American Journal of Criminal Justice

, Volume 40, Issue 3, pp 466–492 | Cite as

Just Following Orders: A Meta-Analysis of the Correlates of American Police Officer Use of Force Decisions

  • P. Colin Bolger


A substantial amount of research has been conducted to identify the most influential predictors of police use of force decisions. Attempts to summarize this research, however, have so far been primarily limited to narrative literature reviews. While these works are important contributions, they are unable to ensure objectivity during their assessment of the status of the use of force empirical literature. This study improves upon prior research by using the meta-analytic method to identify the key correlates of police decisions to use force. This analysis identifies encounter characteristics as the category of variables that is most strongly correlated with use of force decisions, but also point to a strong localization effect. These findings therefore suggest that the primary focus for future theories of use of force decisions should be on what happens during the encounter, and adequate research syntheses will only be made possible when the number of datasets used to examine use of force decision-making is increased.


Police Meta-analysis Decision-making Force 


  1. Adams, K. (1999). What we know about police use of force. In K. Adams (Ed.), Use of force by police: Overview of national and local data (pp. 1–14). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  2. Alpert, G., & Dunham, R. (1999). The force factor: Measuring and assessing police use of force and suspect resistance. In K. Adams (Ed.), Use of force by the police: Overview of national and local data (pp. 45–60). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  3. Bayley, D., & Mendelsohn, H. (1969). Minorities and the police. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bazely, T., Lersch, K., & Mieczkowski, T. Police use of force: Detectives in an urban police department. Criminal Justice Review, 31, 213–229.Google Scholar
  5. Bittner, E. (1970). Functions of the police in a modern society: A review of background factors, current practices, and possible role models. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Mental Health.Google Scholar
  6. Black, D. (1976). The behavior of law. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Brandl, S., Stroshine, M., & Frank, J. (2001). Who are the complaint-prone officers? An examination of the relationship between police officer’ attributes, arrest activity, assignment, and citizens’ complaints about excessive force. Journal of Criminal Justice, 29, 521–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, P. (1994). The continuum of force in community supervision. Federal Probation, 58(4), 31–37.Google Scholar
  9. Crawford, C., & Burns, R. (1998). Predictors of the police use of force: The application of a continuum perspective in phoenix. Police Quarterly, 1, 41–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dugan, J., & Breda, D. (1991). Complaints about police officers: A comparison among types and agencies. Journal of Criminal Justice, 19, 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000). A nonparametric “trim and fill” method of accounting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Journal of American Statistical Association, 95, 89–98.Google Scholar
  12. Engel, R., & Calnon, J. (2004). Examining the influence of drivers’ characteristics during traffic stops with police: Results from a national survey. Justice Quarterly, 21, 49–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Engel, R., Sobol, J., & Worden, R. (2000). Further exploration of the demeanor hypothesis: The interaction effects of suspects’ characteristics and demeanor on police behavior. Justice Quarterly, 17(2), 235–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fleiss, J., & Berlin, J. (2009). Effect sizes for dichotomous data. In H. Cooper, L. Hedges, & J. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed., pp. 237–253). New York, NY: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Friedrich, R. (1980). Police use of force: Individuals, situations, and organizations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 452, 82–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fyfe, J. (1982). Blind justice: Police shootings in Memphis. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 73, 707–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fyfe, J., & Walker, J. (1990). Garner plus five years: An examination of Supreme Court intervention into police discretion and legislative prerogatives. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 14, 167–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Garner, J., Buchanan, J., Schade, T., & Hepburn, J. (1996). Understanding the use of force by and against the police. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Garner, J., Maxwell, C., & Heraux, C. (2002). Characteristics associated with the prevalence and severity of force used by the police. Justice Quarterly, 19(4), 705–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Garner, J., Schade, T., Hepburn, J., & Buchanan, J. (1995). Measuring the continuum of force use by and against the police. Criminal Justice Review, 20, 146–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gill, J., & Pasquale-Styles, M. (2009). Firearm deaths by law enforcement. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 54, 185–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gottfredson, M., & Gottfredson, D. (1980). Decision making in criminal justice: Toward the Rational Exercise of Discretion. New York, NY: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hanushek, E., & Jackson, J. (1977). Statistical methods for social scientists. New York, NY: Academic.Google Scholar
  24. Hickman, M., Piquero, A., & Garner, J. (2008). Toward a national estimate of police use of nonlethal force. Criminology & Public Policy, 7(4), 563–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Johnson, R. (2011). Suspect mental disorder and police use of force. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 38, 127–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kaminski, R., DiGiovanni, C., & Downs, R. (2004). The use of force between the police and persons with impaired judgment. Police Quarterly, 7, 311–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Klahm, C., Frank, J., & Brown, R. (2011). Police use of force: Tales from another city. Journal of Crime & Justice, 34, 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Klahm, C., & Tillyer, R. (2010). Understanding police use of force: A review of the evidence. Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice, 7, 214–239.Google Scholar
  30. Klinger, D. (1995). The micro-structure of nonlethal force: Baseline data from an observational study. Criminal Justice Review, 20(2), 169–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klinger, D. (1997). Negotiating order in patrol work: An ecological theory of police response to deviance. Criminology, 35(2), 277–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kochel, T., Wilson, D., & Mastrofski, S. (2011). Effect of suspect race on officers’ arrest decisions. Criminology, 49(2), 473–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kop, N., & Euwema, M. (2001). Occupational stress and the use of force by Dutch police officers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 631–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lawton, B. (2007). Levels of nonlethal force. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 44, 163–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leinfelt, F. (2005). Predicting use of non-lethal force in a mid-size police department: A longitudinal analysis of the influence of subject and situational variables. The Police Journal, 78, 285–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lersch, K., & Mieczowski, T. (1996). Who are the problem-prone officers? An analysis of citizen complaints. American Journal of Police, 15, 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lester, D. (1982). Perceived stress in police officers and belief in locus of control. The Journal of General Psychology, 107, 157–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lipsey, M., & Wilson, D. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Lundman, R. (1996). Demeanor and arrest: Additional evidence from previously unpublished data. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 33, 306–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lytle, D. (2013). Decision making in criminal justice revisited: Toward a general theory of criminal justice (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati Oh.Google Scholar
  41. Makarios, M., & Pratt, T. (2012). The effectiveness of policies and programs that attempt to reduce firearm violence: A meta-analysis. Crime & Delinquency, 58(2), 222–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McCluskey, J., & Terrill, W. (2005). Departmental and citizen complaints as predictors of police coercion. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 28, 513–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McCluskey, J., Terrill, W., & Paoline, E. (2005). Peer group aggressiveness and the use of coercion in police-suspect encounters. Police Practice & Research, 6, 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Morabito, E., & Doerner, B. (1997). Police use of less-than-lethal force: Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) spray. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategy and Management, 20, 680–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. National Research Council. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. Washington, D.C: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  46. Paoline, E., & Terrill, W. (2004). Women police officers and the use of coercion. Women & Criminal Justice, 15, 97–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Paoline, E., & Terrill, W. (2007). Police education, experience, and the use of force. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 34(2), 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pratt, T. (2002). Meta-analysis and its discontents: Treatment destruction techniques revisited. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 35, 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pratt, T., & Cullen, F. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson & Hirschi’s general theory of crime: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 38(3), 931–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pratt, T., & Cullen, F. (2005). Assessing macro-level predictors and theories of crime: A meta-analysis. Crime & Justice, 32, 373–450.Google Scholar
  51. Reiss, A. (1971). The police and the public. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Reiss, A., & Roth, J. (Eds.). (1993). Understanding and preventing violence. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  53. Riksheim, E., & Chermak, S. (1993). Causes of police behavior revisited. Journal of Criminal Justice, 21(4), 353–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rosenbaum, D., Schuck, A., Costello, S., Hawkins, D., & Ring, M. (2005). Attitudes toward the police: The effects of direct and vicarious experience. Police Quarterly, 8, 343–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rosenthal, R. (1979). The “File drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 65, 185–193.Google Scholar
  56. Rydberg, J., & Terrill, W. (2010). The effect of higher education on police behavior. Police Quarterly, 13, 92–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schuck, A. (2004). The masking of racial and ethnic disparity in police use of physical force: The effects of gender and custody status. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 557–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schuck, A., & Rabe-Hemp, C. (2007). Women police. Women & Criminal Justice, 16, 91–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sherman, L. (1980). Causes of police behavior: The current state of quantitative research. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 17(1), 69–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Slovak, J. (1986). Styles of urban policing. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Smith, D. (1986). The Neighborhood Context of Police Behavior. In A. Reiss & M. Tonry (Eds.), Crime and justice: A review of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  62. Sparger, J., & Giacopassi, D. (1992). Memphis revisited: a reexamination of police shootings after the “garner” decision. Justice Quarterly, 9, 211–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sun, I., & Payne, B. (2004). Racial difference in resolving conflicts: A comparison between black and white police officers. Crime & Delinquency, 50(4), 516–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Terrill, W. (2005). Police use of force: A transactional approach. Justice Quarterly, 22, 107–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Terrill, W., Leinfelt, F., & Kwak, D. (2008). Examining police use of force: A smaller agency perspective. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 31, 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Terrill, W., & Mastrofski, S. (2002). Situational and officer-based determinants of police coercion. Justice Quarterly, 19(2), 215–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Terrill, W., Paoline, E., & Manning, P. (2003). Police culture and coercion. Criminology, 41, 1003–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Terrill, W., & Reisig, M. (2003). Neighborhood context and police use of force. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43(3), 291–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Thompson, B., & Lee, J. (2004). Who care if police become violent? Explaining approval of police use of force using a national sample. Sociological Inquiry, 74, 381–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Werthman, C., & Piliavin, I. (1967). Gang Members and the Police. In D. Bordua (Ed.), The police: Six sociological essays. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  71. Wilson, J. (1968). Varieties of police behavior: The management of law and order in eight communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Southern Criminal Justice Association 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Justice and Community Studies, College of Professional Studies and Applied SciencesMiami University, MiddletownMiddletownUSA

Personalised recommendations