The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment

INTRODUCTION AND MAJOR FINDINGS

  • Preventive patrol by uniformed personnel has been a primary function of policing since the establishment of a patrolling force in 13th century Hangchow.

  • In 20th century America, approximately $2 billion is spent annually on the operation and maintenance of uniformed patrol forces.

  • Police officers, the general public, and elected officials have historically operated under the belief that police presence significantly deters criminal activity.

O.W. Wilson's Perspective on Patrol

  • O.W. Wilson was a prominent chief of the Chicago Police Department and an influential academic theorist on police issues.

  • Wilson stated, “Patrol is an indispensable service that plays a leading role in the accomplishment of the police purpose. It is the only form of police service that directly attempts to eliminate opportunity for misconduct…”

  • He argued that police omnipresence discourages potential criminal activity.

  • Wilson's view remains prevalent today, influencing police training and public perceptions of patrol.

  • The International City Management Association supports this view, asserting that deterrence through police patrol is crucial for crime control.

  • In response to rising crime rates, public officials advocate for increased police patrols to enhance visibility and deterrence.

Emerging Challenges to Traditional Beliefs about Patrol

  • Historically, challenges regarding the effectiveness of patrol were rare until recent years.

  • Researcher Bruce Smith (1930) noted the lack of scientific evidence supporting patrol effectiveness, but received little attention.

  • Beginning in 1962, growing crime rates and awareness of unreported incidents prompted scrutiny of patrol’s effectiveness.

Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment

  • Initiated in 1972, this experiment aimed to rigorously analyze the effectiveness of routine preventive patrol under a grant from the Police Foundation.

  • The Kansas City Police Department partnered with the Police Foundation to create a comprehensive experimental design.

  • The experiment involved variations in patrol levels across 15 Kansas City beats grouped into:

    1. Reactive Beats:

    • Routine preventive patrol was eliminated; officers responded only to calls.

    1. Control Beats:

    • Routine preventive patrol was maintained at the standard level (one car per beat).

    1. Proactive Beats:

    • Routine preventive patrol was intensified with additional patrol cars (2-3 times the usual level).

  • The two organizations agreed on an eight-month duration, potentially extending for four months if conditions allowed.

Hypotheses Addressed in the Experiment

  • A series of hypotheses were proposed to evaluate patrol effectiveness, including:

    1. Crime rates would not vary by patrol type (assessed through victimization surveys and reported data).

    2. Citizens' attitudes towards police services would show no significant variation across experimental conditions.

    3. Citizen fear of crime and protective measures would not differ significantly by patrol type.

    4. Police response time and citizen satisfaction would not change based on different experimental conditions.

    5. Traffic accident rates would not increase in reactive beats.

Key Findings of the Experiment

  • The experimental conditions demonstrated the following results:

    • Minimal differences in reported crime across beats.

    • The only notable difference in reported crime data was considered possibly random.

    • No significant variations in citizen attitudes toward police.

    • Citizen fear of crime was unaffected by the experimental conditions.

    • The use of anti-crime protective measures by citizens showed little change.

    • Businessmen's attitudes regarding crime and police services were stable across experimental conditions.

    • Satisfaction with police encounters remained consistent.

    • Police response times were not significantly influenced by changes in patrol levels.

    • Observations indicated that officers' time was divided between police-related tasks and non-police activities, frequently being noncommitted, with no uniform definition or objective evaluation methods for preventive patrol effectiveness.

  • The findings challenge traditional beliefs about patrol and underscore a disparity between public perception and policing capabilities.

Implications of Research Findings

  • The study suggests that police presence does not yield the anticipated effects on crime prevention or citizen security.

  • It indicated a need for further research on police functions and the definition of preventive patrol roles.

  • The findings emphasize the complexities in police operations and community expectations regarding crime prevention.

  • It is highlighted that the Kansas City population, while lower in density, faced many common issues with larger urban areas.

  • The socio-economic diversity of the experimental area suggests broader implications for understanding police effectiveness in various contexts.