The effects of merging proactive CCTV monitoring with directed police patrol: a randomized controlled trial
This study was designed to test the effect of increased certainty of punishment on reported crime levels in CCTV target areas of Newark, NJ. The experimental strategy was designed for the purpose of overcoming specific surveillance barriers that minimize the effectiveness of CCTV, namely high camera-to-operator ratios and the differential response policy of police dispatch. An additional camera operator was deployed to monitor specific CCTV cameras, with two patrol cars dedicated to exclusively responding to incidents of concern detected on the experimental cameras.
A randomized controlled trial was implemented in the analysis. A randomized block design was used to assign each of the 38 CCTV schemes to either a treatment or control group. Schemes were grouped into pairs based upon their levels of three types of calls for service: violent crime, social disorder, and narcotics activity. Negative binomial regression models tested the effect that assignment to the treatment group had on levels of the aforementioned crime categories.
The experimental strategy was associated with significant reductions of violent crime and social disorder in the treatment areas relative to the control areas. Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) and Total Net Effect (TNE) values suggest that the number of crime incidents prevented was sizable in numerous instances. The experiment had much less of an effect on narcotics activity.
Overall, the findings support the hypothesis that the integration of CCTV with proactive police activity generates a crime control benefit greater than what research suggests is achievable via “stand-alone” camera deployment, particularly in the case of street-level crime.
KeywordsCCTV Crime prevention Randomized block design Randomized field experiment Video surveillance Viewsheds
- Ariel, B., & Farrington, D. (2010). Randomized block designs. In A. Piquero & D. Weisburd (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative criminology. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Armitage, R., Smythe, G., & Pease, K. (1999). Burnley CCTV evaluation. In N. Tilley & K. Painter (Eds.), Surveillance of public space: CCTV, street lighting and crime prevention (Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 10, pp. 225–249). Monsey: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
- Barr, R., & Pease, K. (1990). Crime placement, displacement and deflection. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: a review of research (Vol. 12, pp. 277–218). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Braga, A. (1997). Solving violent crime problems: an evaluation of the Jersey City Police Department’s pilot program to control violent places. Doctoral Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School-Newark, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.Google Scholar
- Braga, A., Papachristos, A., & Hureau, D. (2012). The effects of hot spots policing on crime: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Justice Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/07418825.2012.673632.
- Brantingham, P.L., & Brantingham, P.J. (1998). Mapping crime for analytic purposes: location quotients, counts and rates. In Weisburd, D., & McEwen, T. (Eds) Crime Mapping and Crime Prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, 8, 263–288.Google Scholar
- Britt, C., & Weisburd, D. (2010). Statistical power. In P. Alex & D. L. Weisburd (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative criminology. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Brown, B. (1995). CCTV in town centres: three case studies (Crime Detection and Prevention Series, Paper 68). London: Home Office.Google Scholar
- Buerger, M. (1993). Convincing the recalcitrant: reexamining the Minneapolis RECAP experiment. Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
- Butler, G. (1994). Shoplifters’ views on security: lessons for crime prevention. In M. Gill (Ed.), Crime at work: studies in security and crime prevention. London: Perpetuity Press.Google Scholar
- Cameron, A., Kolodinski, E., May, H., & Williams, N. (2008). Measuring the effects of video surveillance on crime in Los Angeles. Report prepared for the California Research Bureau. USC School of Policy, Planning, and Development.Google Scholar
- Clarke, R. (1997). Introduction. In R. Clarke (Ed.), Situational crime prevention, successful case studies (2nd ed.). Monsey: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
- Clarke, R., & Eck, J. (2005). Crime analysis for problem solvers in 60 small steps. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.Google Scholar
- Clarke, R., & Weisburd, D. (1994). Diffusion of crime control benefits. In R. Clarke (Ed.), Crime prevention studies (Vol. 2, pp. 165–183). Monsey: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Cornish, D., & Clarke, R. (Eds.). (1986). The reasoning criminal: rational choice perspectives on offending. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Cowan, N. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 42, 87–185.Google Scholar
- Ditton, J., & Short, E. (1998). Evaluating Scotland’s first town centre CCTV scheme. In C. Norris, J. Moran, & G. Armstrong (Eds.), Surveillance, closed circuit television and social control. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- Ditton, J., & Short, E. (1999). Yes, it works, no it doesn’t: comparing the effects of open-street CCTV in two adjacent Scottish town centres. In N. Tilley & K. Painter (Eds.), Surveillance of public space: CCTV, street lighting and crime prevention (Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 10, pp. 201–223). Monsey: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
- Fyfe, N., & Bannister, J. (1996). City watching: closed circuit television surveillance in public spaces. Area, 28(1), 37–46.Google Scholar
- Gajewski, F. (1994). The drug market analysis program: a participant observation study. Unpublished master’s thesis, Seton Hall University: South Orange, NJ.Google Scholar
- Gill, M., & Hemming, M. (2004). Evaluation of CCTV in the London borough of Lewisham. Leicester: Perpetuity Research & Consultancy International (PRCI).Google Scholar
- Gill, M., & Spriggs, A. (2005). Assessing the impact of CCTV (p. 292). London: Home Office Research Study No.Google Scholar
- Gill, M., & Turbin, V. (1998). CCTV and shop theft: towards a realistic evaluation. In N. Clive, M. Jade, & A. Gary (Eds.), Surveillance, closed circuit television and social control. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- Gill, M., Spriggs, A., Allen, J., Hemming, M., Jessiman, P., & Kara, D. (2005). Control room operation: findings from control room observations. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
- Guerette, R. (2009). Analyzing crime displacement and diffusion. Problem-oriented guides for police. Problem-solving tools series. No. 10. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Center for Problem-Oriented Policing.Google Scholar
- Harocopos, A., & Hough, M. (2005). Drug dealing in open air markets (Problem-Oriented Guides for Police. Problem-Specific Guides Series: No. 31). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.Google Scholar
- Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6, 65–70.Google Scholar
- Kennedy, D. (2006). Old wine in new bottles: policing and the lessons of pulling levers. In D. Weisburd & B. Anthony (Eds.), Police innovation. Contrasting perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Kennedy, D., & Wong, S. (2009). The high point drug market intervention strategy. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
- King, J., Mulligan, D., & Raphael, S. (2008). CITRIS report: the San Francisco community safety camera program. An evaluation of the effectiveness of San Francisco’s community safety cameras. Research in the interest of society. Berkeley: Center for Information Technology Research in the Interest of Society. University of California.Google Scholar
- La Vigne, N., Lowry, S., Markman, J., & Dwyer, A. (2011). Evaluating the use of public surveillance cameras for crime control and prevention. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center.Google Scholar
- Law Enforcement Information Technology Standards Council [LEITSC] (2008). Standard functional specifications for law enforcement computer aided dispatch (CAD) systems. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, and the National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
- Lipsey, M. (1990). Design sensitivity. Statistical power for experimental research. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
- Lomell, H. (2004). Targeting the unwanted: video surveillance and categorical exclusion in Oslo, Norway. Surveillance & Society, 2, 346–360.Google Scholar
- Norris, C. (2003). From personal to digital: CCTV, the panopticon, and the technological mediation of suspicion and social control. In L. David (Ed.), Surveillance as social sorting: privacy, risk and digital discrimination. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Norris, C., & Armstrong, G. (1999a). CCTV and the social structuring of surveillance. In T. Nick & P. Kate (Eds.), Surveillance of public space: CCTV, street lighting and crime prevention (Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 10, pp. 157–178). Monsey: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
- Norris, C., & Armstrong, G. (1999b). The maximum surveillance society. The rise of CCTV. Berg: Oxford.Google Scholar
- Pease, K. (1999). A review of street lighting evaluations: crime reduction effects. In N. Tilley & K. Painter (Eds.), Surveillance of public space: CCTV, street lighting and crime prevention. Crime prevention studies (Vol. 10). Monsey: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
- Perneger, T. (1999). Multiple testing. British Medical Journal, 322, 226–231.Google Scholar
- Piza, E. (2012). Identifying the ideal context for CCTV camera placement: an analysis of micro-level features. Doctoral Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School-Newark, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.Google Scholar
- Piza, E., Caplan, J., & Kennedy, L. (2012). Is the punishment more certain? An analysis of CCTV detections and enforcement. Justice Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/07418825.2012.723034.
- Ratcliffe, J. (2006). Video surveillance of public places. Problem-oriented guides for police. Response guide series. Guide No. 4. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Center for Problem-Oriented Policing.Google Scholar
- Ratcliffe, J., & Breen, C. (2008). Spatial evaluation of police tactics in context (SEPTIC) spreadsheet, version 3 (spring 2010). Downloaded from www.jratcliffe.net.
- Sarno, C., Hough, M., & Bulos, M. (1999). Developing a picture of CCTV in Southwark Town Centres: final report. London: Criminal Policy Research Unit, South Bank University.Google Scholar
- Sherman, L. (1990). Police crackdowns: initial and residual deterrence. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: a review of research (Vol. 12, pp. 1–48). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Sherman, L., & Eck, J. (2002). Policing for crime prevention. In L. Sherman, D. Farrington, B. Welsh, & D. MacKenzie (Eds.), Evidence-based crime prevention (pp. 295–329). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Sherman, L., Buerger, M., & Gartin, P. (1989). Repeat call address policing: the Minneapolis RECAP experiment. Washington, DC: Crime Control Institute.Google Scholar
- Skogan, W., & Frydl, K. (eds) (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: the evidence. Committee to Review Research on Police Policy and Practices. Committee on Law and Justice, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- Smith, S., & Bruce, C. (2008). CrimeStat III user workbook. Washington, DC: The National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
- Snijders, T. (2005). Power and sample size in multilevel linear models. In B. Everitt & D. Howell (Eds.), Encyclopedia of statistics in behavioral science (Vol. 3, pp. 1570–1573). Chicester: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Star Ledger, The (2010). Newark finalizes 167 police layoffs after union refuses Booker’s plea to return to negotiating table. Tuesday, November 30th. Retrieved at: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/11/union_head_expects_167_newark.html.
- Tilley, N. (1993). Understanding car parks, crime and CCTV. London: Crime Prevention Unit Series Paper 42 Home Office.Google Scholar
- Tuttle, B. (2009). How Newark became Newark. Piscataway: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
- U.S. Census Bureau (2010). State and county quick facts. Washington, DC: United States Census Bureau. http://quickfacts.census.gov. Accessed 9 Sept 2013.
- Uitenbroek, D. (1997). SISA binomial. Southampton. http://www.quantitativeskills.com/sisa/calculations/bonfer.htm. Accessed 5 May 2014.
- Weisburd, D. (2008). Place-based policing (Ideas in Policing Series). Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
- Weisburd, D., Petrosino, A., & Mason, G. (1993). Design sensitivity in criminal justice experiments. In T. Michael (Ed.), Crime and justice: an annual review of research (Vol. 17). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Welsh, B., & Farrington, D. (2002). Crime prevention effects of closed circuit television: a systematic review. London: Home Office (Research Study No. 25).Google Scholar
- Welsh, B., & Farrington, D. (2007). Closed-circuit television surveillance and crime prevention: a systematic review. Stockholm: National Council for Crime Prevention.Google Scholar
- Wilson, O. W. (1963). Police administration. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar