Abstract
Despite widespread media coverage of police use-of-force incidents resulting in serious injury or death, there has been relatively little research conducted on how those decisions are made. The current study is a first step toward investigation of deception in shoot/no-shoot situations. We approach this study from the perspective of perceptual–cognitive expertise, a concept that has been studied in sport for 50 years to determine the cognitive underpinnings behind athletes anticipating their opponents’ actions. Participants watched temporally-occluded video stimuli of actors pulling either a revolver or a wallet from two concealed locations on their body, and then anticipated whether the object was a weapon or a non-weapon. The data were analyzed using signal detection metrics, an approach which results in independent measures of sensitivity and response bias. We found that sensitivity was affected by occlusion point and draw location. When only the initial part of the draw motion was visible (and the object was not yet visible), participants were relatively unbiased in their responses. However, as more of the draw motion was revealed, participants tended to adopt a liberal response bias: they identified the object as a weapon more frequently than as a non-weapon.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abernethy B, Russell DG (1987) Expert-novice differences in an applied selective attention task. J Sport Psychol 9:326–345
Abernethy B, Schorer J, Jackson RC, Hagemann N (2012) Perceptual training methods compared: the relative efficacy of different approaches to enhancing sport-specific anticipation. J Exp Psychol Appl 18:143–152
Alder D, Ford PR, Causer J, Williams AM (2014) The coupling between gaze behavior and opponent kinematics during anticipation of badminton shots. Hum Mov Sci 37:167–179
Broadbent DP, Causer J, Williams AM, Ford PR (2015) Perceptual–cognitive skill training and its transfer to expert performance in the field: future research directions. Eur J Sport Sci 15:322–331
Cañal-Bruland R, Schmidt M (2009) Response bias in judging deceptive movements. Acta Psychol 130:235–240
Cañal-Bruland R, Mooren M, Savelsbergh GJP (2011) Differentiating experts’ anticipatory skills in beach volleyball. Res Q Exerc Sport 82:667–674
Correll J, Park B, Judd CM, Wittenbrink B (2002) The police officer’s dilemma: using ethnicity to disambiguate potentially threatening individuals. J Pers Soc Psychol 83:1314–1329
Davidson v. City of Opelika (2015), No. 16–10857, Non-Argument Calendar (11th Cir. Jan. 17, 2017)
Dicks M, Davids KW, Button C (2010) Individual differences in the visual control of intercepting a penalty kick in association football. Hum Mov Sci 29:401–411
Farrow D, Abernethy B, Jackson RC (2005) Probing expert anticipation with the temporal occlusion paradigm: experimental investigations of some methodological issues. Mot Control 9:330–349
Force Science News (2011) Important new reaction-time study addresses what’s “reasonable” in armed-suspect encounters. Retrieved from http://www.forcescience.org/fsnews/178.html
Gabbett T, Rubinoff M, Thorburn L, Farrow D (2007) Testing and training anticipation skills in softball fielders. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2:15–24
Gamble KR, Vettel JM, Patton DJ, Eddy MD, Caroline Davis F, Garcia JO et al (2018) Different profiles of decision making and physiology under varying levels of stress in trained military personnel. Int J Psychophysiol 131:73–80
Gorman AD, Farrow D (2009) Perceptual training using explicit and implicit instructional techniques: does it benefit skilled performers? Int J Sports Sci Coach 4:193–208
Green DM, Swets JA (1966) Signal detection theory and psychophysics. John Wiley, Oxford
Güldenpenning I, Kunde W, Weigelt M (2017) How to trick your opponent: a review article on deceptive actions in interactive sports. Front Psychol 8:917
Hagemann N, Strauss B, Cañal-Bruland R (2006) Training perceptual skill by orienting visual attention. J Sport Exerc Psychol 28:143–158
Hamilton JA, Lambert G, Suss J, Biggs AT (2019) Can cognitive training improve shoot/don’t-shoot performance? Evidence from live fire exercises. Am J Psychol 132:179–194
Hutson HR, Anglin D, Yarbrough J, Hardaway K, Russell M, Strote J et al (1998) Suicide by cop. Ann Emerg Med 32:665–669
Jackson RC, Warren S, Abernethy B (2006) Anticipation skill and susceptibility to deceptive movement. Acta Psychol 123:355–371
Johnson RR, Stone BT, Miranda CM, Vila B, James L, James SM et al (2014) Identifying psychophysiological indices of expert vs. novice performance in deadly force judgment and decision making. Front Hum Neurosci 8:512
Johnson DJ, Cesario J, Pleskac TJ (2018) How prior information and police experience impact decisions to shoot. J Pers Soc Psychol 115:601–623
Klinger D (2004) Into the kill zone. Josey-Bass, San Francisco
Kunde W, Skirde S, Weigelt M (2011) Trust my face: cognitive factors of head fakes in sports. J Exp Psychol Appl 17:110–127
Mann DT, Williams AM, Ward P, Janelle CM (2007) Perceptual–cognitive expertise in sport: a meta-analysis. J Sport Exerc Psychol 29:457–478
Meehan NC, Strange C, McClary M (2015) Behavioral indicators during a police interdiction (Report No. NRL/MR/5508--15-9598). Retrieved from Defense Technical Information Center: http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA620182
Mitchell L, Flin R (2007) Shooting decisions by police firearms officers. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak 1:375–390
Mohandie K, Meloy JR, Collins PI (2009) Suicide by cop among officer-involved shooting cases. J Forensic Sci 54:456–462
Mori S, Shimada T (2013) Expert anticipation from deceptive action. Atten Percept Psychophys 75:751–770
Nieuwenhuys A, Cañal-Bruland R, Oudejans RRD (2012a) Effects of threat on police officers’ shooting behavior: anxiety, action specificity, and affective influences on perception. Appl Cogn Psychol 26:608–615
Nieuwenhuys A, Savelsbergh GJP, Oudejans RRD (2012b) Shoot or don’t shoot? Why police officers are more inclined to shoot when they are anxious. Emotion 12:827–833
Nieuwenhuys A, Savelsbergh GJP, Oudejans RRD (2015) Persistence of threat-induced errors in police officers’ shooting decisions. Appl Ergon 48:263–272
Peirce JW (2007) PsychoPy—psychophysics software in Python. J Neurosci Methods 162(1–2):8–13
Proctor RW, Van Zandt T (2008) Human factors in simple and complex systems, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Roca A, Williams AM (2016) Expertise and the interaction between different perceptual-cognitive skills: implications for testing and training. Front Psychol 7:792
Rowe R, Horswill MS, Kronvall-Parkinson M, Poulter DR, McKenna FP (2009) The effect of disguise on novice and expert tennis players’ anticipation ability. J Appl Sport Psychol 21:178–185
Schlink BR, Peterson SM, Hairston WD, König P, Kerick SE, Ferris DP (2017) Independent component analysis and source localization on mobile EEG data can identify increased levels of acute stress. Front Hum Neurosci 11:310
Sebanz N, Shiffrar M (2009) Detecting deception in a bluffing body: the role of expertise. Psychon Bull Rev 16:170–175
Smeeton NJ, Williams AM (2012) The role of movement exaggeration in the anticipation of deceptive soccer penalty kicks. Br J Psychol 103:539–555
Smeeton NJ, Williams AM, Hodges NJ, Ward P (2005) The relative effectiveness of various instructional approaches in developing anticipation skill. J Exp Psychol Appl 11:98–110
Stanislaw H, Todorov N (1999) Calculation of signal detection theory measures. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 31:137–149
Suss J, Ward P (2012) Use of an option generation paradigm to investigate situation assessment and response selection in law enforcement. Proc Hum Fact Ergon Soc Annu Meet 56:297–301
Suss J, Ward P (2018) Revealing perceptual–cognitive expertise in law enforcement: an iterative approach using verbal-report, temporal-occlusion, and option-generation methods. Cogn Tech Work 20:585–596
Tashman L, Harris KR, Ramrattan J, Ward P, Eccles DW, Ericsson KA et al (2006) Expert performance in law enforcement: are skilled performers more effectively constraining the situation to resolve representative dynamic tasks than novices? Proc Hum Fact Ergon Soc Annu Meet 50:1213–1217
Taverniers J, De Boeck P (2014) Force-on-force handgun practice: an intra-individual exploration of stress effects, biomarker regulation, and behavioral changes. Hum Factors 56:403–413
Vickers JN, Lewinski W (2012) Performing under pressure: gaze control, decision making and shooting performance of elite and rookie police officers. Hum Mov Sci 31:101–117
Ward P, Williams AM, Bennett SJ (2002) Visual search and biological motion perception in tennis. Res Q Exerc Sport 73:107–112
Ward P, Harris KR, Ericsson KA, Eccles DW, Tashman L, Lang LH (2007) Cognitive basis for expert and superior performance in law enforcement. Proc Annu Meet Cogn Sci Soc USA 29:1884
Ward P, Suss J, Eccles DW, Williams AM, Harris KR (2011) Skill-based differences in option generation in a complex task: a verbal protocol analysis. Cogn Process 12:289–300
Williams AM, Davids K (1998) Visual search strategy, selective attention, and expertise in soccer. Res Q Exerc Sport 69:111–128
Williams AM, Jackson RC (2018) Anticipation in sport: fifty years on, what have we learned and what research still needs to be undertaken? Psychol Sport Exerc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.11.014
Williams AM, Ward P (2007) Anticipation and decision making: exploring new horizons. In: Tenenbaum G, Eklund RC (eds) Handbook of sport psychology, 3rd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, pp 203–223
Williams AM, Ford PR, Eccles DW, Ward P (2011) Perceptual–cognitive expertise in sport and its acquisition: implications for applied cognitive psychology. Appl Cogn Psychol 25:432–442
Witt JK, Brockmole JR (2012) Action alters object identification: wielding a gun increases the bias to see guns. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 38:1159–1167
Wright MJ, Jackson RC (2014) Deceptive body movements reverse spatial cueing in soccer. PLoS One 9(8):e104290
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of Wichita State University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB #3846) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed Consent
Prior to filming, informed consent was obtained from each individual actor. Each actor also signed a media release form giving the researchers permission to use the recordings for the purposes of conducting experiments and disseminating the results.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Suss, J., Raushel, A. Wallet or Gun? Evaluating Factors that Affect Anticipation Ability in a Use-of-Force Scenario. J Police Crim Psych 34, 292–302 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-019-09329-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-019-09329-2