Microsoft Word - RIB_BWC

©"2015"UNIVERSITY"OF"NEVADA,"LAS"VEGAS

July 2015, CCJP 2015-02

Body Worn Cameras on Police: Results from a

National Survey of Public Attitudes

By William H. Sousa, Ph.D., Terance D. Miethe, Ph.D., and Mari Sakiyama, M.A.

Body worn cameras (BWCs) are small video/audio

recording devices worn on police officers’ uniforms,

usually in the chest area, shoulder, or collar. Although

several models are available, all BWCs provide the

same basic function. When activated, the BWC is

designed to record officers’ activities, communications,

and other interactions with members of the public.

BWCs offer several potential advantages. BWCs may

help protect citizens from police misconduct – and may

help protect police from false allegations of misconduct.

They can assist in evidence gathering and officer

training. In addition, the willingness to have officer

actions recorded demonstrates a level of transparency

on the part of police agencies. Along with potential

advantages, however, there are possible consequences.

For example, video and audio recordings made by

BWCs can lead to concerns over privacy rights of both

citizens and police officers.

Recent cases of lethal injuries involving police-citizen

interactions have sparked a great deal of interest in the

value of BWCs on officers. These incidents have

prompted political pressure to expand the use of BWCs

in the United States. As a result, many departments

around the US are in the process of acquiring funding

and developing policies that will equip officers with the

technology.

Given the national interest in expanding the use of

BWCs in police work, it is important to more fully

understand the nature of public attitudes about the

technology. While some recent polls have asked

general questions about public attitudes toward BWCs

(see YouGov 2015; Pew Research Center 2014), these

surveys have not examined the particular contexts in

which people support BWCs or their views about the

positive and negative consequences of them.

Survey respondents were generally supportive of

BWCs on police officers. 85% of the sample

thought that police should wear body cameras

and similar proportions agreed that police will

behave more respectfully toward citizens, that

BWCs will reduce excessive force and other forms

of misconduct by police, and that BWCs will

improve evidence gathering in criminal incidents.

Nearly half of the sample (49%) agreed that

BWCs on police will cause citizens to behave

more respectfully toward officers, and 75%

indicated that false complaints of police

misconduct will decrease.

A smaller, although still substantial, percentage of

respondents acknowledged potential concerns

with BWCs on police. About 40% of the sample

agreed that victims and witnesses might be

apprehensive about cooperating with police

knowing that their statements will be recorded.

Furthermore, respondents were generally

concerned about the availability of recordings:

less than one-third of the sample indicated that

the media or members of the public should have

access to BWC recordings.

Public opinions varied in terms of how BWCs

might impact relationships between police and the

community. Although 91% reported that BWCs

will help to improve transparency, 61% indicated

that citizens will have greater trust in police, and

only 36% reported that BWCs will help to reduce

racial tension between police and citizens.

BODY"WORN"CAMERAS"ON"POLICE!

This Research in Brief summarizes the main findings of

a recent national survey on citizen opinions about BWCs

on police officers. The survey instrument included items

related to the general awareness of BWCs, opinions on

their potential advantages, attitudes toward their

potential consequences, perceptions of certain BWC

policies, and support for BWCs under various

circumstances and by different public safety officials.

Data and Methods

Using Qualtrics, an online survey was administered

during May 2015 to a national sample of US residents

age 18 years or older. This method yielded a total

sample of 635 respondents. Respondents in this sample

were primarily male (54%), white (78%), over 30 years

old (63%), and had a household income of less than

$50,000 per year (57%).

Public Awareness and Overall Support for BWCs

As shown in Diagram 1, most people in the sample were

aware of the idea of BWCs on police (88%) and, in

general, supported BWCs on officers (85%). Many

respondents (64%), however, were unsure if police in

their town were currently using BWCs.

Potential Advantages of BWCs

Several survey questions asked respondents to indicate

the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with a

series of statements about potential advantages of

BWCs as they relate to police-citizen interactions. More

specifically, the questions asked about how BWCs might

impact police behaviors, citizen behaviors, information

gathering, and overall relationships between police and

citizens. Responses were recorded on a 5-point Likert

scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly

agree.” Diagram 2 displays the percent of respondents

who “agreed” or “strongly agreed” with these

statements.

Respondents generally agreed that police behaviors are

likely to change as the result of BWCs – approximately

80% indicated that officers will behave more respectfully

and that unnecessary force and other types of police

misconduct will decrease (i.e., offensive language,

abuse of power, etc.). Nearly the same percentage also

agreed that citizens are less likely to file false

complaints of police misconduct. Fewer respondents –

although still nearly half of the sample – indicated that

citizens are likely to behave more respectfully toward

police.

Subjects expressed a fair amount of confidence in the

recording abilities of BWCs, with over 80% indicating

that BWCs can improve evidence gathering and provide

accurate accounts of officer-citizen interactions.

Respondents were less convinced of the impact of

BWCs on the overall relationship between police and

the community. Although over 90% agreed that BWCs

can improve the transparency of police practice, less

than two-thirds reported that BWCs will increase

citizens’ trust in police or improve the police relationship

!"#$%"%&'()#*+#,+-#.-//+&0#&%1-2&2"$#/+(23%#0+#

4%'&#5+*,#3'6%&'.7#

8&%#'",#/+(23%#2"#,+-&#0+4"#3-&&%"0(,#4%'&2"$#

5+*,#3'6%&'.7#

9%:+&%#0;%#2"0&+*-3<+"#0+#0;2.#.-&=%,)#;'*#,+-#

;%'&*#'5+-0#/+(23%#4%'&2"$#5+*,#3'6%&'.#2"#

0;%2&#*'2(,#2"0%&'3<+".#420;#32<>%".7#

??@#A#B".-&%#

CD@#A#B".-&%#

D@#A#E+#

FG@#A#E+#

?F@#A#E+#

HI@#A#J%.#

?K@#A#J%.#

HH@#A#J%.#

L2'$&'6#?M#N%"%&'(#84'&%"%..#+:#9OP.#

!"#$"%&'()*$+)&,('-(()&.+%$#(&")/&#$01()*&-$%%&/(#2("*(&

3$01()*&-$%%&4"5(&62("'(2&'27*'&$)&.+%$#(&,(#"7*(&+8&9:3*&

9:3*&$;.2+5(&.+%$#(&2(%"0+)*4$.*&-$'4&#$01()*&

9:3*&$;.2+5(&'2")*."2()#<&,<&.2+5$/$)6&"&5$*7"%&2(#+2/&

9:3*&.2+5$/(&")&"##72"'(&"##+7)'&+8&.+%$#(=#$01()&$)'(2"#0+)*&

9:3*&$;.2+5(&(5$/()#(&6"'4(2$)6&$)&#2$;$)"%&$)#$/()'*&

3$01()*&-$%%&,(4"5(&;+2(&2(*.(#>7%%<&'+-"2/&.+%$#(&

3$01()*&-$%%&2(/7#(&8"%*(&#+;.%"$)'*&+8&.+%$#(&;$*#+)/7#'&

9:3*&-$%%&2(/7#(&+'4(2&'<.(*&+8&.+%$#(&;$*#+)/7#'&

9:3*&-$%%&2(/7#(&'4(&7*(&+8&(?#(**$5(&8+2#(&,<&.+%$#(&

@+%$#(&-$%%&,(4"5(&;+2(&2(*.(#>7%%<&'+-"2/&#2$;(&5$#0;*&

@+%$#(&-$%%&,(4"5(&;+2(&2(*.(#>7%%<&'+-"2/&#2$;(&*7*.(#'*&

@+%$#(&-$%%&,(4"5(&;+2(&2(*.(#>7%%<&'+-"2/&#$01()*&$)&6()(2"%&

ABC&

BDC&

BBC&

EDC&

FDC&

FGC&

HEC&

IGC&

FJC&

FKC&

IEC&

FJC&

FBC&

L$"62";&JM&@+'()0"%&9:3&N/5")'"6(*&O@(2#()'&-4+&PN62((P&+2&PQ'2+)6%<&N62((PR&

BODY"WORN"CAMERAS"ON"POLICE"

with the public. Furthermore, only about one-third of the

sample agreed that racial tension between police and

citizens will decrease as the result of BWCs.

Potential Consequences of BWCs

Another series of questions asked respondents to

indicate the extent to which they agreed with several

statements about some potential consequences of

BWCs. These consequences relate primarily to privacy

concerns about the recording of suspects, victims,

witnesses, and citizens in general. Diagram 3 displays

the percent of respondents who “agreed” or “strongly

agreed” with these statements.

Just over 20% of the sample indicated that BWCs

present some concern over the personal privacy rights of

crime victims and citizens within viewing range of the

BWC. Fewer agreed that BWCs violate the privacy of

crime suspects, although over 10% still reported this as a

concern. Respondents were, however, more likely to

report some concern related to citizens’ willingness to

approach or cooperate with officers when their

statements are recorded by BWCs. Approximately 40%

of the sample agreed that victims and witnesses may be

apprehensive about cooperating with the police because

of BWC recordings, and just under that percentage

indicated that citizens may worry about approaching

officers to discuss suspicious activities.

BWC Policy: Notification, Activation, and Access to

Recording

The survey also asked respondents to indicate the extent

to which they agreed with statements about several BWC

policies. Some of the statements addressed questions

about when officers should activate (or deactivate) BWCs

and whether officers should notify citizens if they are

being recorded. Other statements related to who should

have access to video recordings. Diagram 4 displays the

percent of respondents who “agreed” or “strongly agreed”

with these statements.

As shown in Diagram 4, most in the sample reported that

officers should always have the BWC activated when

interacting with citizens, and most also indicated that

police should notify citizens whenever a BWC is

recording. Only 16% agreed that police should comply

with citizen requests to deactivate BWCs, although

slightly more indicated that officers should grant

deactivation requests from victims or witnesses.

Interestingly, nearly two-thirds of respondents indicated

that citizens recorded on BWCs should have access to

their recordings, but less than one-third believed that the

media or the public at large should have access to

videos.

Beliefs about the Necessity of BWCs for Different

Policing Activities

The survey next presented respondents with eight police

activities and asked them to indicate the degree to which

BWCs are necessary in that situation. Responses were

recorded on a 3-point scale ranging from “not necessary”

to “very necessary.” Diagram 5 displays the results of

this series of questions.

As shown in Diagram 5, respondents were generally

supportive of BWCs for most of the police activities that

were listed. For seven of the eight activities, 50% or

more of the sample considered BWCs to be “very

necessary” – and 87% or more considered them to be

“somewhat” or “very” necessary.

!"#$%&'()"**()+,,-(./+01(.22,+.34"&5(+63%,'(1+(7"'30''('0'2"3"+0'(

.3#8"#%'("&(14%",(&%"54/+,4++7'(70%(1+(,%3+,7"&5(+9('1.1%:%&1'(

!,":%(8"3#:'()"**()+,,-(./+01(3++2%,.#&5()"14(2+*"3%(70%(1+(

3+&3%,&'(14.1(14%",('1.1%:%&1'(.,%(,%3+,7%7(

;"1&%''%'()"**()+,,-(./+01(3++2%,.#&5()"14(2+*"3%(70%(1+(3+&3%,&'(

14.1(14%",('1.1%:%&1'(.,%(,%3+,7%7(

<;!'(8"+*.1%(14%(2%,'+&.*(2,"8.3-(+9(3,":%('0'2%31'(

<;!'(8"+*.1%(14%(2%,'+&.*(2,"8.3-(+9(3,":%(8"3#:'(

<;!'(8"+*.1%(14%(2%,'+&.*(2,"8.3-(+9(.&-(2%,'+&()"14"&(8"%)"&5(,.&5%(

+9(14%(<;!(

=>?(

=@?(

AB?(

B=?(

CB?(

CC?(

D".5,.:(=E(F+1%&#.*(<;!(!+&'%G0%&3%'(HF%,3%&1()4+(IJ5,%%I(+,(IK1,+&5*-(J5,%%IL(

BODY"WORN"CAMERAS"ON"POLICE!

Note:""Total"for"each"category"may"not"add"to"100%"due"to"rounding"and"a"small"percent"of"“don’t"know”"responses"

The one exception involved situations where police

assist with medical emergencies. In this case, only 32%

of respondents considered BWCs to be “very

necessary,” while 26% considered BWCs to be “not

necessary” at all.!

Support for BWCs for Different Types of Public

Safety Agencies

Finally, the survey asked respondents to indicate their

support for BWC usage by different types of public

safety agencies. Diagram 6 indicates the percent of

respondents who indicated that they have at least some

support for BWCs in these different agencies.

Respondents appear generally supportive of BWCs on

all types public safety officials. This is especially the

case with police officials that citizens are most likely to

encounter (i.e., local and state police officers) and other

uniformed government officials that have surveillance or

detection responsibilities (correctional officers, Border

Patrol, Park Rangers, TSA officers, etc.). Respondents

were slightly less likely to agree with BWCs on school

safety officers or private security guards, although

support for BWCs on these officials remained relatively

high. Additionally, over half of the respondents

indicated some support for BWCs on firefighters and

emergency medical technicians. The sample was less

supportive of BWCs on neighborhood watch volunteers

– this is the only category where fewer than half of the

sample indicated support for the technology.

Any$member$of$the$public$should$have$access$to$any$BWC$recording$

The$media$should$have$access$to$any$BWC$video$

People$recorded$on$BWCs$should$have$access$to$their$recording$

Police$should$comply$with$the$requests$of$all$ci>zens$to$turn$oﬀ$BWCs$

Police$should$comply$with$vic>m/witness$requests$to$turn$oﬀ$BWCs$

Police$should$no>fy$ci>zens$whenever$a$BWC$is$recording$

Police$should$always$have$the$BWC$on$when$interac>ng$with$a$ci>zen$

26%$

31%$

63%$

16%$

26%$

64%$

72%$

Diagram$4:$BWC$Policy$Ques>ons$(Percent$who$"Agree"$or$"Strongly$Agree")$

!""#"$%&'(#)*'+,-#./0',+,1&,%.#,"'

21/3.'")45"'46'-1#7,1"'4%'")1,,)"'8'*#&*(/9"'

:)455#%&'5,450,'#%'5;<0#.'50/.,"'

=4;$%,'";17,#00/%.,'46'>%4(%'.1#+,'/1,/"'

?4%#)41#%&'.14(-"'/%-'-,+4%")1/$4%"'

=,"54%-#%&')4'./00"'641'",17#.,'/)'/'5,1"4%@"'*4+,'

21/%"541$%&'/11,"),-'5,1"4%"')4'",.;1,'04./$4%"'

A#&*'1#">'45,1/$4%"'B-1;&'1/#-"C':D!2C',).EF'

GHI'

JKI'

JLI'

JJI'

JMI'

NHI'

NOI'

OGI'

GPI'

GMI'

GLI'

GJI'

GLI'

GKI'

HNI'

QHI'

HNI'

QQI'

QKI'

MI'

NI'

LI'

HI'

R#/&1/+'JS'T,.,""#)9'46'UDV"'#%')*,'W4004(#%&':#);/$4%"'

%4)'%,.,""/19'

"4+,(*/)'%,.,""/19'

7,19'%,.,""/19'

BODY"WORN"CAMERAS"ON"POLICE"

Discussion

Overall support for BWCs on police – particularly on

local and state uniformed officers – is very high.

Although support for the technology varies slightly

based on the type of activity that police perform, survey

respondents generally agree that BWCs will result in

more police respect toward citizens, fewer incidents of

police misconduct, and more effective information

gathering by police. Although fewer agree that citizen

respect toward officers will increase or that the

relationship between police and citizens will improve as

the result of BWCs, most believe that false complaints of

police misconduct will decrease because of the

technology.

Despite the general support for BWCs, a small but

considerable percentage of respondents reported some

potential concern over the technology. Approximately

20% of the sample worried about the personal privacy of

crime victims and those within the viewing range of a

BWC. About one-third of the sample indicated that

citizens might be apprehensive about approaching

officers with information about suspicious activities in

their neighborhoods – and even more agreed that

victims and witnesses might worry about cooperating

with officers knowing that their statements will be

recorded. Although most respondents indicated that

officers should always have the BWC activated when

interacting with citizens and that officers should notify

citizens of the activation, over one-quarter of the sample

reported that police should deactivate the BWC at the

request of victims and witnesses.

The data also reveal other information about public

opinion of BWCs that is seemingly contradictory. For

example, most of the sample reported that BWCs will

help to improve the transparency of police practice, but

many are concerned about allowing the media or

members of the public access to video recordings. Also,

respondents reported that BWCs are very necessary for

certain police activities that are relatively rare (such as

high risk operations), but for some police activities that

are much more common (such as assisting with medical

emergencies), BWCs are considered to be much less

necessary.

While the public appears very much in support of BWCs

on police, the potential concerns of some respondents

highlight the need to proceed cautiously in terms of

equipping officers with the technology. Issues regarding

activation, deactivation, and access to recorded data

appear particularly important to the public. Police

agencies should therefore carefully consider these

issues in formulating policies. Furthermore, future

research should consider the potential consequences of

BWCs in terms of interactions between police and

citizens.

Limitations

The main limitation of this research relates to the

sampling design. Although the Qualtrics method

provides a national sampling frame, respondents are

restricted to those who have access to these online

surveys. However, when compared to other recent

surveys on citizen views about BWCs (YouGov 2015;

!"#$%&'(%'')*+,-.%*/'012-""(3*

45"($"2.6*5")#.,0*-".%2#.#,23*74893:*

;#("<$%-"(3*

=(#/,-"*3".1(#-6*$1,()3*

>.%''0*3".1(#-6*'?."(3*

9>@*'?."(3*7"A$AB*,#(C'(-*3".1(#-6:*

D'((".E'2,0*'?."(3*

;")"(,0*12#F'(5")*C'0#."*7"A$AB*G'()"(*=,-('0:*

H'.,0*,2)*3-,-"*C'0#."*'?."(3*

IJ4K@HH*>L==IK9*;IK*GMD3*

NOP*

OQP*

ORP*

QSP*

RTP*

USP*

UOP*

VSP*

VOP*

UOP*

W#,$(,5*QX*>1CC'(-*F'(*GMD3*&6*=1&0#.*>,F"-6*7="(."2-*Y2)#.,E2$*>1CC'(-:*

BODY"WORN"CAMERAS"ON"POLICE!

Pew Research Center 2014), the level of public support

for body cameras is of a similar high magnitude,

providing some evidence for the generalizability of the

results.

We also note that this survey was conducted shortly

after several high-profile cases involving deaths of

citizens while they were interacting with police or while

they were in police custody. These cases generated a

great deal of national publicity and a push toward

greater police accountability. Thus, the political climate

surrounding BWCs and police accountability may have

impacted survey responses.

References

Pew Research Center (December 2014). Sharp Racial

Divisions in Reactions to Brown, Garner Decisions. A

Pew Research Center/USA TODAY Survey.

Retrieved from http://www.people-

press.org/2014/12/08/sharp-racial-divisions-in-

reactions-to-brown-garner-decisions/

YouGov (April 2015). Overwhelming Support for Police

Body Cameras. YouGov.com. Retrieved from

https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/05/07/body-

cams/

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the Department of Criminal

Justice at UNLV for the support necessary to complete

this research.

BODY"WORN"CAMERAS"ON"POLICE"

The Research in Brief series is produced by the

Center for Crime and Justice Policy at the

University of Nevada,

Las Vegas. The Center

is housed in the Department of Criminal Justice,

which is located in

the Greenspun College of

Urban Affairs. Research in Briefs are modeled

after the Bureau of

Justice Statistics' Special

Reports and Bulletins.

The Briefs report on all

aspects of the criminal justice system, including

trends in crime and arrests,

police practices,

prosecution, pretrial activities,

adjudication,

sentencing, and corrections. Although

Research in Briefs typically focus on criminal

justice issues within Nevada, these reports may

focus on national issues as well.

Research in Briefs are designed to provide

members of the general public, local officials,

community organizations, and media outlets a

concise and objective profile of

current crime

and criminal justice trends in Nevada and

elsewhere that may serve as a foundation for

informed discussions of future crime control

policies and practices.

Previous Research in Briefs

(Available from www.unlv.edu/ccjp)

Aerial Drones, Domestic Surveillance, and Public

Opinion of Adults in the United States

Arrest-Related Deaths in Nevada, 2009-2011

Arson Trends in Nevada, 1997-2006

Auto Theft in Nevada, 1994-2008

Burglary Trends in Nevada, 1990-2007

Capital Punishment in Nevada, 1977-2008

Clearance Rates in Nevada, 1998-2009

Communication Intercepts Authorized in Nevada,

1997-2008

A Comparison of Different On-Line Sampling

Approaches for Generating National Samples

Criminal Victimization in Nevada, 2008

Criminal Victimization in Nevada, 2011

Deaths in Custody in Nevada, 2001-2006

Impact of Foreclosures on Neighborhood Crime in

Nevada, 2006-2009

Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program in Nevada,

2005-2010

Nevada vs. U.S. Residents’ Attitudes Toward

Surveillance Using Aerial Drones

Perceptions of Disorder: Results from Two Las Vegas Tourist

Locations

Public Attitudes about Aerial Drone Activities:

Results

of a National Survey

Rape and Other Sex Offenses in Nevada,

1990-2007

School Violence Prevention in Nevada

CENTER FOR CRIME AND JUSTICE POLICY

RESEARCH IN BRIEF SERIES