David Weisburd’s research while affiliated with George Mason University and other places

While numerous studies demonstrate that Black individuals have more negative perceptions of the police than their White counterparts, few have simultaneously examined racial differences in perceptions of procedural justice, police effectiveness, and legitimacy. Additionally, limited research has rigorously examined the relationship between race and perceptions of the police while carefully accounting for potentially relevant factors that could influence this relationship. Using unique survey data largely drawn from crime hot spots in Baltimore, Maryland, we examined the differences between White ( n = 500) and Black ( n = 2,452) individuals’ perceptions of procedural justice, police effectiveness, and police legitimacy. Furthermore, by conducting propensity-score matching on White and Black residents in our data, we compared perceptions of the police between 394 pairs of similarly situated Black and White residents who were matched based on demographics, victimization, offending, self-control, recent experiences with the police, perceived police presence, and street environments. Results indicated that while Black people have more negative perceptions of procedural justice than White people, they do not hold different perceptions regarding police effectiveness and obligation to obey. These findings hold even when comparing the matched White and Black people. Our findings suggest a nuanced relationship between race and perceptions of the police.

Microgeographic units of analysis have moved to the center of criminological inquiry. This Element brings together leading crime-and-place scholars to identify promising areas for future study. Section 1 introduces the Element and the importance of focusing on the future of studies of crime and place. Section 2 examines the development of hot-spots policing and the importance of focusing on its impact on communities. It also looks at how 'pracademics' can advance the science and practice of place-based policing. Section 3 focuses on place managers as prevention agents and examines how city government can influence crime at place. It further contends that rural communities need to become a key focus of crime-and-place scholarship. Section 4 emphasizes the importance of the connection of health, crime, and place. It also argues for the importance of expanding the methodological tools of crime and place to include careful ethnographic and qualitative research.

Our paper reports on a systematic review of crime concentration studies over the last 35 years. We identify 47 papers that report on crime concentrations at a micro geographic unit of analysis. These papers produced 49 estimates of general crime concentration for crime incidents at streets segments for a specific cumulative proportion of crime. The median concentration for these estimates is 50 % of crime found at 4.5 % of streets, and 25 % of crime at 1.25 % of streets. The bandwidth for 50 % crime concentration is 9.3 % (1.7–11.0 %), and for 25 % crime concentration 3.0 % (0.4–3.4 %). Using the interquartile range to exclude outliers, we found a bandwidth of 2.5 % (3.2–5.7 %) for 50 % of crime, and 1.4 % (0.8–2.2 %) for 25 % of crime. Crime concentration was generally stronger for specific types of crime, and bandwidths of concentration were generally smaller. Using alternative measures of crime and different micro geographies produces similar conclusions regarding strong crime concentration at place with narrow bandwidths. Our review shows that a general framework of a law of crime concentration applies across a large number of cities across many regions around the world.

One of the key policing innovations of the last three decades has been community-oriented policing. It is particularly important because it is one of the only proactive policing approaches that consistently improves citizen evaluations of the police. At the same time, a series of reviews have concluded that there is not persuasive evidence that community policing reduces crime. In this paper we argue that these conclusions are likely flawed because of what we term crime reporting sensitivity (CRS) bias. CRS bias occurs because community policing leads to more cooperation with the police and subsequently increased crime reporting. Such increased crime reporting bias adjusts crime prevention outcomes of community policing downward. We illustrate this process by reanalyzing data from the Brooklyn Park ACT Experiment (Weisburd et al., 2021). We begin by showing the specific crime categories that contribute most to CRS bias. We then use a difference-in-differences panel regression approach to assess whether the experimental intervention in Brooklyn Park led to significant CRS bias. Finally, we use bounded estimates from the Brooklyn Park Experiment to adjust meta-analytic results from prior community policing studies to examine whether the conclusion that community policing does not impact on crime would need to be revisited if CRS bias was accounted for. We find that adjusted estimates tell a very different, more positive, story about community policing, suggesting that future studies should recognize and adjust for CRS bias, or identify other measures not influenced by this mechanism.

While reformers view police training as an important means for improving performance, the training evidence base has historically been weak. Little research has focussed on how training impacts both attitudes and behaviour in the field, and the extent to which changes in attitudes following a training program are linked to officer behaviour in the field. This paper uses data from a multi-site randomized trial of procedural justice training in hot spots to assess the attitude–behaviour link. We ask to what extent do officers’ attitudes about procedural justice impact their behaviour in the field? We find no support for officer baseline attitudes being predictive of their use of procedural justice with the public. But for trained officers, we do find evidence that attitudes following training are related to behaviour in observed interactions in the field. We conclude with a discussion of the implications for police training and training evaluation studies.

This paper describes a quasi-experimental evaluation of a reform in Israel (‘EMUN’), which attempted to institutionalize problem-oriented policing on a national scale. The current study examines the effect of this reform on tackling traffic disturbance and road bullying offences. We compared three police stations that chose to deal with traffic offences using the tools and techniques provided through the reform (treatment stations) with five police stations that were matched - using a specially designed algorithm - on several criteria, including similar trends of traffic offences (comparison stations). Each treatment station was compared to two comparison stations using a difference-in-differences approach. In five out of six comparisons there were large and significant reductions in documented traffic disturbances in the targeted areas of the treatment stations compared to the control stations. We also found evidence of significant diffusions in crime control benefits in two of the treatment stations. However, there was evidence of significant geographical displacement to the buffer zone in the largest treatment stations. We attribute this to differences in the nature of the areas targeted and discuss the relative harms and benefits. The findings of the study show that institutionalizing a variety of evidence-based policing strategies has a promise not only for classic crimes (such as property and violence), but also for incivilities and quality-of-life offenses.

Research summary We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis examining whether increasing preventive patrol in large areas reduces crime. Our review included experimental and quasi‐experimental studies that focused on areas such as beats, precincts, or entire jurisdictions and that measured a crime outcome either through official data or surveys. We identified 17 studies to include in our review. We used two methods for assessing study impacts: an approach which identified a primary/general outcome measure and a second approach which used robust variance estimation (RVE) and included all effect sizes across each study. Both approaches showed small crime prevention benefits (RVE: 9% decline; primary/general: 6% decline), but only the RVE model was significant at conventional levels ( p < 0.05). There was no significant evidence of displacement. Moderator analyses suggest that as dosage increases so do the crime prevention impacts. In RVE models, preventive patrol was associated with significant reductions in property and violent crime, but nonsignificant increases in drug and disorder offenses. Policy implications Increasing preventive patrol activities has the potential to reduce crime in large administrative areas. At the same time, existing studies offer little guidance as to how such preventive patrol should be carried out. Deterrence theory, as well as evidence from studies of hot spots policing, suggests that the greatest benefits will be gained from informing patrol efforts about where and when crime occurs. Although more research is needed regarding patrol allocations in large areas, present knowledge suggests that the more such patrols can be targeted at specific places at specific times, the greater will be the crime control benefits. In this context, we argue that police agencies may want to apply a hybrid approach to police patrol, which would include a combination of hot spots policing units and general patrol units informed by data on where crime is concentrated.