Sustaining Children
and Adolescents Sport Participation,” D)8/,$%#)1#2(B0+*$%#C*"+=+"B#$,6#[!$%"(, 12(3),
pp. 424–433. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2013-0180.
Vries, J. de and Timmins, F. (2015) “Care erosion in hospitals: Problems in reflective
nursing practice and the role of cognitive dissonance,” I8/0!# F68*$"+),# P)6$B,
38(38), pp. 5–8. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.12.007.
!
288
Vučković, G. !"# $%& (2008) “Characteristics of shooting efficiency during a basic
shooting training program involving police officers of both sexes,” S$*"$#8,+=!/0+"$"+0O
0!/+!0;#2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#$,6#3.)/", 6(2), pp. 147–157.
Werth, E. P. (2009) 2/)?%!9O?$0!6# %!$/,+,-# +,# .)%+*!# $*$6!9+!0;# C68%"#%!$/,+,-#
./+,*+.%!0# 8"+%+K!6# ?B# .)%+*!# "/$+,!/0&# \5,.8?%+0(!6# 6)*")/$%# "(!0+0^@. Lynchburg:
Liberty University.
Werth, E. P. (2011) “Scenario training in police academies: developing students’
higher-level thinking skills,” 2)%+*!#2/$*"+*!#$,6#H!0!$/*(, 12(4), pp. 325–340. doi:
10.1080/15614263.2011.563970.
Werthner, P. and Trudel, P. (2006) “A New Theoretical Perspective for Understanding
How Coaches Learn to Coach,” P(!# 3.)/"# 20B*()%)-+0", 20(2), pp. 198–212. doi:
10.1123/tsp.20.2.198.
White, D. (2006) “A conceptual analysis of the hidden curriculum of police training in
England and Wales,” 2)%+*+,-# $,6# 3)*+!"B, 16(4), pp. 386–404. doi:
10.1080/10439460600968164.
White, M. D. (2006) “Hitting the target (or not): Comparing characteristics of fatal,
injurious, and noninjurious police shootings,” 2)%+*!#A8$/"!/%B, 9(3), pp. 303–330. doi:
10.1177/1098611105277199.
Wilkinson, M. H. F. (1997) “Nonlinear Dynamics, Chaos-theory, and the ‘Sciences of
Complexity’: Their Relevance to the Study of the Interac- tion between Host and
Microflora,” in Heidt, P. et al. (eds) M%6#[!/?)/,#5,+=!/0+"B#3!9+,$/#N),)-/$.(#I!'#
C,"+9+*/)?+$%#3"/$"!-+!0. Herborn-Dill, Germany: Herborn Litterae, pp. 111–130.
Williams, A. M. (2017) “Using the ’Expert Performance Approach’as a framework for
examining and enhancing skill learning: Improving understanding of how experts
learn,” S/),"%+,!#Q!$/,+,-#H!0!$/*(, 5(3). doi: 10.14786/flr.v5i3.267.
Williams, A. M. and Ford, P. R. (2008) “Expertise and expert performance in sport,”
<,"!/,$"+),$%# H!=+!'# )1# 3.)/"# $,6# FG!/*+0!# 20B*()%)-B, 1(1), pp. 4–18. doi:
10.1080/17509840701836867.
!
289
Williams, A. M. and Hodges, N. J. (2005) “Practice, instruction and skill acquisition in
soccer: Challenging tradition,” D)8/,$%#)1#3.)/"0#3*+!,*!0, 23(6), pp. 637–650. doi:
10.1080/02640410400021328.
Wolfe, S. E. !"#$%& (2019) “Advancing a Theory of Police Officer Training Motivation
and Receptivity,” D80"+*!#A8$/"!/%B, pp. 1–23. doi: 10.1080/07418825.2019.1703027.
Wolfe, S. E. !"#$%& (2020) “Social Interaction Training to Reduce Police Use of Force,”
P(!#CIICQ3#)1#"(!#C9!/+*$,#C*$6!9B#)1#2)%+"+*$%#$,6#3)*+$%#3*+!,*!, 687(1), pp.
124–145. doi: 10.1177/0002716219887366.
Wright, T., Trudel, P. and Culver, D. (2007) “Learning how to coach: the different
learning situations reported by youth ice hockey coaches,” 2(B0+*$%#F68*$"+),#$,6#
3.)/"#2!6$-)-B, 12(2), pp. 127–144. doi: 10.1080/17408980701282019.
Zaiser, B. and Staller, M. S. (2015) “The word is sometimes mightier than the sword:
Rethinking communication skills to enhance officer safety,” D)8/,$%# )1# Q$'#
F,1)/*!9!,", 4(5), pp. 1–17.
Zapf, P. A. and Dror, I. E. (2017) “Understanding and Mitigating Bias in Forensic
Evaluation: Lessons from Forensic Science,” <,"!/,$"+),$%#D)8/,$%#)1#S)/!,0+*#N!,"$%#
[!$%"(, 16(3), pp. 1–12. doi: 10.1080/14999013.2017.1317302.
