The Journal - CPOA€¦ · The Journal of California Law Enforcement welcomes articles relevant to the area of law enforcement from its readers. The following guidelines should be

JournalThe

Problem Oriented Policing: Is it Time to Expand the Scope?

Hate Speech as a Catalyst to Violence

Implicit Bias and the Police

Volu

me

51

No.

1, 2

017

of California Law Enforcement

Instructions to Contributing Authors

The Journal of California Law Enforcement welcomes articles relevant to the area of law enforcement from its readers.

The following guidelines should be observed:

Articles should be submitted by e-mail to [email protected]. Articles should be between 1000-3000 words. A short biographical sketch (3-4 sentences) and photograph of the author should be submitted with the article. The article should be written in APA style. Photographs can be in black and white or in color, but will be reproduced in black and white. We strongly recommend the use of graphs, charts, tables, illustrations, or photographs.

Authors will receive a complimentary copy of the Journal of California Law Enforcement in which their article appears and a letter of appreciation will be sent to the author’s department head.

Send articles to Cailin Seva, editor, Journal of California Law Enforcement, [email protected].

Journalof California Law Enforcement

The

This Journal of California Law Enforcement will be an agenda-setting publication for the law enforcement profession, providing a serious source of original thinking that will advance the performance of agencies and their leaders.

Opinions expressed in the Journal of California Law Enforcement are those of the authors. CPOA state board, appointees, staff and its membership does not endorse trademarked products mentioned in the Journal; their inclusion is solely at the discretion of the authors.

EditorCAILIN SEVACalifornia Peace Officers’ Association

Articles Reviewed ByJEFF NOBLEJournal Subcommittee ChairPublications & Public Affairs Committee

The Journal of California Law Enforcement is published quarterly by the California Peace Officers’ Association. 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 1495, Sacramento, CA 95814

The annual paper subscription rate is $40 for CPOA members and $55 for nonmembers. Digital rates can be found at CPOA.org.

Executive Committee

PresidentMARC COOPWOODCaptain, Sacramento Police Department

1st Vice PresidentVACANT

2nd Vice PresidentJAY VARNEYSheriff, Madera Count Sheriff’s Department

3rd Vice PresidentMARC SHAWAssistant Chief, California Highway Patrol

TreasurerERIK MANESSUndersheriff, Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department

Immediate Past PresidentSCOTT JONESSheriff, Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department

Executive DirectorCAROL LEVERONI, CAE

Problem Oriented Policing: Is it Time to Expand the Scope?Dennis W. Bulen, PhD, Wright State University-Lake Campus and Sharon Showman, Wright State University-Lake Campus

Hate Speech as a Catalyst to ViolenceAmy Cozad, California State University, Long Beach

Implicit Bias and the PoliceCommander Bill Whalen, Irvine Police Department

6.

12.

19.

JournalThe

of California Law Enforcement Volume 51 No 1

6

Crime and the causes of crime have been issues for law enforcement since the beginning of formalized policing. How the police respond to the community in general and how they respond to crime specifically has affected some shifts in policing philosophy. From the Political Era of the late 1800’s through the Community Oriented Policing (COP) era of the 1980’s, police have tried to identify strategies to address the causes of crime and have implemented methods in an attempt to prevent the occurrence and reoccurrence of crime. Herman Goldstein introduced Problem Oriented Policing (POP) as a proactive approach to addressing crime. The impetus for POP was to increase the effectiveness of policing. Goldstein suggested examining the issues that cause crime, “for improving policing in which the high priority attached to addressing substantive problems shapes the police agency, influencing all changes in personnel, organization, and procedures”. (Goldstein, 1990) POP was designed to move the police response to crime from the traditional reactive approach to a more proactive approach. In theory, if the police can identify the causes of crime and address these root causes, the crime rate can be reduced. The police should examine why crime is occurring in a particular area and address these “whys”. It is a shift in police focus from the ‘means’ to the ‘ends’. (Ikerd, 2010) While Ikerd summarized research that suggests POP has been successful in


By: Dennis W. Bulen, PhD, Wright State University-Lake Campus and Sharon Showman, Wright State University-Lake Campus

Dennis W. Bulen is retired from the police service in Kentucky, having spent 7 years as police chief. He is the editor and contributor to the Applied Criminal Justice Monthly (inaugural publication date 10/2017). He has worked as a case investigator for the public defender’s office, has worked in retail loss prevention, and is currently a criminal justice instructor at Wright State University-Lake Campus.

Sharon Showman’s area of expertise is organizational, cultural, and gender communication. She does training in personal and organizational communication. She will be a regular contributor to the Applied Criminal Justice Monthly. She currently teaches Communication at Wright State University-Lake Campus.


The Journal of California Law Enforcement 7

addressing community crime, Mazerolle, Darroch and White (2013) summarized the barriers police departments experienced with the implementation of POP strategies. These barriers are all internal to the police organization. The cultural shift within the organization required to facilitate the success of the POP initiative is a slow process. The larger the department, the longer the timeframe takes for this paradigm shift to occur. The timeframe slows and in some instances stops the process and POP is never successfully operationalized. The long-term effect is that the crime problems are still being addressed retroatively. Problem Oriented Policing suggests a systematic inquiry into the crime problem, disaggregating and accurately labeling problems, analysis of the multiple interests in problems, strengthening the decision-making processes and increasing accountability, and adopting a proactive stance. (Goldstein, 1990) While this is the fundamental tenets of POP, it does not address the root causes of crime. Policing still remains reactive in every sense of the word. Before the police can address the crime problem, the root issue that allows crime to exist must be identified. Only by addressing the root cause can a catalyst for change be implemented. The one constant that transcends the crime problem at all levels is education. Education Week reported that an estimated 1.1 million prospective 2012 high school graduates did not earn a diploma. An overall dropout rate of 7% was experienced in 2012. (Mathews, 2012) The U.S. Department of Education (2013) estimated that 14% of the general population cannot read and that 21% of U.S. adults read below a fifth grade level. Further, 19% of high school graduates cannot read. (Mazwrolle, Darroch & White, 2013) According to the American Psychological Association (2012), 14% of the adult American population demonstrated a below basic literacy level and 29% demonstrated a basic reading level. Student from low-income families are five times more likely to drop out of high school than students from high-income families. Dropouts are less likely to secure employment that pays a living wage and are more likely to be involved in criminal activity. (Rumberger, 2011) Belfield and Levin (2007) found that California high school dropouts were between two and eight times more likely than high school graduates to be incarcerated. Television reality shows that have a jail or prison format such as Lock-up (MSNBC), America’s Hardest Prisons (NATGEO), and Jail (Spike TV) have one common theme, the inmates profiled demonstrate a minimal level of education. Venus Bailey, Intake Officer at Metro Corrections in Jefferson County, Kentucky, stated the average educational level of inmates at Metro Corrections is 10th grade. Ms. Bailey believes that education is a catalyst for reducing the recidivism rate. At Metro Corrections, the recidivism rate is lower when an inmate achieves a GED while incarcerated. Her experience indicates that generational incarceration is also reduced when the adult(s) in an inmate household attains a GED. Bailey (2015) The lack of education is a root cause of crime. Merton’s Strain Theory (1968) suggests that delinquency is a result of a lack of opportunity, particularly economic opportunity, and the lack of educational opportunity is the primary cause. Cohen’s Delinquency and Frustration Theory (1955) directly relates the lack of educational preparation to rates of delinquency. Cloward and Ohlin (1960) suggest that members in the lower socio-economic status who cannot reach their goals through legitimate means use an illegitimate opportunity structure to reach those goals. These theories

8 Problem Oriented Policing: Is it Time to Expand the Scope?

have one overriding premise; the lack of education leads to a lack of economic opportunity. Areas with high school dropout rates also have high crime rates. The crime rate is directly proportional to the dropout rate. The higher the dropout rate, the higher the crime rate. Forty-one percent of the students in the 50 largest U.S. cities drop-out. Seventy-five percent of crimes committed in the U.S. are committed by high school dropouts (APA, 2012). When there are no opportunities to meet economic goals through legitimate means, the only means left to meet these goals are illegitimate. The catalyst for reaching goals through legitimate means is education. Education improves human capital. Human capital generally refers to the knowledge, skills, and talents an individual possesses. (Coff, 1999) It is a measure of the economic value of an employee’s skill set. The education, experience and abilities of an employee has an economic value for employers and for the economy as a whole. This human capital also has an effect on the community. The same education, experience, and abilities that have a positive effect on the employer, also has an effect on the community. The more that is invested in the human capital, the greater the economic return to the community. A quality educational experience is paramount to reducing the crime rates. But education must be relevant to the student. If the student does not perceive a personal or future benefit to the learning outcomes, the student will lose interest and drop out. Students must be able to visualize an attainable and successful future for his/her life. High schools are still educating using a template that was successful when the U.S. job markets were predominately hiring in manufacturing and industrial labor. There was a wide array of job opportunities for high school graduates, and to some degree, high school drop-outs when manufacturing and industry were the primary job options. Today, manufacturing and industrial labor jobs have been replaced by jobs requiring a level of expertise in technology and automation. The human factor has been replaced with a robot. This has resulted in fewer career opportunities available for high school graduates and little to no opportunity for high school dropouts. This is particularly true in urban areas. Urban areas have commonalities such as a lower socio-economic status, higher rates of unemployment, higher rates of high school drop-outs, higher rates of illiteracy and consequently, higher rates of crime than do suburban and rural areas. Statistics suggest that approximately 75% of crimes in the U.S. are committed by high school drop-outs. Further, approximately 40% of the students in the 50 largest U.S. cities drop out of high school and approximately 60% of Black drop-outs spend some time in prison (APA, 2012). This suggests that the lack of quality educational opportunities and therefore, the lack of quality career opportunities contribute to the crime rate.


High School Dropout Statistics (US) [6]

Total number of high school dropouts annually 3,303,000Number of high school students who drop out each day 8,300Percent of Americans with a high school diploma 85.3%

Percent of all drop outs that happen in the ninth-grade 36%Percent of students in the largest 50 U.S. cities that graduate high school

59%

Percent of U.S. crimes committed by a high school dropout 75%Percent of Black dropouts that have spent time in prison 60%

A new approach would have police administrators expand Problem Oriented Policing to include educational administrators in the scanning, analysis, response and assessment (SARA) approach to crime. Scanning would include: identifying crime as a reoccurring concern to both the police and the public; identifying crime as a consequence of the lack of education; determining how frequently crimes are committed by those who lack education and how long this phenomenon has been taking place; and developing goals for addressing the crime problem by reducing the educational gap. Analysis would include: understanding how the educational gap affects the crime rate; present relevant data to educational leaders the correlation between under education and the crime rate; and develop a working hypothesis as to how a partnership between law enforcement and the educational system may effectively reduce the crime rate. The response would include: brainstorming how to address the crime rate through education; state objectives and identify interventions; and initiate the interventions. This will be a long term process. It is not as simple as identifying an abandoned building as a crack house and tearing down the building. This type of response to addressing the crime problem will have generational implications. Police, educational administrators, and local school boards can help bridge the gap between traditional educational opportunities that drop outs perceive as inconsequential to their economic security and quality educational opportunities that a potential dropout may view as value-added. Several states have Post-Secondary Education Opportunities (PSEO). PSEO programs are designed for college eligible high school students that allow these targeted high school students to attend and obtain credit for college courses. This gives the student a jump on his/her college education. Police administrators should work with school administrators, local school boards and state education associations to develop programs for at-risk students. Urban areas have variety of career college educational opportunities for high school graduates and GED recipients. Career college curriculums are traditionally two years and include HVAC, plumbing, construction management, diesel mechanics, autoCAD drafting, electrical, and a variety of opportunities in the health related fields. Lockard and Wolf (2012), in their projection of the 30 fastest-growing jobs by 2020, identified 14 (46.6%) technical-type jobs in this projection. The job identified range from personal care aides with a 70.5% projected employment increase of to pile-driver operators with a 42.2%

10 Problem Oriented Policing: Is it Time to Expand the Scope?

projected employment increase. These careers do not require a college education but require training and education above a high school diploma. The salaries for the jobs in this projection range from $19,640 for personal care aides to $45,720 for brick and block masons. Police administrators should help broker a partnership between the local school systems and career colleges to bring these vocational-type programs to the high schools. A student could obtain a high school diploma and a certification in one of these areas and have employment opportunities upon graduation. Police administrators should work closely with city officials to identify vacant buildings that are subject to a nuisance abatement law. This law allows a municipality to go to court to obtain an order of possession. Once the court has issued an order of possession, the municipality has full control over the building. The city then could use the vocational-type programs through the schools to rehabilitate these properties and put them back into productive use. The intended consequences of this type of program may be an increase in city revenue either through selling the property or renting the property and an increase in property value which will increase the assessed value which would then increase property tax for the city. The blighted landscape of some urban areas would improve with this program. Problem-oriented policing is an approach that redefines the relationships between the police and the community and formalizes a unified approach to addressing community crime problems. Police are continually trying to find new methods, techniques, and approaches to better address the crime problems within their community. Law enforcement routinely forges partnerships with other police agencies, community service agencies, and emergency management agencies, all in an effort to better serve their communities. Police administrators should become actively involved in the educational process. They should forge relationships with local school boards and state and national education associations. They should sit on advisory committees so they could offer insight into curriculum development through the lens of crime prevention. Bringing legitimate educational opportunities to high schools that offer realistic employment opportunities for students will reduce the occurrence of criminal activity.

ReferencesAmerican Psychological Association (2012). Facing the school dropout dilemma. Retrieved from http://apa.org/pi/families/school-dropout-prevention.org.Bailey, V. Personal Communication. 11 March 2016.Coff R. 1999. When competitive advantage doesn’t lead to performance: the resource- based view and stake- holder bargaining power. Organization Science 10(2): 119 – 133.Clower, R. & Ohlin, L (1960). Delinquency and Opportunity, New York: Free Press.Cohen, A. (1955). Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang. New York: The Free Press.Herman G. (1990), Problem-Oriented Policing. New York: McGraw-Hill.Ikerd, T. (2010). Putting POP to the pavement: Captains in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences. Police Practice and Research. 11(6) 491-504. Lockard, C. & Wolf, M. (2012). Top 30 fastest-growing jobs by 2020. Monthly Labor


Review (01/2012). Retrieved from: https://www.bumc.bu.edu/gms/ files/2012/02/Top-30-fastest.pdf. Mathews, C. (2012). Diplomas Count 2012: Trailing behind, moving forward: Latino students in U.S. schools Washington, D.C.: Education Week. Retrieved 02/21/2015 http://edweek.org/ew/toc/2012/06/07/.Mazwrolle, L., Darroch, S., & White, G. (2013), Leadership in problem-oriented policing. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 36(3) 543-560.Merton, R. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure, Glencoe, IL: The Free Press. Rumberger, R. (2011). Dropping out: Why students drop out of high school and what can be done about it. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. US Department of Education (2013). The US. Illiteracy rate hasn’t changed in 10 years. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/ illiteracy-rate n 3880355.html.

12 Hate Speech as a Catalyst to Violence

History has consistently exposed the vehement essence of hate speech and how this form of verbal expression has mobilized vulnerable societies into accepting and tolerating violence towards specific groups of people (History.com, 2009; MOT, 2016a, 2016b; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b, 2016c). The inherent danger in a society that tolerates offensive speech is that hate grows and can generate a subculture of hostility, which breeds disdain within a group of likeminded people (MOT, 2016a, 2016b; Parekh, 2006; USHMM, 2016a). Further, the culture of hate utilizes manipulation and power to spread its malevolent propaganda (MOT, 2016b; O’Shaughnessy, 2009; USHMM, 2016b). Many groups of individuals have been and continue to be victimized and dehumanized to the extent of lethal consequences (History.com, 2009; MOT, 2016a; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b, 2016c). To understand the dynamic nature of hate speech, it is essential to discuss the platforms by which this form of hostile communication can be expressed. Biased philosophies are commonly transmitted through advertising (Fleming, 1995). Propaganda is misinformation that is disseminated among society to publicize a viewpoint or political cause (MOT, 2016a; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b; Welch, 2004). Propaganda shapes the public’s perspectives regarding issues using manipulation and persuasion, and thus, is essential to the diffusion of prejudiced opinions (Fleming, 1995; MOT, 2016a, 2016b; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b; Welch, 2004). The media (i.e., television and radio) is the main mechanism through which this form of biased communication is publicized today. However, the Internet, newspapers, books, movies, magazines, and posters also serve as stages to spread messages (MOT, 2016a, 2016b; O’Shaughnessy, 2009; USHMM, 2016a; Welch, 2004). Frequent exposure to prejudiced propaganda can transform negative discriminatory views and stereotypes into socially accepted norms. Thus, hostility directed towards certain groups of individuals in the name of race, religion, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, and politics develops into an accepted and encouraged practice (MOT, 2016a, 2016b; O’Shaughnessy, 2009; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b; Welch, 2004). Another method used in the development and perpetuation of prejudiced ideologies is verbal communication (Josey, 2010; Parekh, 2006). Verbal interaction

Hate Speech as a Catalyst to ViolenceBy: Amy Cozad, Huntington Beach Police Department

Amy Cozad works for the Huntington Beach Police Department and is an undergraduate student at California State University, Long Beach (CSULB) majoring in Criminal Justice and Criminology and minoring in Psychology. She is also a prospective member of Alpha Phi Sigma, the National Criminal Justice Honor Society. This report was originally written for a CSULB Criminal Justice Ethics course and portrays a significant issue that is facing the United States at this time.


utilizes language and speech to convey messages and emotions (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association [ASHA], n.d.). Language is learned through repetitive exposure whereby individuals learn to acquire, comprehend, and produce words to communicate with other individuals (ASHA, n.d.). Additionally, communication can be positive or negative, depending on the context of the dialogue and involves actively speaking and actively listening (ASHA, n.d.; Kader, 2015; Parekh, 2006). Thus, philosophies are developed through verbal interaction whereby controversial opinions are learned and absorbed, and become entrenched in an individual’s sense of self (Bandura, 1977). Verbal interaction has the power to articulate hateful thought into speech and provides a channel to influence, manipulate, inspire, and encourage opinions through a public forum (ASHA, n.d.; MOT, 2016a, 2016b; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b). An extensive and dominant method utilized in the dissemination of intolerable attitudes is the use of speech, which is a form of verbal and non-verbal communication protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution (ASHA, n.d.; Bleich, 2014; Kader, 2015). Free speech is fundamental to a democratic society when autonomy and liberty are the overriding goals. Certain types of speech are not protected, and the restrictions on speech vary depending on the country (Bleich, 2014; Kader, 2015). Accordingly, speech regulations are a necessary element to democratic civilizations when the rights of free speech must be balanced with the governmental need to protect society (Parekh, 2006). This idea is validated through historical events that demonstrated the function of hate speech as a catalyst to inflammatory prejudiced discords where groups of people have been oppressed, dehumanized, and massacred (History.com, 2009; MOT, 2016a, 2016b; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b). Consequently, many tragedies have occurred due to the hate and lethal maltreatment that dissident speech incites (MOT, 2016a, 2016b; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b, 2016c). Hate speech is a controversial form of expression that provokes hostility and resentment against a group of people due to their association with an ethnic or social group (Parekh, 2006). This form of communication is characterized as being biased dialogue utilized for the sole purpose of demeaning and oppressing a group of individuals. Further, hate speech attaches a label to the target group that claims the group embodies undesirable qualities that set them apart from the rest of society. Discriminatory ideologies are developed through repeated exposure to biased dialogue. Offensive speech leads to aggression, violence, and genocide against the targeted groups (MOT, 2016a, 2016b; Parekh, 2006; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b, 2016c). The examples illustrate the various mechanisms by which hate speech and offensive ideologies are transmitted (Bandura, 1996, 1999, 2002; History.com, 2009; Josey, 2010; MOT, 2016a, 2016b; O’Shaughnessy, 2009; Parekh, 2006; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b). Additionally, socially entrenched biased ideals foster a prejudiced atmosphere rife with hate in which discriminatory moral identities are composed. As intolerance towards the targeted group escalates, hate speech is more likely to occur resulting in the stigmatization and dehumanization of the targeted group. Consequently, violent outcomes intensify whereby inclinations


toward the application of genocide are highly probable (MOT, 2016a; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b; Bandura, 1996, 1999, 2002). To substantiate the claim that hate speech has the power to incite violence to the point of genocide, this paper will illuminate the dynamic nature of hate speech and how this form of expression has the power of mobilizing societies into accepting the application of violence. Moreover, this paper will demonstrate the dangerous process through which hate speech inculcates discriminatory sentiments, resulting in a biased ideology that becomes engrained in a social system. Through this process of biased assimilation, society is more likely to allow “collective violence” to occur in which inclinations towards the act of genocide become more pervasive (Zvagulis, 2010, p. 9).

Discrimination: Transforming into a Socially Accepted Norm Research studies have revealed how biased ideologies have the power to evolve into socially accepted norms. Leets and Giles (1997) studied how university students of Asian American/Pacific Islander descent rated the degree of harm incurred through a direct confrontation of discrimination. The authors measured the respondent’s perceptions of a scenario in which prejudiced speech was applied. The situation analyzed the speakers’ motives in utilizing discriminatory discourse, as well as the degree of cruelty of the verbal assault. Respondents rated psychological distress as more damaging than physical harm. Additionally, respondents revealed that when one’s ethnic identity is attacked, the degree of harm is more intense than when one’s individuality is criticized. Strikingly, the study exposed that respondents were more likely to tolerate the occurrence of hate speech than oppose this form of hostile interaction (Leets & Giles, 1997). Individual perceptions of discriminatory comments and the motivation to confront or not confront the perpetrator are prominent issues facing researchers today. A study conducted by Dickter and Newton (2013) investigated the reactions of students in response to hearing racist jokes and comments. The study was conducted among 68 female and 29 male college students. Most participants were Caucasian (68.4%), and also included participants who identified themselves as Asian (14.0%), African American (7%), Latino (5.3%), and other (5.3%). The research revealed that most participants were not willing to confront the perpetrator. Additionally, the sample that intervened responded to the perpetrator with supplementary discriminatory remarks. The study found no significant differences between intervention strategies of males and females, but did assert that males were less likely to confront the perpetrator due to a fear of retaliation. Women were more likely to confront the perpetrator if they felt directly threatened by the statement. A robust number of participants reported that they would not confront the offender because they did not feel that their verbal opposition would make a difference (Dickter & Newton, 2013). This study revealed how fear and feelings of passivity are prominent facilitators of the dissemination of discrimination. To examine the effects racist humor has on individual behavior, Hudson, Rush, and MacInnis (2010) examined how students from a Canadian university perceived the discriminatory nature of anti-Mexican jokes. The respondents,


composed of Caucasian and Canadian students, were exposed to derogatory jokes targeted at Mexicans, Americans, and Canadians. The authors found that students’ underlying prejudicial attitudes towards Mexicans contributed to their partiality of anti-Mexican jokes. Additionally, the study revealed how favoritism towards anti-Mexican jokes predicated intolerant attitudes towards Mexicans. The authors asserted that students who rationalized their perceptions of anti-Mexican jokes as being inoffensive fostered discriminatory attitudes towards the target group (Hudson, Rush, & MacInnis, 2010). This study exposed how the use of levity provides a public forum for dominant prejudicial biases to be transmitted among society.

The Dynamic Nature of Hate Speech Proponents of free speech argue that offensive speech is purely dialogue (Parekh, 2006). Further, these individuals rationalize their viewpoint by claiming that hate speech solely utilizes words and symbols, thus the adverse effects are minimal and insignificant. Conversely, proponents of regulation on hate speech assert that words alone are not the only element to consider when analyzing the harmful effects of hate speech (Parekh, 2006; USHMM, 2016a). Speech can take on various meanings depending on the speaker and the audience. Certain factors affect the meaning individuals ascribe to the words they are hearing. First, the speaker and his objectives must be examined. Additionally, the audience to whom the speaker is relaying the message to should be considered. For hate speech to incite violence, the listener must be open to new ideas and susceptible to the message (Benesch, 2004). The USHMM (2016a) emphasizes that hate speech has the potential to encourage violence if the speaker and listener are motivated to mobilize the hatred into violent action. Parekh (2006) asserts that hate speech fosters animosity, stigmatizes the out-group by associating it with unfavorable qualities, and demonizes the targeted group to the point of marginalization. Additionally, Boeckmann and Turpin-Petrosino (2002) affirm that hate speech demands supremacy over a class of people who are controlled by the fear hate speech generates. Kader (2015) emphasizes that hate speech evokes violent outcomes by arousing the speaker, and affecting bystanders. Repeated exposure to offensive speech leads to bigoted ideologies engrained in the subculture that, eventually, endorse violent acts. The USHMM (2016a) contends that societal and governmental factors can increase the likelihood of hate speech leading to violence. These factors include “history of violence, the marginalization of certain groups, and prejudice” (USHMM, 2016a, p. 9). Violence is more likely in societies that have “a stratified hierarchy, tenuous rule of law, state-sponsored violence, impunity, or widespread corruption” (USHMM, 2016a, p. 9). The media is a pervasive contributor to the spread of hateful communication that manipulates society, thereby making violence more probable (MOT, 2016a, 2016b; O’Shaughnessy, 2009; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b). Per the USHMM (2016a).


The Process of Genocide Research has been conducted to elucidate the dynamics associated with the materialization of societal genocidal inclinations (Bandura, 1996, 1999, 2002; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b; Zvagulis, 2010). Per Zvagulis (2010), extreme violent acts such as genocide are not impulsive occurrences. Hate speech provides an opportunity to spread discriminatory messages with the goal of provoking, manipulating, indoctrinating, and assimilating civilizations into accepting the application of genocide. The author acknowledges how this marketing utilizes extreme methods of “persuasion and coercion” that escalate discriminatory ideological sentiments, which work to break down the social order (Zvagulis, 2010, p.9). As a result, society allows “collective violence” to occur in which inclinations towards the act of genocide become more pervasive (Zvagulis, 2010, p. 9). Many dynamics affect the manifestation of genocide, one of which includes the barbarity of dehumanization. Savage (2013) explored the elements of dehumanization that facilitate genocidal tendencies in societies. Savage (2013) notes that motivation is key to inciting genocide and while dehumanization occurs at a prominent rate in societies, motivation to commit acts of genocide is not as pervasive. Therefore, some societies are more disposed to collective genocidal provocation, while other societies impede the violent inclinations. While individuals primarily oppose the inhumane practice of genocide, justification serves as the catalyst to accept this form of violence (Savage, 2013). Genocidal tendencies form over a period in which societies with biased ideologies are more likely to be susceptible to the wide-reaching tentacles of genocide (USHMM, 2016a). Additionally, the perpetrators of genocide utilize various approaches in spreading their harmful propaganda. Thus, the dominant group professes to be the true victim wherein their acts of violence are theorized as ethical endeavors (Bandura, 1996, 1999, 2002; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b). Consequently, this process provides an environment that encourages genocidal propensities to develop, and leads to the destruction of the targeted group.

Policy Implications The proposed policy implications focus on education, awareness, and prevention of hate speech and the ensuing violence. Offensive speech awareness tactics must tackle the causes of discriminatory dialogue. Preventative measures need to be employed in the U.S., and it is essential that the government does not restrict the constitutional right of free speech (UHSMM, 2016a).

Education Education is crucial to the effectiveness of the proposed policy. Extant research exposed the pervasiveness of biased ideologies and how discriminatory indoctrination transformed the minds of children during the Holocaust (Voigtlander & Voth, 2015). This research also revealed the susceptibility of school-aged children to discrimination. The authors contend that indoctrination of prejudiced philosophies are more likely to influence young children when discriminatory


beliefs are already strong. Therefore, mandatory educational programs must be implemented at the grade-school level and must continue throughout the duration of educational instruction. These programs need to teach students about the inappropriateness of stereotyping, how us-vs-them behavior intensifies biased beliefs, the harmful effects of hate speech, and how to effectively respond to discriminatory dialogue (Voigtlander & Voth, 2015).

Awareness Awareness efforts should educate individuals about the harmful effects of offensive speech. The public needs to be educated about techniques that aid in identifying hate speech so they will be better equipped to counter this form of manipulative expression. Fortifying the public with knowledge about hate speech and the violence it incites will aid in the resistance to this form of expression (USHMM, 2016a).

Prevention Discrimination thrives in social systems receptive to hateful and biased ideologies (USHMM, 2016a). Propaganda provided the main channels through which the anti-Semitic ideology was disseminated through society during the Holocaust (Fleming, 1995; MOT, 2016a; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b; Welch, 2004). The media is the most powerful facilitator of mass communication, and the method of mass communication has improved with the advent of the Internet. Therefore, a preventative policy that monitors and targets the circulation of discriminatory ideologies in all forms of mass communication is imperative (USHMM, 2016a).Additionally, leaders need to develop a unified framework that discourages the use of hate speech. These representatives must understand their vital role in the diffusion of discriminatory ideologies and how their conduct affects public opinion. If a government official condones the use of hate speech, the public is more likely to engage, which may lead to violence. Furthermore, political leaders need to be discouraged from using hate speech in their political platforms. The USHMM (2016a) asserts, “silence in the face of hate speech can indicate that it – and any violence it promotes – is acceptable” (p. 12). Therefore, it is essential for governmental, community, religious, and cultural leaders to actively and publicly participate in the prevention of hate speech and the violence it incites (USHMM, 2016a).

Conclusion In conclusion, hate speech is a form of discriminatory expression that incites hostility and violence against a specific group of people (Parekh, 2006). Hate speech provides a channel through which intolerant attitudes are learned, developed, accepted, trusted, and become engrained within a social environment (Bandura, 1996, 1999, 2002; History.com, 2009; Josey, 2010; MOT, 2016a, 2016b; O’Shaughnessy, 2009; Parekh, 2006; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b). As intolerance escalates, hate speech is more likely to occur resulting in the demonization and


dehumanization of the targeted group. Consequently, genocidal tendencies become exceedingly probable (MOT, 2016a; USHMM, 2016a, 2016b; Bandura, 1996, 1999, 2002). Several policies were proposed to aid in the awareness and prevention of hate speech, subsequent violence, and ensuing genocide. The proposed policies will provide a safeguard against the flow and dissemination of discriminatory sentiments that have the power of transforming into strong societal norms in which hate speech becomes an acceptable form of expression and violence becomes more probable. Education that encourages government participation must be the primary hate speech prevention tool to ensure that this form of discriminatory dialogue, which incites violence to the point of genocide, does not become a societal norm and never again has the opportunity of occurring in the U.S. (USHMM, 2016a). ReferencesAmerican Speech-Language-Hearing Association (n.d.). What is language? What is speech? In Advanced Search. WASHINGTON, DC: American Speech- Language-Hearing Association. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/ public/speech/development/language_speech/Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallBandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G.V., and Pastroelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364-374.Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193-209.Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education, 31(2), 101-119. doi:10.1080/0305724022014322Benesch, S. (2016). Inciting Genocide, pleading free speech. World Policy Journal, 21(2), 62-69. Bleich, E. (2014). Freedom of expression versus racist hate speech: Explaining differences between high court regulations in the USA and Europe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(2), 283-300. doi:10.1080/13 69183X.2013.851476Boeckmann, R.J., & Turpin-Petrosino, C. (2002). Understanding the harm of hate crime. Journal of Social Issues, 58(2), 207-225. Dickter, C.L., & Newton, V.A. (2013). To confront or not to confront: Non-targets’ evaluations of and responses to racist comments. Journal of Applied Social psychology, 43, E262-E275. doi:10.1111/jasp.12022Fleming, C.A. (1995). Understanding propaganda from a general semantics perspective. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 52(1), 3-12. History.com (2009). The holocaust. In Topics. New York, NY: A+E Networks. Retrieved from http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/the- holocaustHudson, G., Rush, J., & MacInnis, C.C. (2010). A joke is just a joke (except when it


isn’t): Cavalier humor beliefs facilitate the expression of group dominance motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(4), 660-682. doi:10.1037/a0019627Josey, C.S. (2010). Hate speech and identity: An analysis of neo racism and the indexing of identity. Discourse and Society, 21(1), 27-39. doi:10.1177/0957926509345071Kader, D. (2015). Sticks and stones: The role of law in the dynamics of hate. Cross Currents, 65(3), 297-301. doi:10.1111/cros.12139Leets, L., & Giles, H. (1997). Words as weapons – When do they wound? Investigations of harmful speech. Human Communication Research, 24(2), 260-303. O’Shaughnessy, N. (2009). Selling Hitler: Propaganda and the nazi brand. Journal of Public Affairs, 9, 55-76. doi:10.1002/pa.312.Parekh, B. (2006). Hate speech: Is there a case for banning? Public Policy Research, 12(4), 213-223. doi:10.1111/j.1070-3535-2005.00405.xSavage, R. (2013). Modern genocide dehumanization: A new model. Patterns of Prejudice, 47(2), 139-161. doi:10.1080/0031322x.2012.754575Museum of Tolerance (2016a). The Holocaust Exhibit. Los Angeles, CA: Museum of Tolerance. Museum of Tolerance (2016b). Tolerancenter. Los Angeles, CA: Museum of Tolerance.United Nations General Assembly (1951). Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 9 December 1948, United Nations, Treaty Series 1021, vol. 78, p. 277. Retrieved from https://treaties.un.org/ doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume 78/v78.pdfUnited States Holocaust Memorial Museum (2016a). Hate speech and group- targeted violence: The role of speech in violent conflicts. In Speech, Power, Violence. Washington, DC: United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Retrieved from https://www.ushmm.org/m/pdfs/20100504-hate-speach- violence.pdfUnited States Holocaust Memorial Museum (2016b). Introduction to the holocaust. In Holocaust Encyclopedia. Washington, DC: United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Retrieved from https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/ article.php?ModuleId=10005141United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (2016c). Nazi medical experiments. In Holocaust Encyclopedia. Washington, DC: United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Retrieved from https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/ article.php?ModuleId=10005250Voigtlander, N., & Voth, H. (2015). Nazi indoctrination and anti-Semitic beliefs in Germany. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(26), 7931-7936. doi:10.1073/ pnas.1414822112Welch, D. (2004). Nazi propaganda and the volksgemeinschaft: Constructing a people’s community. Journal of Contemporary History, 39(2), 213- 238. doi:10.1177/0022009404042129


Zvagulis, P. (2010). Blaming the scapegoat. New Presence: The Prague Journal of Central European Affairs, 12(3), 7-15.


Implicit Bias and the PoliceBy: Commander Bill Whalen, Irvine Police Department

Bill Whalen works for the Irvine Police Department and is a Commander overseeing the Patrol Operations Division. Prior to promoting to Commander, Bill managed the Office of Emergency Management and worked in Special Projects. He was also the SWAT Team Commander. Bill has worked several other assignments throughout the Department including the Office of Professional Standards, Detective Bureau, and FTO. Bill has a Master’s of Science Degree in Emergency Services Administration from Cal State Long Beach and is a graduate of the Sherman Block Supervisory Leadership Institute, PERF’s Senior Management Institute for Police, and POST Command College

Sir Robert Peel, considered by many to be the father of modern day law enforcement and a visionary in police – community relations had several principles attributed to him. Peel’s 7th Principle stated in part “…the police are the public and the public are the police…” (Nagel, 2014). Unfortunately, in this country there exists a disconnect between the police and many segments of the African-American communities they serve. A 2015 Gallup poll showed only 30% of African-Americans had confidence in the police (Jones, 2017). This distrust has manifested throughout the country in the form of civil unrest, further damaging these fragile relationships. This atmosphere of distrust must be remedied. It is up to the police to understand the fundamental causes of mistrust and actively pursue ways to improve. Bias exists in policing, and has since the beginning of the profession. If the community does not believe the police are treating them impartially and free from bias, then trust in the police will not be attained. While explicit bias and racism have significantly declined, implicit bias is still present and a detriment. This article will discuss the significance of the oft misunderstood term, implicit bias and discuss how this can be rendered inconsequential in the future.Understanding the history of bias in policing There are several types of bias that exist. Two significant types for law enforcement are explicit and implicit bias. Explicit bias defines attitudes and beliefs that are known to an individual, and which most people would recognize as racism. Someone who harbors explicit bias feelings or beliefs may treat another person different based on their identification with a broad category, such as race (“Perception Institute”, 2016). Unfortunately, modern law enforcement can trace its roots to a time when our society was openly racist and prejudicial toward African-Americans. In the early to mid 19th century, slave patrols were an early form of policing in the southern United States (Dempsey, 2010). Racist and biased behavior continued in this country, and the police found themselves at the epicenter of the civil rights

22 Implicit Bias and the Police

movement in the 1960’s. As one example, in 1963 in Birmingham, Alabama, police used high pressure fire hoses and police K-9’s against peaceful African-American demonstrators (Siemaszko, 2012). 1965 saw one of the worst riots in American history as African-American’s in the Watt’s neighborhood of Los Angeles rioted following the arrest of a motorist for drunk driving. The rioting was fueled by perceived racial injustices at the hands of the police. According to Time Magazine, Los Angeles Police Chief William Parker referred to the rioters as “monkeys in a zoo” (Rothman, 2017). These police officers may or may not have held their own biased beliefs; however, as the enforcement arm of the government they were expected to uphold racist laws prevalent in our country during that era. Understanding the past, but not being mired in it, is crucial to moving forward. Much has been done to heal these wounds. Discrimination in all aspects of society is illegal. Courses in racial profiling and procedural justice are required before an officer hits the streets. In general, attitudes and beliefs in this country have improved over the last 50 years. In 1995, Brown wrote that stereotypes have declined significantly in America, writing that “In 1933, 75% of whites openly described Black people as lazy but fewer than 5% did so in the beginning of the 1990’s” (Brown, 1995). Brown correlated this improvement of expressed stereotypes to lower explicit racist beliefs. He also believed it is reasonable to infer police officers, who come from the public, would show similar reductions. Despite vast improvement in minimizing explicitly biased behavior in this country, an emerging body of research suggests African-Americans are still treated disparately. The term used to describe this behavior is implicit bias. According the Stanford Encyclopedia of Psychology, implicit bias “is a term of art referring to relatively unconscious and relatively automatic features of prejudiced judgment and social behavior” (Brownstein, 2016). In the book Blindspot: Hidden Biases of Good People, the authors reviewed several unobtrusive studies on racism and concluded that, while outwardly there was a decline in racist behavior, unconsciously this behavior persisted (Banaji, 2013). The persistence of this behavior unknowingly and unwittingly continues to influence police actions towards African-Americans.

The Impact of Implicit Bias on Modern Day Policing The study of implicit bias is important because the bias we hold can potentially influence our actions without our conscious understanding. The introduction of the Implicit Association Test by researchers Anthony Greenwald, Mahzarin Banaji, and Brian Nosek was groundbreaking in the study of implicit bias. The test measures the relative strength of associations between pairs of concepts. The underlying premise is when the person taking the test highly associates two concepts (e.g. picture of an African-American and a gun) the sorting task will be easier and require less time to complete (Understanding Prejudice, 2017). Greenwald and Banaji found that over 75% of those who took the race IAT indicated a preference for Whites. Other researchers have used different associative studies to evaluate perceptions about African-Americans. A 2007 study involved the use of video games to expose participants to shoot/no shoot scenarios. The results of


this study suggested that race plays a factor in a persons’ perception of African-Americans as dangerous (Correll, Park, Judd, & Wittenbrink, 2007). How does the presence of this type of implicit bias in a police officer influence their actions in a use of force scenario? Researchers Lois James, Lorie Fridell, and Frank Straub studied how an officers’ implicit bias can influence their actions. According to their research, the manifestations of implicit bias can run the gamut from initiating a contact with someone based upon their race to deploying deadly force based upon a perceived threat (James, Fridell, & Straub, 2016). The use of deadly force is the ultimate deprivation of civil liberties legally entrusted to the police. It is to be used only in the direst of circumstances when the threat of great bodily injury or death to an innocent person is imminent and the use of deadly force is the only reasonable means to stop this threat (“Graham v. Connor”, 1989). The populace being policed must trust their police to wield this extraordinary power judiciously and appropriately. The study of bias and deadly force becomes important when police officers are making decisions based on a perception of danger. This can occur when a suspect, although not possessing a deadly weapon (or not having yet displayed the deadly weapon) acts in a manner which an officer interprets as threatening. During such an incident, an officer must rapidly evaluate their environment as well as the suspect’s actions and arrive at a decision. Is it possible unconscious beliefs can influence this decision? In 2016, The Washington Post began to look in earnest at police officer involved shootings. Their first in depth reporting was for data obtained for the calendar year 2015, in which they reported there were 990 fatal shootings involving the police (Kindy, Fisher, Tate, & Jenkins, 2015). Researchers and Criminal Justice Professors Justin Nix, Bradley Campbell, and Geoffrey Alpert studied the data uncovered by the Washington Post and reported that in most of these situations where a suspect was fatally shot by the police, the suspect was armed with a deadly weapon. Less than 10 % of fatal shootings involved “unarmed” civilians. A more detailed analysis of these shootings revealed 15% of African-Americans shot by the police were unarmed compared with 6% of Caucasian individuals. These researchers also looked specifically at those suspects actively engaged in “firing a gun at police, attacking police with something other than a gun, or pointing/brandishing a gun at police”. They found that 71% of African-American’s shot by police fell into this category as compared to 80% of Caucasian citizens (Nix, Campbell, & Alpert). The researchers admit that further analysis is required before conclusions can be drawn. However, there is some suggestion of the presence of bias in these situations. Others draw from similar data to reach similar conclusions.In their book In Context: Understanding Police Killings of Unarmed Civilians, police use of force experts Nick Selby, Ben Singleton, and Ed Flosi reviewed 153 deaths during 2015, in which an unarmed person was killed by a police officer in the performance of their official duties. Their belief is a bias towards race would manifest more in the killings of unarmed individuals as compared to those who were armed. In their research, the authors could not determine if race was a factor in whether an unarmed individual was shot. They acknowledged this question “must be answered using a much wider array of contextual data” (2016).


Harvard economist, Ronald Fryer, looked extensively at police use of force incidents. This included data from the New York Police Department’s stop, question, and frisk policies, the Police-Public Contact Survey, and from several large metropolitan police departments throughout the United States. Fryer’s analysis concluded African-Americans were no more likely to be shot by police then Caucasian citizens were. His studies did show, however, that African-Americans were more likely than Caucasians to have lower levels of force used against them (2016). In a study published in the September 2014 Journal of Experimental Criminology, researchers from Washington State University conducted an analysis of how a suspect’s race and ethnicity influenced both the subconscious threat responses and decisions to shoot. What made this research unique is in addition to measuring the time it took to recognize the threat posed by armed African-Americans versus Caucasians, the researchers monitored the alpha brain waves of the participants. In doing so, they could determine if the participants exhibited brain arousal associated with a threat response when faced with their individual scenarios. The results of the research indicated in both shoot and no shoot scenarios, participants exhibited a higher sub conscious threat level when faced with African-Americans as compared to Caucasians. The research also showed the participants took significantly longer to shoot an armed African-American as compared to a Caucasian, despite the higher subconscious threat level (Lois, Klinger & Vila, 2014).

Moving Forward Thanks to groundbreaking work by Dr. Lorie Fridell and others, law enforcement is increasing awareness on the issue of implicit bias and its impact on the community (2015). Dr. Fridell developed the Fair and Impartial Policing course that is having a nationwide impact; the COPS office investing over one million dollars in delivering Fair and Impartial Policing courses across the country. Dr. Fridell’s courses focus on the science of bias; how individuals in any profession can reduce and manage their biases; how impartial policing is linked to the concepts of procedural justice and legitimacy; and, what police professionals need to do to ensure bias-free policing. The challenge moving to the future is taking Dr. Fridell’s work, combining it with emerging research and applying it to the police officer of the future so that implicit bias can be lowered to the point where it no longer has relevance. In further studies on implicit bias, researchers E. Ashby Plant and B. Michelle Peruche found that after initially showing an unconscious bias towards shooting unarmed African-Americans in computer simulations, the unconscious bias in police participants was nonexistent after repeated exposure to the computer simulation exercise (2016). A 2013 de-biasing study found self-linking and positive associations with the outlying group lowered implicit bias. They further found these techniques were more effective than older, more established techniques of counter stereotyping (Woodcock and Monteith, 2012). Moving beyond simple awareness of the issue, understanding how to lower implicit bias is a critical step in rendering this bias inconsequential in the police officer of the future.


The Future The difficult part of the conversation is that it resides at the subconscious level. Therefore, those with the bias in most cases are not aware of it. Thorough evaluation of results from the Implicit Association Test show a preference towards Caucasians even with those who espouse egalitarian beliefs. In the Kirwanian Institutes report on implicit bias, they write “The implicit associations we hold do not necessarily align with our declared beliefs or even reflect stances we would explicitly endorse” (“Understanding Implicit Bias”, 2017). Unfortunately, the term implicit bias is being used interchangeably with racism and explicit bias when the reality is they are not synonymous. Because those who hold the bias do not believe they are biased, comparing implicit bias to racism serves to create roadblocks to acknowledgement and understanding. Interchanging implicit and explicit bias creates a negative perception of the person with the bias. This negativity impedes progress and serves as an obstacle to resolving this crisis. Even those that wish to defend law enforcement incorrectly use the term. During the 2016 Vice Presidential debate, Governor Mike Pence in an effort to defend law enforcement stated “…they also hear the bad mouthing, the bad mouthing that comes from people that seize upon tragedy in the way of police action shootings as -- as a reason to -- to use a broad brush to accuse law enforcement of -- of implicit bias or institutional racism. [Italics added] And that really has got to stop.” (Blake, 2016). Implicit bias needs to be detected and acknowledged in a guilt free environment. Everyone holds biases to some degree. The research has shown many people will hold an unconscious bias towards African-Americans, and because of their biases will view African-Americans as more dangerous than Caucasians. Police officers are recruited from society and will therefore hold biases reflective of society. New recruits should have the opportunity to explore their biases without fear of being accused of being racist. Acknowledging the existence of a bias will minimize its impact. The Implicit Association Test has been an important tool in understanding the presence of bias. While effective, it has limitations. It only measures the presence of bias, but does not quantify the level of bias. Additional research is needed on how much bias must be present to influence a person’s conduct. Everyone holds biases to a certain degree so it is unrealistic to expect all biases will be eliminated completely. A more realistic goal would be to reduce biases to a level where they no longer impact actions. Once the level of bias can be identified, the police recruit of the future will receive enhanced bias training to lower their levels of implicit bias to appropriate levels prior to their graduation and commencing field work. There have been early successes in lowering bias. However, more work is needed. Fields such as virtual reality show promise in immersing individuals in an environment conducive to lowering bias. The police officer of the future must undergo recurrent testing and training to ensure their implicit biases remain at acceptable levels. The delivery of police training in the academy should be evaluated. Currently in California, a standardized form of instruction in the form of “Learning


Domains” exists in each of the academies sanctioned by the California Peace Officer Standards and Training. Learning Domain #42, “Cultural Diversity/Discrimination” provides overarching awareness of racial profiling and discrimination, but does not delve into the unconscious world of implicit bias. Additionally, in academies the current training modality on this topic is lecture in a group setting. While this can certainly provide awareness, the research suggests bias lowering techniques should be tailored to the individual. Police recruits should identify and explore their biases in an individualized and guilt free setting. If future research shows the time necessary for individualized instruction is too onerous, consideration can be given to providing this instruction prior to beginning the police academy coursework.

Conclusion As Sir Robert Peel understood nearly 200 years ago, the police and community are intertwined. Each are expressly reliant on the other. We live in a time when there are trust problems between law enforcement and the African-American community that negatively impact the ability to effectively police these communities. A study of history suggests we have done little to address the underlying issues of this mistrust and while the modern police officer may not have committed the biased acts that to this day harbor ill will in a great many people, we bear the burden of trying to right the wrong. Our own implicit biases serve as an impediment. The community must know that implicit bias and explicit bias are not the same and that frequent accusations of racist behavior are not only false, but also highly detrimental to our collective goals. Understanding how different levels of bias influence actions, acknowledging biases in a guilt free environment, and actively reducing biases to the point of insignificance will serve as the building blocks for a new era of policing.

ReferencesAaron Blake. “The Mike Pence vs. Tim Kaine vice-presidential debate transcript, annotated.” The Washington Post, October 5, 2016. Accessed November 7, 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/04/ the-mike-pence-vs-tim-kaine-vice-presidential-debate-transcript- annotated/?utm_term=.be75f087c089.Anna Woodcock and Margo Monteith. “Forging links with the self to combat implicit bias.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 16 (2012): 445-461.Anthony Greenwald, Debbie McGhee, and Jordan Schwartz. “Measuring Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition: The Implicit Association Test.” The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74 (1998): 1464-1480.Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST). “Student Workbooks.” Accessed January 5, 2017. https://www.post.ca.gov/student-workbooks. aspx.Corky Siemaszko. “Birmingham erupted into chaos in 1963 as battle for civil rights exploded in South.” New York Daily News, May 3, 2012. http://www. nydailynews.com/news/national/birmingham-erupted-chaos-1963-


battle-civil-rights-exploded-south-article-1.1071793.E. Ashby Plant, B. Michelle Peruche. “The Consequences of Race for Police Officers’ Response to Criminal Suspects.” Psychological Science 16 (2016): 180-183. Fair and Impartial Policing, accessed January 5, 2017. www. fairandimpartialpolicing.com.Graham v. Connor (490 U.S. 386 (1989)).James, Lois, David Klinger, and Bryan Vila. “Racial and Ethnic Bias in Decisions to Shoot seen through a Stronger Lens: Experimental Results from High- Fidelity Laboratory Simulations.” Journal of Experimental Criminology 10, no. 3 (09, 2014): 323-340. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11292-014- 9204-9. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1558959142?account id=458.Jeffrey Jones. “In U.S., Confidence in Police Lowest in 22 Years.” Accessed January 17, 2017. http://www.gallup.com/poll/183704/confidence-police-lowest- years.aspx.John Dempsey and Linda Forst. An Introduction to Policing 5th Edition. Clifton Park: Delmar, 2010.Joshua Correll, Bernadette Park, Chalres Judd, and Bernd Wittenbrink. “The influence of stereotypes on decisions to shoot.” European Journal of Social Psychology 37 (2007): 1102-1117.Justin Nix, Bradley Campbell, and Geoffrey Alpert. “Fatal Shootings by U.S. Police Officers in 2015: A Bird’s Eye View.” The Police Chief 83 (August 2016): 48-52.Kimberly Kindy, Marc Fisher, Julia Tate, and Jennifer Jenkins. “A year of reckoning: Police fatally shoot nearly 1,000.” The Washington Post, December 26, 2015. Accessed November 5, 2016, http://www. washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/12/26/a-year-of-reckoning- police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/.Kirwan Institute for the study of Race and Ethnicity. “Understanding Implicit Bias.” Accessed January 17, 2017. http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/ research/understanding-implicit-bias/.Lily Rothman. “50 Years After Watts: the Causes of a Riot.” Time Magazine, August 11, 2015. Accessed January 19, 2017, http://time.com/3974595/watts- riot-1965-history/.Lois James, Lorie Fridell, and Frank Straub. “Implicit Bias versus the ‘Ferguson Effect’: Psychosocial Factors Impacting Officers’ Decisions to Use Deadly Force.” The Police Chief 83 (February 2016): 44-51. Lorie Fridell. (2016). Fair and Impartial Policing. Retrieved from https://static1. squarespace.com/static/54722818e4b0b3ef26cdc085/t/5623ec8ce4b0 099ac9caaada/1445194892676/Extended_About+FIP_2015.pdfMahzarin Banaji and Anthony Greenwald. Blindspot: Hidden Biases of Good People.” New York: Delacorte Press, 2013.Michael Brownstein. “Implicit Bias.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed December 30, 2016. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicit- bias/.

28

Michael Nagel. “Sir Robert Peel’s Nine Principles of Policing.” The New York Times, April 14, 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/nyregion/sir- robert-peels-nine-principles-of-policing.html?_r=1.Nick Selby, Ben Singleton, and Ed Flosi. “In Context: Understanding Police Killings of Unarmed Civilians.” St. Augustine: Contextual Press, 2016.Perception Institute. “Explicit Bias.” Accessed December 15, 2016. https:// perception.org/research/explicit-bias/.Ronald G. Fryer Jr. 2016. “An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force.” Working Paper 22399. National Bureau of Economic Research, July. http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdfRupert Brown. Prejudice: Its Social Psychology. Cornwall: Blackwell Publishing, 1995.Understanding Prejudice. “Frequently Asked Questions About the IAT.” Accessed January 5, 2017. http://www.understandingprejudice.org/iat/faq.htm.

Implicit Bias and the Police

YOUR SOURCE

YOUR VOICE

YOUR CHOICE

YOU ARE COMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE

for professional development and training

on issues impacting law enforcement

for connections that make a difference throughout your career

CPOA IS COMMITTED TO YOUThe California Peace Officers’ Association has developed progressive leadership in California law enforcement for nearly 100 years. CPOA’s membership program strives to develop your leadership skills through training, advocacy and networking. CPOA is...

START LEADING TODAY AT CPOA.ORG

Calif

orni

a Pe

ace

Offi

cers

’ Ass

ocia

tion

555

Capi

tol M

all,

Suite

149

5Sa

cram

ento

, CA

958

14

Documents

The Journal - CPOA€¦ · The Journal of California Law Enforcement welcomes articles relevant to the area of law enforcement from its readers. The following guidelines should be