Advertisement

Journal of Experimental Criminology

, Volume 7, Issue 1, pp 3–26 | Cite as

The Evidence-Based Policing Matrix

  • Cynthia Lum
  • Christopher S. Koper
  • Cody W. Telep
Article

Abstract

The next phase of evidence-based policing requires both scholars and practitioners to move from lists of specific studies about “what works” to using that information strategically. This requires developing generalizations or principles on the nature of effective police strategies and translating the field of police evaluation research into digestible forms that can be used to alter police tactics, strategies, accountability systems, and training. In this article, we present a tool intended for such use: the Evidence-Based Policing Matrix. The Matrix is a consistently updated, research-to-practice translation tool that categorizes and visually bins all experimental and quasi-experimental research on police and crime reduction into intersections between three common dimensions of crime prevention—the nature of the target, the extent to which the strategy is proactive or reactive, and the specificity or generality of the strategy. Our mapping and visualization of 97 police evaluation studies conducted through December 31, 2009, indicate that proactive, place-based, and specific policing approaches appear much more promising in reducing crime than individual-based, reactive, and general ones. We conclude by discussing how the Matrix can be used to guide future research and facilitate the adoption of evidence-based policing.

Keywords

Evidence-based policing Effectiveness Matrix Evaluation Experiments Hot spots policing 

References

  1. Abrahamse, A. F., Ebener, P. A., Greenwood, P. W., Fitzgerald, N., & Kosin, T. E. (1991). An experimental evaluation of the Phoenix repeat offender program. Justice Quarterly, 8, 141–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bayley, D. H. (1994). Police for the future. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bayley, D. H. (1998). Policing in America: Assessments and prospects. Ideas in American Policing. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, T. (1990). Evaluating neighborhood watch. Basingstoke: Gower.Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, T., Holloway, K., & Farrington, D. (2008). The effectiveness of neighborhood watch. Campbell Collaboration systematic review final report. Retrieved 4 June 2010 from: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/248/.
  6. Braga, A. A. (2007). Effect of hot spots policing on crime. Campbell Collaboration systematic review final report. Retrieved 4 June 2010 from: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/118/.
  7. Braga, A. A., Weisburd, D. L., Waring, E. J., Mazerolle, L. G., Spelman, W., & Gajewski, F. (1999). Problem-oriented policing in violent crime places: a randomized controlled experiment. Criminology, 37(3), 541–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Braga, A. A., Kennedy, D. M., Waring, E. J., & Piehl, A. M. (2001). Problem-oriented policing, deterrence, and youth violence: an evaluation of Boston's Operation Ceasefire. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38(3), 195–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Braga, A. A., Pierce, G. L., McDevitt, J., Bond, B. J., & Cronin, S. (2008). The strategic prevention of gun violence among gang-involved offenders. Justice Quarterly, 25, 132–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, F. (2005). Efficiency in learning: Evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Clarke, R. V. G., & Hough, J. M. (1980). The effectiveness of policing. Farnborough: Gower.Google Scholar
  12. Connell, N. M., Miggans, K., & McGloin, J. M. (2008). Can a community policing initiative reduce serious crime? Police Quarterly, 11, 127–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis, R. C., Weisburd, D., & Hamilton, E. (2007). Preventing repeat incidents of family abuse: A randomized field trial of a second responder program in Redlands, CA. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  14. Davis, R. C., Weisburd, D., & Taylor, B. (2008). Effects of second responder programs on repeat incidents of family abuse. Campbell Collaboration systematic review final report. Retrieved 4 June 2010 from: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/233/.
  15. Eck, J., & Weisburd, D. (Eds.). (1995). Crime and place. Monsey: Criminal Justice Press/ Willow Tree Press.Google Scholar
  16. Erickson, M., & Gibbs, J. (1975). Specific versus general properties of legal punishments and deterrence. Social Science Quarterly, 56, 390–397.Google Scholar
  17. Esbensen, F.-A. (2002). National evaluation of the Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) program. Final report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  18. Farrington, D. P., & Petrosino, A. (2001). The Campbell Collaboration Crime and Justice Group. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Farrington, D. P., Gottfredson, D., Sherman, L., & Welsh, B. (2002). The Maryland scientific methods scale. In L. W. Sherman, D. P. Farrington, B. Welsh, & D. MacKenzie (Eds.), Evidence-based crime prevention (pp. 13–21). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Goldstein, H. (1979). Improving policing: a problem-oriented approach. Crime & Delinquency, 25(2), 236–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kelling, G. L., Pate, A. M., Dieckman, D., & Brown, C. (1974). The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment: Technical report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
  22. Kennedy, D. M. (2009). Deterrence and crime prevention: Reconsidering the prospect of sanction. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Koper, C. (2008). The varieties and effectiveness of hot spots policing: Results from a national survey of police agencies and a re-assessment of prior research. Paper presented November 14 at the American Society of Criminology meeting, St. Louis, MO.Google Scholar
  24. Koper, C. S., & Mayo-Wilson, E. (2006). Police crackdowns on illegal gun carrying: a systematic review of their impact on gun crime. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2(2), 227–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lawton, B. A., Taylor, R. B., & Luongo, A. J. (2005). Police officers on drug corners in Philadelphia, drug crime, and violent crime: intended, diffusion, and displacement impacts. Justice Quarterly, 22(4), 427–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lasley, J. (1996). "Designing out" gang homicides and street assaults. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  27. Laycock, G. (1991). Operation identification, or the power of publicity? Security Journal, 2, 67–72.Google Scholar
  28. Lum, C. (2009). Translating police research into practice. Ideas in American Policing. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
  29. Lum, C. and Koper, C. (Forthcoming, accepted for publication in 2008). Is crime prevention relevant to counter-terrorism? In B. Forst, J. Greene, & J. Lynch (Eds.), Criminologists on terrorism and homeland security. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Lum, C., Kennedy, L. W., & Sherley, A. J. (2006). The effectiveness of counter-terrorism strategies. Campbell Collaboration systematic review final report. Retrieved 4 June 2010 from: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/53/.
  31. Martin, S., & Sherman, L. W. (1986). Selective apprehension: a police strategy for repeat offenders. Criminology, 24, 155–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mastrofski, S. D. (1999). Policing for people. Ideas in American Policing. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
  33. Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 125–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mazerolle, L. G., Price, J. F., & Roehl, J. (2000). Civil remedies and drug control: a randomized field trial in Oakland, CA. Evaluation Review, 24(2), 212–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mazerolle, L., Soole, D. W., & Rombouts, S. (2007). Street-level drug law enforcement: A meta- analytic review. Campbell Collaboration systematic review final report. Retrieved 4 June 2010 from: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/123/.
  36. McGarrell, E. F., Chermak, S., & Wilson, J. M. (2006). Reducing homicide through a "lever- pulling" strategy. Justice Quarterly, 23(2), 214–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research. (1996). A review of the literature on dissemination and knowledge utilization. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.Google Scholar
  38. National Research Council (NRC). (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. Committee to Review Research on Police Policy and Practices. In W. Skogan & K. Frydl (Eds.), Committee on Law and Justice, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  39. Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using evidence: How research can inform public services. Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  40. O’Neill, M., Marks, M., & Singh, A.-M. (Eds.). (2007). Police occupational culture: New debates and directions. Amsterdam: Elsevier JAI Press.Google Scholar
  41. Packer, H. L. (1964). Two models of the criminal process. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 113(1), 1–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Police Executive Research Forum. (2008). Violent crime in America: What we know about hot spots enforcement. Critical Issues in Policing Series. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  43. President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice. (1967). Task force report: The police. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  44. Reiss, A. J. (1985). Policing a city's central district: The Oakland story. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  45. Reiss, A. J., Jr. (1992). Police organization in the twentieth century. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: A review of research ((pp, Vol. 15, pp. 51–97). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  46. Rosenbaum, D. P., Lewis, D., & Grant, J. (1986). Neighborhood-based crime prevention: Assessing the efficacy of community organizing in Chicago. In D. P. Rosenbaum (Ed.), Community crime prevention: does it work? Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Rosenbaum, D. P., Flewelling, R. L., Bailey, S. L., Ringwalt, C. L., & Wilkinson, D. L. (1994). Cops in the classroom: A longitudinal evaluation of Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE). Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 31(1), 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rosenberg, M., & Knox, L. M. (2005). The matrix comes to youth violence prevention: a strengths-based, ecologic, and developmental framework. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 29(5), 185–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sherman, L. W. (1983). Patrol strategies for police. In J. Q. Wilson (Ed.), Crime and public policy (pp. 145–163). San Francisco: ICS Press/Transaction Books.Google Scholar
  50. Sherman, L. W. (1984). Experiments in police discretion: scientific boon or dangerous knowledge? Law and Contemporary Problems, 47, 61–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sherman, L. W. (1986). Policing communities: what works? In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: A review of research ((pp, Vol. 8, pp. 343–386). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  52. Sherman, L. W. (1990). Police crackdowns: Initial and residual deterrence. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: A review of research ((pp, Vol. 12, pp. 1–48). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  53. Sherman, L. W. (1992). Attacking crime: Police and crime control. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: A review of research, vol. 15 (pp. 159–230). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  54. Sherman, L. W. (1995). The police. In J. Q. Wilson & J. Petersilia (Eds.), Crime (pp. 327–348). San Francisco: ICS Press.Google Scholar
  55. Sherman, L. W. (1997). Policing for crime prevention. In L. W. Sherman, D. Gottfredson, D. MacKenzie, J. Eck, P. Reuter, & S. Bushway (Eds.), Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  56. Sherman, L. W. (1998). Evidence-based policing. Ideas in American Policing. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
  57. Sherman, L. W., & Berk, R. A. (1984). The specific deterrent effects of arrest for domestic assault. American Sociological Review, 49, 261–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sherman, L. W., & Rogan, D. P. (1995). Deterrent effects of police raids on crack houses: a randomized controlled experiment. Justice Quarterly, 12, 755–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sherman, L. W., & Weisburd, D. (1995). General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime hot spots: a randomized controlled trial. Justice Quarterly, 12, 625–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sherman, L. W., & Eck, J. E. (2002). Policing for crime prevention. In L. W. Sherman, D. P. Farrington, B. C. Welsh, & D. L. MacKenzie (Eds.), Evidence-based crime prevention (pp. 295–329). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. Sherman, L. W., Schmidt, J. D., Rogan, D. P., Gartin, P. R., Cohn, E. G., Collins, D. J., et al. (1992). The variable effects of arrest on criminal careers: the Milwaukee domestic violence experiment. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83, 137–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sherman, L., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P., & Bushway, S. (1997). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  63. Sherman, L. W., Strang, H., & Woods, D. J. (2000). Recidivism patterns in the Canberra Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE). Canberra: Center for Restorative Justice, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  64. Sherman, L. W., Farrington, D. P., Welsh, B. C., & MacKenzie, D. L. (Eds.). (2002). Evidence- based crime prevention. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  65. Skogan, W., Hartnett, S. M., et al. (1995). Community policing in Chicago, year two. Chicago: Criminal Justice Information Authority.Google Scholar
  66. Smith, M. R. (2001). Police-led crackdowns and cleanups: an evaluation of a crime control initiative in Richmond, Virginia. Crime and Delinquency, 47, 60–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Stafford, M., & Warr, M. (1993). A reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(2), 123–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Taylor, B., Koper, C. S., & Woods, D. (2010). Combating auto theft in Arizona: A randomized experiment with license plate recognition technology. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
  69. Tonry, M., & Morris, N. (Eds.). (1992). Crime and justice: A review of research, vol. 15. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  70. Trojanowicz, R. (1986). Evaluating a neighborhood foot patrol program: The Flint, Michigan project. In D. P. Rosenbaum (Ed.), Community crime prevention: Does it work? (pp. 157–178). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  71. Tyler, T. R. (2004). Enhancing police legitimacy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593, 84–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Villaveces, A., Cummings, P., Espetia, V. E., Koepsell, T., McKnight, B., & Kellermann, A. L. (2000). Effect of a ban on carrying firearms on homicide rates in 2 Columbian cities. Journal of the American Medical Association, 283(9), 1205–1209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Weisburd, D. (2002). From criminals to criminal contexts: reorienting criminal justice research and policy. Advances in Criminological Theory, 10, 197–216.Google Scholar
  74. Weisburd, D. (2008). Place-based policing. Ideas in American Policing. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
  75. Weisburd, D., & Green, L. (1995). Policing drug hot spots: the Jersey City drug market analysis experiment. Justice Quarterly, 12, 711–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Weisburd, D., & Eck, J. E. (2004). What can police do to reduce crime, disorder and fear? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593, 42–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Weisburd, D., & Lum, C. (2005). The diffusion of computerized crime mapping in policing: linking research and practice. Police Practice and Research: An International Journal, 6, 419–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Weisburd, D., & Braga, A. A. (Eds.). (2006). Police innovation: Contrasting perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Weisburd, D., Lum, C., & Petrosino, A. (2001). Does research design affect study outcomes? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 50–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Weisburd, D., Lum, C., & Yang, S.-M. (2003a). When can we conclude that treatments or programs “don’t work. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587, 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Weisburd, D., Mastrofski, S. D., McNally, A. M., Greenspan, R., & Willis, J. J. (2003b). Reforming to preserve: compstat and strategic problem solving in American policing. Criminology and Public Policy, 2, 421–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Weisburd, D., Bushway, S., Lum, C., & Yang, S. (2004). Trajectories of crime at places: a longitudinal study of street sements in the city of Seattle. Criminology, 42(2), 283–322.Google Scholar
  83. Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., Hinkle, J. C., & Eck, J. E. (2008a). Effects of problem-oriented policing on crime and disorder. Campbell Collaboration systematic review final report. Retrieved 4 June 2010 from: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/228/.
  84. Weisburd, D., Morris, N., & Ready, J. (2008b). Risk-focused policing at places: an experimental evaluation. Justice Quarterly, 25(1), 163–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Weisburd, D., Bernasco, W., & Bruinsma, G. (Eds.). (2009). Putting crime in its place: Units of analysis in geographic criminology. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  86. Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., Hinkle, J. C., & Eck, J. E. (2010). Is problem-oriented policing effective in reducing crime and disorder? Findings from a Campbell systematic review. Criminology & Public Policy, 9, 139–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Willis, J. J., Mastrofski, S. D., & Weisburd, D. (2007). Making sense of COMPSTAT: a theory- based analysis of change in three police departments. Law & Society Review, 42, 147–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Wilson, D. B. (2001). Meta-analytic methods for criminology. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Wilson, J. Q., & Petersilia, J. (Eds.). (1995). Crime. San Francisco: ICS Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cynthia Lum
    • 1
  • Christopher S. Koper
    • 2
  • Cody W. Telep
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy, Department of Criminology, Law and SocietyGeorge Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA
  2. 2.Police Executive Research ForumWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations