Report on Police Body Cameras

Posted: December 21st, 2022

Report on Police Body Cameras

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course

Instructor

Date

Report on Police Body Cameras

Summary of Client’s Information Need

The client has encountered a relative working as a police officer and from the findings of an interview, revealed that he had minimal knowledge about police body cameras and their application in civil cases. Body-worn cameras (BWC) are an innovative technology currently being adopted by police departments in the United States and other countries (Crow & Smykla, 2019). However, the technology is not well understood by civilians and police officers alike, which raises controversial debates regarding its pros and cons regarding its ability to improve police work and enhance public safety (Lum et al., 2019). Consequently, the client cannot hold a knowledgeable conversation with the relative police officer related to police body cameras.

Therefore, the client needs basic information to enhance his knowledge about body-worn cameras and their applications by police officers in civil case settings. Specifically, the client needs to be informed about body-worn camera technology and how it works. He also needs information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of this innovative technology and its novel use in police work, particularly in assisting police officers to present credible civil cases in court to resolve civil disputes, such as the issuance of traffic tickets and other minor civil infringements. The client also needs the knowledge regarding why the use of police body cameras remains controversial considering the mixed reactions emerging from the public, police officers, and police departments, which influence its adoption by the police force universally in the United States. Indeed, there are supporters and opponents of the adoption of police body cameras, and the client needs to understand the reasons for their diverse opinions.  In turn, the client needs to understand the challenges experienced by police officers and departments in readily adopting this new technology and how these challenges can be addressed to make the technology more acceptable and promote its adoption. Finally, the client needs information that would enhance his understanding of specific situations and cases where police body cameras can be applied and which ones would be controversial. This would help the client understand the diverse opinions related to adopting this technology in the United States.

Report and Recommendations to Client

Technology

Body-worn cameras are an advancement of miniature digital camera technology, which have found applications as wearable devices. The digital devices are worn on the user’s bodies, in this case, police officers. Their small size and lightweight enable them to be attached to the uniform or body armor of the officers, usually worn on the front side (Lum et al., 2019). The devices can capture audio and video footage simultaneously and record them in internal storage memory. The cameras are battery-operated and require regular charging, although their batteries can last for between 8 and 12, thus remaining operational throughout the police officers’ shift duration. Similarly, the data collected is downloaded for storage and use at the precinct’s premises at the end of the shift, to create storage room for the next use. These cameras have particular features that make them suitable for police work. Specifically, they have autofocus capabilities to capture vivid videos without any user intervention. They should also be capable of taking videos in low light and at night, while the audio can be captured succinctly in a noisy background. In addition, the device should be tamper-proof to avoid intentional and accidental editing and deleting of footage (National Institute of Justice, 2022). Besides, the device should be rugged enough to withstand the rigors of police work, alongside being compatible with the information systems found in police precincts to support interoperability. Consequently, the data should be stored in formats that can be read by regular playing devices and can be downloaded via Bluetooth into the precinct’s data storage system (National Institute of Justice, 2022).   

Although this technology is popular among police officers and civilians, it is still in its nascent stages because it has not been universally adopted across all law enforcement agencies in the United States. For instance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics published a report in 2018, which indicated that 80% of large police departments in the united states had acquired this technology and usage ranged between 49% and 60% for the agencies that had procured body-worn cameras (National Institute of Justice, 2022).

Unfortunately, existing evidence of the effectiveness of police body cameras is mixed and inconclusive. The technology is meant to reduce civilian complaints, enhance the safety of police officers, reduce the liability of law enforcement agencies, decrease excessive use of force by police officers, increase the quality of evidence presented to courts of law, and promote police transparency and accountability (Crow & Smykla, 2019). However, most evidence points to either inconsistent or statistically insignificant effects in realizing the proposed objectives. For instance, the most quoted study conducted in Rialto, California, indicated that the police body cameras significantly reduced the police use of excessive force but did not alter the citizens’ complaints about police conduct (National Institute of Justice, 2022). Contrastingly, a study conducted at The Metropolitan Police Department in Las Vegas, Nevada, revealed opposite effects, in that the technology significantly reduced the police use of excessive force and civilian complaints (National Institute of Justice, 2022).

Social issues

As enumerated earlier, body-worn cameras are meant to address some critical and prevalent societal issues related to law enforcement and police work. However, the technology presents social issues that influence its acceptability among police officers and civilians, and its effectiveness in addressing the law enforcement challenges. For instance, there are concerns that the technology infringes on the privacy of police officers and civilians because it can capture footages of personal activities that the individuals would not like to share. Others claim that the technology subjects unsuspecting individuals to facial recognition to promote public surveillance, thus exposing them to profiling and increasing their implications with crimes and other undesirable behaviors. Concerning circumstances pertinent to civilians include domestic and intimate partner violent incidences and rape, which people do not want to be shared with the public for fear of victimization, stereotyping, loss of relationships, and even loss of jobs. On the other hand, police departments are concerned about the high cost of adopting the technology amid scarce resources and constrained budgets (National Institute of Justice, 2022). Forcing police departments, especially the much smaller ones, to draw resources from other pertinent law enforcement activities, is problematic. These departments are further constrained by the high cost of systems and services that should support the effective use of police body cameras, including information technology infrastructure, repairing or replacing defective devices, training police officers and support staff, and maintaining the devices and systems. However, the technology has demonstrated promise for enhancing police accountability and transparency and improving their conduct following their association with extrajudicial killings that have damaged the police image and reputation in the United States.

Stakeholders

The stakeholders interested in the police body camera technology include police officers, police departments, civilians, lawyers, prosecutors, judges, policymakers, media houses, and third-party equipment suppliers and service providers. These are primary stakeholders because they interact directly with the law enforcement agencies in adopting body-worn camera technology. However, they have diverse interests in this technology and play different roles in its implementation and success.

Key Findings

The quality of evidence from the research studies conducted on this topic is high and impressive. Notably, there are a large number of randomized control trials and experimental designs in many studies encountered, which provide the highest level of evidence in research because they are ranked as level I in the hierarchy of evidence. Also notable is the high number of studies focusing on the perceptions of police officers and departments regarding their experiences with the body-worn cameras, as the main users of the technology. Specifically, four out of the ten studies selected focused on police officers, while three attended to drivers, and one each addressed arrestees and news media houses. For instance, Jennings et al. (2014) and Gaube et al. (2016) investigated the perceptions of the police officers regarding their experience with body-worn cameras. Jennings et al. (2014) collected data from police officers at Orlando Police Department in Florida, while Gaube et al. (2016) surveyed police officers from Phoenix Police Department and Tempe Police Department in Arizona, and Spokane Police Department in Washington. Although Jennings et al. (2014) found that the Orlando Police Department police officers were largely supportive of the police body cameras because they would feel comfortable using them alongside acknowledging the technologies benefits in their behavior, that of their colleagues, and that of citizens, the study by Gaube et al. (2016) delivered mixed results. Notably, while officers from Tempe Police Department had positive perceptions about body-worn cameras, those from Phoenix Police Department had negative sentiments, while those from Spokane Police Department exhibited positive and negative perceptions. However, these sentiments did not change between pre-implementation and post-implementation of the body-worn cameras program deployed between 2013 and 2015. However, there was a slight improvement in the three departments after the program regarding the comfort levels and ease of use of the technology, with officers Tempe and Spokane recognizing the advantageous effects of the technology while those from Phoenix remained unchanged in their perceptions regarding the positive effects of the body-worn cameras.  In the same vein, Wood and Groff (2018) revealed that police body cameras have the potential to transform policing by transforming its nature, quality and effectiveness in the long-term, while progressing practice towards modern service conformation. However, Drover and Ariel (2015) revealed that implementing police body cameras in law enforcement was challenged by the officers’ resistance to change, although they indicated that training would reverse such resistance and convert it to support.

In the same vein, Ariel et al. (2020) studied the influence of body-worn cameras on the incidences and complaints of excessive use of force. The study revealed that there were significantly fewer incidences of the use of force by police officers and reduced complaints against them. This confirms the findings made earlier by Ariel (2016), which indicated that police were more cautious when arresting suspected law violators when wearing body cameras than when not wearing them.

Taylor and Lee (2019) and Demir et al. (2020) investigated the perceptions of arrestees and drivers regarding their views and experiences with police officers wearing body cameras. The arrestees hailed the wearing of such cameras while the drivers complied better with the directives of police officers wearing body cameras. In both cases, the behavior of the civilians changed and become more compliant with the law when enforced by police officers with body-worn cameras compared to those that did not wear such devices. Finally, in study by Schneider (2018) that investigated how media has covered the famous study at Rialto, California, about the experiences with and outcomes of body-worn cameras by police officers, the effects of the technology on police legitimacy and public image were discerned. The study revealed that the extensive coverage of the technology, its use, and its effectiveness had elicited huge coverage over the media, with some footage from the police body cameras going viral. This study revealed the important role played by media in promoting police legitimacy and public image.

Conclusion

The evidence obtained from research studies and stakeholders’ viewpoints indicate that although body-worn cameras are a new and innovative technology, its popularity was growing among police officers and civilians. The positive sentiments and perceptions voiced by police officers, arrestees, and drivers indicated an overwhelming support for the deployment of this technology because of its potential to transform an improving policing practice. In this regard, police body cameras have the potential of addressing driving violations by changing the drivers’ behavior and improving their compliance with traffic regulations. Besides, this technology can help resolve any traffic offenses disputes that emerge, thus quickening the delivery of justice.

Recommendations

It is recommended that more awareness about the body-worn camera technology be created among police officers and civilian population. Such awareness would help alleviate the fears about its use and promote its adoption by the police departments across the United States. Similarly, police officers need to be trained to dispel any suspicions they may have regarding privacy and victimization concerns, considering that the technology can deliver more benefits that detriments to law enforcement. 

Annotated Bibliography

Ariel, B. (2016). Police body cameras in large police departments. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 106(4), 729-768. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45163406

Source Summary: Barak Ariel, a well-known author in criminology, penned the paper. This essay aims to show how police officers may be held accountable for their acts by wearing body cameras. Deterrence and awareness theories are hypothesized in this study of police-public interactions. Police, body cameras, and police were all keywords used in the quest to locate the item at the university library.

Currency: This article was written in 2016 by someone who knew a lot about police body cameras for big police departments. The article provides an overview of the challenges, particularly pilot testing. I need to locate further publications on body-worn cameras (BWCs) and evaluate their efficacy.

Authority/credibility: This work was published in the Rutgers University Libraries’ peer-reviewed publication Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. The journal’s only purpose is to investigate various facets and sectors of criminology and to offer in-depth analyses of issues with answers.

Sources of information: There are about 147 references in the footnotes to this article. Several of them are reputable periodicals, such as the International Journal of Policing Education, which the Rutgers University Library also owns. The author seems to be knowledgeable in the work of other information technology specialists, as the paper contains connections to other websites and organizations.

Point of view: The author was adamant on BWCs, which he supported for the same reason of officer security and responsibility.

Schneider, C. J. (2017). Body worn cameras and police image work: News media coverage of the Rialto Police Department’s body-worn camera experiment. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal, 14(3), 449–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659017721591

Source Summary: Christopher J. Schneider, a professor at Brandon University in Canada, authored the research, which was published in 2017. The essay discusses novel ways to police image work, such as incorporating BWCs. The BWCs experiment conducted by the Rialto police department is used to bolster the paper’s conclusions. The mainstream media extensively reported Rialto’s results, and this piece evaluates how they were portrayed. The media has given BWCs substantially more coverage than the scientific community. According to the theory, BWCs are intended to bolster the police’s legitimacy or the public’s impressions of police behavior. Police legitimacy is highly dependent on their ability to keep control over their image as the legitimate authority in the media. This is referred to as image management. The additional inquiry might be pursued in a variety of directions. The phrases “BCW” and “Police” first appeared in this piece.

Currency: This post was produced in 2017 with an extensive understanding of how BWCs and police image works together to combat crime and hold individuals accountable. Given the critical nature of police image work and the media coverage of BWCs, we must understand how BWCs are addressed in the media. The article has sufficient current material to be regarded as a reference.

Authority/credibility: The Journal of Crime, Media, and Culture published this paper. A peer-reviewed, international publication, it is housed at the Rutgers University Libraries. Criminology as a whole and specific issues and solutions are the main focus of the publication. He is an associate professor of sociology in Manitoba, Canada. Schneider’s current study focuses on the evolution of police work related to information technology. In Canada, this university is a well-known research and technology institution.

Sources of information: The article has around 60 footnotes. Several of them are reputable periodicals, such as the International Journal of Criminology, which the Rutgers University Library also owns. The author seems to be familiar with the work of other information technology professionals since the essay includes connections to a range of websites and organizations.

Point of view: The author was a stickler for the subject of information technology and its impact on police operations, which he criticized for their lack of security and accountability.

Taylor, E., & Lee, M. (2019). Points of view: Arrestees’ perspectives on police body-worn cameras and their perceived impact on police–citizen interactions. The British Journal of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azz007

Source Summary: Emmeline Taylor and Murray Lee, both academics at some of the most prestigious universities in the United Kingdom, authored the essay. The opinions of those whom a police officer has recently arrested have been mostly missing from arguments about whether or not cops should wear cameras while on duty, and this essay fills that hole (BWCs). This article examines the viewpoints and experiences of arrestees using police body-worn cameras to overcome this vast divide (BWCs). Prisoners overwhelmingly support the use of body cameras by cops, believing that they may improve law enforcement and public behavior by increasing accountability and enriching both. However, this assistance is conditional on the application of several operational and administrative restrictions governing the use of BWC. BWC and police officer were the search terms used to locate this article on Google.

Currency: The post was produced in 2019 with extensive information on how BWCs and police image works together to combat crime and hold individuals accountable. The researcher examined evidence of arrests made by police officers using body-worn cameras. The article has sufficient current material to serve as a reference.

Authority/Credibility: The study appeared in the British Publication of Criminology in 2019, a peer-reviewed journal published by the Rutgers University Libraries. The two authors are well-known academics from prestigious institutions in the United Kingdom who specialize in criminology and law.

Sources of information: The article has around 100 footnotes. Several of them are reputable periodicals, such as the British Journal of Justice, which the Rutgers University Library also owns. The author seems to be familiar with the work of other information technology professionals since the essay includes connections to a range of websites and organizations.

Point of view: The paper emphasizes the dangers associated with BWCs rather than the possible benefits to law enforcement.

Jennings, W., Fridell, L., & Lynch, M. (2014). Cops and cameras: Officer perceptions of body-worn cameras in law enforcement. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(6), 549-556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2014.09.008

Source Summary: There are several benefits to using body-worn cameras in criminal justice investigations, which this study illuminates. Officers support the plan, arguing that it would hurt their behavior and the behavior of the general public and anybody else engaged in the criminal justice system. This article aims to assess whether or not the device’s use will influence how police officers’ conduct themselves while doing their duties. Additionally, the story plot addresses improvements in the criminal court system’s technical capabilities.

Currency: The paper was published in 2014 and discussed how police officers might see their use of BWCs. The researcher examined evidence of arrests made by police officers using body-worn cameras. The article has sufficient current material to serve as a reference.

Authority/Credibility: The study was published in the Rutgers University Libraries’ Publication of Criminal Justice, a peer-reviewed journal. The authors of this article are well-known in criminology and law, particularly for their work on current policy issues. This essay provided a synthesis of their most current concepts from those years.

Sources of information: The article has over 50 footnotes and over 100 in-text sources. Several of them are reputable periodicals, such as the British Journal of Criminology, which the Rutgers University Library also owns. The author seems to be familiar with the work of other information technology professionals since the essay contains connections to a range of websites and organizations.

Point of view: The article attempts to give a non-fictional perspective by presenting the opposite side of the tale – officers’ percentages over BWCs. The critical issue raised by the authors is the change of officers’ quarters — even during that age, privacy was a concern.

Demir, M., Braga, A., & Apel, R. (2020). Effects of police body‐worn cameras on citizen compliance and cooperation: Findings from a quasi‐randomized controlled trial. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(3), 855-882. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12505

Source Summary: The essay’s authors are Demir, Braga, and Apel, all of whom are well-known professionals in criminology and public policy. According to the author, road users who are stopped by authorities wearing body cameras are more likely to obey traffic regulations than those stopped by officials without cameras. The research found that drivers are more cooperative with body cameras when they fear having every incident they are a part of being filmed. For the second research issue, it is critical to understand how wearing cameras improve the criminal justice system. This essay may be utilized to achieve this objective. According to this report, they have seen increased compliance in areas where drivers adhere to traffic restrictions. A decrease in police-involved violence may also help cops better comprehend how it protects them. BWC and public policy were determined to be the most relevant search terms.

Currency: The article was published in 2020 when researchers were targeting the null hypothesis of many research – do these cameras influence the behavior of citizens? The article is much current to the issues we are facing today. Using a quasi-randomized technique to acquire data related to citizen behaviors on BMCs was a wise move.

Authority/credibility: The article was written by three well-known authors for their public policy publications. Since it was more of group work, no organization or agency was concerned by their publication. The article has been published in Criminology & Public Policy journal, peer-reviewed and held by Rutgers University Library.

Sources of information: The article has footnotes that include over 50 references and 100 in-text citations. Some of them are reliable publications like the Journal of Criminology, Public Policies, and law held by the Rutgers University Library. The author seems to know about the work of other experts in information technology, and the articles have links to a variety of websites and organizations.

Point of view: The point of view addressed by the authors is quite different from the rest because the authors wanted to understand how the BWCs affect different people.

Crow, M., & Smykla, J. (2019). Police body-worn cameras: Research developments on an emerging technology. Criminal Justice Review, 44(3), 257-262. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016819854789

Source Summary: According to the report, the criminal justice system has come to accept the use of body-worn cameras for several reasons. They understand the value of having this data, which may be utilized by the author’s Crow and Smykla, including order maintenance, research, and future decision-making. To answer the first issue in this study, it is necessary to understand why these technologies have been implemented in the criminal justice system. According to the research, people are more circumspect about their actions as a result of the cameras, and the cameras “improve police accountability and boost transparency inside inner-city areas,” according to the research. The top search terms were cameras and law enforcement.

Currency: The article was published in 2019 when researchers targeted the research developments around emerging technologies. The article is many current technological issues we are facing today. The article’s view of police BWCs is the same as other articles. There was no specialization achieved.

Authority/credibility: The article was written by two authors well known for their criminal justice reviews and publications. Since it was more of group work, no organization or agency was concerned by their publication. The article was published in a peer-reviewed criminal justice review journal held by Rutgers University Library.

Sources of information: The article has footnotes that include over 50 references and 100 in-text citations. Some of them are reliable publications like the Journal of Criminology, also held by the Rutgers University Library. The author seems to know about the work of other experts in information technology, and the articles have links to a variety of websites and organizations.

Point of view: The article’s point of view focus on the extremist point (even the perception) of today’s emerging technology. The issues of privacy have been raised by the authors as well.

Drover, P., & Ariel, B. (2015). Leading an experiment in police body-worn video cameras. International Criminal Justice Review, 25(1), 80-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057567715574374

Source Summary: They address how cameras affect police use of force, tangible evidence against suspects, and officer complaints. Additionally, they examine the development constraints and the need for future adaptation. As the study’s last question states, body-worn cameras in the criminal justice system have the potential to boost police safety. According to the article, police personnel are not required to file public complaints since they can produce proof if they are falsely accused. Essays on BWV underline the need for officer protection. According to the article, police officers would no longer be susceptible to false claims due to technological advancements.

Currency: The article was published in 2015 when researchers were targeting the experiments on body-worn cameras and their relationship to both sides of criminal justice. The article is many current technological issues we are facing today. The article’s view of police BWCs is quite different because it mentions police false accusations.

Authority/credibility: This article was published in the Journal of International Criminal Justice Review. It is an international and peer-reviewed journal held by the Rutgers University Libraries. The journal’s sole purpose is to explore different parts and sectors of criminology and publish problems with solutions extensively.

Sources of information: The article has footnotes that include about 60 references. Some of them are reliable publications like the International Journal of Criminology, also held by the Rutgers University Library. The author seems to know about the work of other experts in information technology, and the articles have links to a variety of websites and organizations.

Point of view: The author was strict on information technologies and related changes to police work where he criticizes them for security and accountability.

Wood, J., & Groff, E. (2018). Reimagining guardians and guardianship with the advent of body worn cameras. Criminal Justice Review, 44(1), 60-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016818814895

Source Summary: The essay’s authors (Wood and Groff) portray police officers who wear body cameras while providing services to the broader public as public defenders. Using the cameras, positive interactions between the public and police personnel may be developed. This article is an excellent place to start when considering whether or not body cams will affect police officer behavior. Because the majority of residents would be law-abiding, cops will serve as guardians. Law enforcement seems to have veered away from developing intimate connections with the community in favor of maintaining a safe distance.

Currency: The article was published in 2018 when researchers targeted the research developments around emerging technologies. The article is many current technological issues we are facing today. The article’s view of police BWCs is the same as other articles. There was no specialization achieved.

Authority/credibility: The article was written by two authors well known for their criminal justice reviews and publications. Since it was more of group work, no organization or agency was concerned by their publication. The article was published in a peer-reviewed criminal justice review journal held by Rutgers University Library.

Sources of information: The article has footnotes that include over 30 references and 30 in-text citations. Some of them are reliable publications like the Journal of Criminology, also held by the Rutgers University Library. The author seems to know about the work of other experts in information technology, and the articles have links to a variety of websites and organizations.

Point of view: The article’s point of view focus on the extremist point (even the perception) of today’s emerging technology. The issues reimagination of guardians and guardianships of BWC was called into action.

Ariel, B., Farrar, W., & Sutherland, A. (2020). Correction to: The effect of police body-worn cameras on use of force and citizens’ complaints against the police: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 36(4), 1017-1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-019-09423-y

Source Summary: Ariel, Farra, and Sutherland are among those who contributed to the paper, which explores whether body cameras worn by police officers may help reduce officers’ use of excessive force. This essay paints a realistic picture of the possibilities for miscommunication between police officers and civilians. There is a possibility that this article will explain why cameras are being utilized and how they affect police officers’ conduct. The study’s findings are outlined in the paper, which also estimates the causal influence of body-worn video usage on the two outcome variables by accounting for both within-group and between-group variance in body-worn camera use. Police, force, and camera were the most relevant search phrases. The results were shown using a map.

Currency: The article was published in 2019 when researchers were targeting the null hypothesis of many research – do these cameras reduce the use of force among police forces? The article is much current to the issues we are facing today. Using a quasi-randomized technique to acquire data related to citizen behaviors on BMCs was a wise move.

Authority/credibility: The article was written by three well-known authors for their public policy publications. Since it was more of group work, no organization or agency was concerned by their publication. The article has been published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, a peer-reviewed and held by Rutgers University Library.

Sources of information: The article has footnotes that include over 65 references and 80 in-text citations. Some of them are reliable publications like the Journal of Criminology, Public Policies, and law held by the Rutgers University Library. The author seems to know about the work of other experts in information technology, and the articles have links to a variety of websites and organizations.

Point of view: The point of view addressed by the authors is quite different from the rest because the authors wanted to understand how the BWCs affect police and the general public’s perception of the law. The article’s primary purpose was to offer a counter-narrative for the same.

Gaub, J. E., Choate, D. E., Todak, N., Katz, C. M., & White, M. D. (2016). Officer perceptions of body-worn cameras before and after deployment: A study of three departments. Police quarterly, 19(3), 275-302. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611116653398

Source Summary: Officers’ usage of body cameras has increased in popularity over the past few years due to the worsening of police-community relations. Cameras worn by police officers assist in the healing of community rifts by ensuring that police officers are held accountable for their actions. While government officials have indicated significant support for body cameras, police officers have responded with little to no response. Many individuals are concerned about the long-term repercussions of police agencies implementing body cameras based on data acquired from officers before and after the cameras were adopted. This article was written in collaboration with five (5) separate authors, including Gaub, Choate, Todak, Katz, and White. Perceptions, deployment, and body cams were all used as search criteria.

Currency: The article was published in 201 when researchers were targeting the null hypothesis of much research – do these cameras reduce the use of force among police forces? The article is much current to the issues we are facing today. Using a quasi-randomized technique to acquire data related to citizen behaviors on BMCs was a wise move.

Authority/credibility: The article was written by five authors well known for their public policy publications, and they all have special seats at Arizona State University. Since it was more of group work, no organization or agency was concerned by their publication. The article has been published in Police Quarterly Journal, a peer-reviewed held by Rutgers University Library.

Sources of information: The article has footnotes that include over 100 references and 80 in-text citations. Some of them are reliable publications like the Police Quarterly Journal, Public Policies, and law held by the Rutgers University Library. The author seems to know about the work of other experts in information technology, and the articles have links to a variety of websites and organizations.

Point of view: The point of view addressed by the authors is quite different from the rest because the authors wanted to idea that body cameras ensure proper protocol and officers are held liable for their actions. The article’s primary purpose was to offer a counter-narrative for the same.

Reflections on the ICP project

This assignment was insightful because it provided invaluable experience in searching for and analyzing evidence from existing literature. It helped me realize the value of high-quality evidence in promoting my understanding of complex and relatively new topics, such as police body cameras and body-worn camera technology. Sources with a high level of evidence, such as experiments and randomized controlled studies, presented unbiased and authentic evidence critical for objective decision-making. However, accessing information about an emerging topic can be challenging because of the scarcity of research. In addition, many preliminary studies on a new topic such as this can yield mixed and inconclusive findings, thus challenging the proper evaluation of a new technology that is yet to be widely adopted.

References

Ariel, B. (2016). Police body cameras in large police departments. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 106(4), 729-768. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45163406

Ariel, B., Farrar, W., & Sutherland, A. (2020). Correction to: The effect of police body-worn cameras on use of force and citizens’ complaints against the police: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 36(4), 1017-1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-019-09423-y

Crow, M., & Smykla, J. (2019). Police body-worn cameras: Research developments on an emerging technology. Criminal Justice Review, 44(3), 257-262. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016819854789

Demir, M., Braga, A., & Apel, R. (2020). Effects of police body‐worn cameras on citizen compliance and cooperation: Findings from a quasi‐randomized controlled trial. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(3), 855-882. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12505

Drover, P., & Ariel, B. (2015). Leading an experiment in police body-worn video cameras. International Criminal Justice Review, 25(1), 80-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057567715574374

Gaub, J. E., Choate, D. E., Todak, N., Katz, C. M., & White, M. D. (2016). Officer perceptions of body-worn cameras before and after deployment: A study of three departments. Police Quarterly, 19(3), 275-302. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611116653398

Jennings, W., Fridell, L., & Lynch, M. (2014). Cops and cameras: Officer perceptions of body-worn cameras in law enforcement. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(6), 549-556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2014.09.008

Schneider, C. J. (2017). Body worn cameras and police image work: News media coverage of the Rialto Police Department’s body-worn camera experiment. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal, 14(3), 449–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659017721591

Taylor, E., & Lee, M. (2019). Points of view: Arrestees’ perspectives on police body-worn cameras and their perceived impact on police–citizen interactions. The British Journal of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azz007

Wood, J., & Groff, E. (2018). Reimagining guardians and guardianship with the advent of body worn cameras. Criminal Justice Review, 44(1), 60-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016818814895

Lum, C., Stoltz, M., Koper, C. S., & Scherer, J. A. (2019). Research on body‐worn cameras: What we know, what we need to know. Criminology & Public Policy, 18(1), 93-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12412

National Institute of Justice (2022, January 7). Research on body-worn cameras and law enforcement. Retrieved from https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/research-body-worn-cameras-and-law-enforcement