Introduction
The increased deployment of advanced technology has significantly transformed the face of policing in the U.S. over the last decade. For instance, citywide video networks, in conjunction with healthcare facilities, businesses, and schools, have served as a model for public-private partnerships in the fight against crime. Other technologies, such as enhanced 911 systems, have improved proactive crime prevention by providing officers with sophisticated communications. Besides, local law enforcement agencies are gaining proficiency in combating crime and computer-based attacks using data analytics and artificial intelligence. Since their introduction, however, body-worn cameras (BWC) have received more scrutiny or attention than any other law enforcement technology. Nonetheless, body-worn cameras have the potential to radically improve police procedures, transparency, civility, corroboration of evidence, and resolution time.
The BWCs are being used by local and state law enforcement agencies in the United States to enforce openness and accountability in the police force. Numerous law enforcement departments in the United States now mandate police officers who have open and direct interaction with the public to wear body cameras (National Institute of Justice, 2022). Despite their extensive and expanding use, research on the efficacy of BWCs is mixed. According to the National Institute of Justice (2022), the contradictory feelings and study results about the benefits of BWCs strongly suggest that more research is needed. Randomized control trials could shed further light on the usefulness of these devices and the technology’s broad acceptance among the police force.
Reasons for Introduction of Body-Worn Cameras and Arising Issues
The BWCs were designed to improve officer safety and evidence quality, reduce civilian complaints, train officers, and limit agency responsibility. Police chiefs in departments that deploy BWCs claim that the technology has more advantages than disadvantages (Braga et al., 2017). They argue, for example, that these gadgets have raised the civility of police-citizen interactions and improved citizen perceptions of police legitimacy and transparency (Braga et al., 2017, p. 1). Furthermore, at an age when anyone with a cell phone camera may record video footage of police encounters, the technology can be used to back up the officer’s account of the occurrence. Following recent high-profile police deaths, public pressure to deploy the technology has increased. As a result, footage collected during civilian-police interactions provides greater documentation to confirm the nature of events and validate the officers’ and citizens’ testimony.
The most important functional uses of the technology are to improve police accountability and transparency, to document evidence, and to prevent and resolve complaints. By recording an accurate account of incidents, residents and officers are driven to act responsibly and transparently because the encounters are accessible to the public for scrutiny. According to research, community members and police officers may adjust their behavior if they are aware recording is underway, thereby enhancing legal and respectful policing practices and lowering false complaints (Braga et al., 2019). In addition, video recordings have provided significant evidence to substantiate the victims’ claims and the cops’ accounts. Therefore, incorporating BWCs into policing tactics is crucial to resolving the national need for enhanced police transparency and supervision.
Although the introduction of BWCs was a noble course toward enhancing accountability and transparency, its use has also raised important questions. For instance, questions have been raised about the privacy and trust issues associated with recording victims of crime. Whether police officers can maintain a positive community relationship if they are ordered to record almost everything has been questioned. Perhaps, community members would find it awkward to learn from an officer that they are being recorded even for casual conversations. Several groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, have requested a change to the BWC bill, arguing that mandating the cameras without further research is premature (American Civil Liberties Union, 2019). For instance, every record kept must be incident-specific, and while recordings must be uninterrupted, they must also be appropriate, necessary, and legitimate.
Body cameras are now necessary for police enforcement, but depending on how and when they are utilized, they may be beneficial or damaging. For instance, the American Civil Liberties Union (2019) claimed that using body cameras in a school setting would be inappropriate as law enforcement in schools does not necessarily need force. Besides, the success of the BWCs depends on several things, including when officers are compelled to switch them on if they are reviewed before filing a report, and whether the video should be made available to the general public for accountability. Other factors, like the price of body cameras, influence how and where they are used in many U.S. locations (Braga et al., 2019). The expense of the devices, continuous maintenance, and video storage or disposal has placed a significant financial burden on the agency, particularly in cities with numerous municipal governments with restricted budgets.
Effectiveness of the Body-Worn Cameras
BWCs’ impact on the use of force, proactive police techniques, the number of arrests, and officers’ perceptions of the technology have all been studied. Other studies investigated the impact of body cameras on citizen complaints, how well police officers cooperated and followed commands, and how happy people were with police organizations and criminal investigations.
Similarly, recent research has looked into body camera footage’s usefulness in court. Studies on how BWC influences officers’ use of force were dominant, but they yielded mixed findings.
Various studies published through 2019 have devised new approaches to evaluate the effectiveness of BWCs on the use of force by the police. To assess the impact of body cameras on officer use of force, citizen complaints, and police job activities, Braga et al. (2019) combined a randomized study with a quasi-experimental approach. According to the survey, equipping officers with BWCs led to a slight but statistically significant decrease in the use of force and complaints from the public. These results are consistent with a prior study by Maskaly et al. (2017) that showed a decrease in the use of force and civilian complaints when BWCs were deployed. Although Maskaly et al. (2017) limited their analysis to scholarly literature, the evidence demonstrates that body cams can positively influence officers’ and people’s behavior. Scientific studies have refined their methodology over time, and the results show encouraging support for body cameras.
Based on an analysis of the research done so far on BWCs, the devices are well-liked and supported by the public. The results of a study by Lum et al. (2019) paint a picture of police support for BWCs. Most cops appreciate the tool’s ability to guard against exaggerated or false accusations, gather evidence, and produce accurate reporting (Lum et al., 2019). An early study suggested that body cameras helped officers use less force, but more current research has produced mixed results. Recent randomized studies on BWCs, according to Chapman (2019) and Lum et al. (2019), have the best chance of yielding reliable results. The ability of randomized trials to separate the treatment of interest from all other factors that affect a specific outcome has influenced the current research findings. From an efficiency standpoint, variation in recent results could be due to differences in agency policies regarding the use of BWCs.
Officer adherence to these principles varies, as does agency policy regarding the use of BWC. The discrepancies may explain the inconsistent impact of body cams, as shown in the current research. While BWC usage policy requires police to use the device during all encounters with the community, research has shown that officers only use the device when responding to a violent incident or major property crime (Counsel on Criminal Justice, 2021; Braga et al. 2019; Chapman, 2019, p. 3). Officers’ varied use of these gadgets may have reduced their intended impact. Police must constantly activate the device at any time when contacting members of the public to gain the full benefits of BWCs. It will allow you to record trigger events and assign blame if an incident occurs. It will make it possible to capture trigger events and subsequently lay blame whenever an incident occurs.
The most constant conclusion across research is a decrease in public complaints when cops wear body cameras. For instance, Lum et al. (2020, p. 3) discovered that BWCs reduced civilian complaints by 16.6% across 22 studies. The decrease could be linked to community members becoming more discrete because the camera footage could be used against them or negatively depict their behavior. Other studies have found that the public perceives camera-equipped cops as procedurally just (Lum et al., 2020). It implies that individuals are likelier to consider officers legitimate, satisfied with the engagement, or to regard cops with cameras as experts.
Based on its use, the public’s perception of BWCs and police wearing them has improved over time. According to Sousa et al. (2017), approximately 85% of people support cops wearing BWCs, 91% believe it enhances transparency, and 80% believe it reduces excessive use of force. The media attention surrounding recent high-profile episodes of police misbehavior is a significant additional aspect contributing to the cameras’ popularity and positive reputation (Koslicki, 2019). Data show a considerable increase in BWC use by police departments, owing primarily to public scrutiny of high-profile homicides and disproportionate use of force (Lum et al., 2019). The significant decrease in citizen complaints following the implementation also reduced police officer liability, contributing to the technology’s widespread adoption (Koslicki, 2019). Therefore, implementing the technology was a significant catalyst that will change the underlying policies to favor transparency and accountability.
Furthermore, body camera footage has been used to help prosecute individuals in court. According to Counsel on Criminal Justice (2021), research suggests that BWC footage resulted in many arrests, guilty pleas, and convictions. When the footage captures a complete depiction of events, it influences the summary of judgment outcomes. More extensive research shows that BWCs have investigative benefits, such as documenting domestic violence cases and pursuing justice (Koslicki, 2019). Overall, BWC footage makes it easier for cops to pursue prosecution and increases the likelihood that charges will be filed, resulting in a guilty plea or verdict at trial.
Recommendations
Despite recent research efforts using randomized control trials, the information gap persists. For example, little attention has been paid to the spillover effects of BWC use and improvements in training and organizational policy. By failing to account for the spillover effects of wearing body cameras, research may unintentionally diminish the importance of BWCs. These studies should thoroughly examine the impact of direct and indirect spillover on the civility of police-civilian interactions and police work activities. The use of BWCs may have deterring effects on both cops and citizens (Braga et al., 2019). According to Braga et al. (2019), officers and people perceive an increased risk that inappropriate or unlawful activity will be captured on video, even if the BWCs are not present. Based on this premise, partial implementation appears to be a more cost-effective option than complete implementation.
Furthermore, BWCs should be made available for instructional purposes, such as showcasing proper or inappropriate ways to use them while interacting with the public.
Body cams have more promise if they are regularly employed in police training, performance assessments, and supervisory audits. According to the Counsel on Criminal Justice (2021), the technology has the potential for misconduct investigations and performance reviews in exposing officer behavior and accountability while on duty. The research evaluated in this context has revealed that the cameras can effectively reduce public complaints and potentially curb the use of force. However, the cameras must be accompanied by adequate policies and control. It entails comprehending new technology’s intended and unintended impacts to make appropriate policies for the public benefit and the officers.
Finally, to enjoy the full benefits of the technology, policies should mandate officers to activate their cameras during interactions with the public. According to the studies reviewed in this paper, the overall social advantages may surpass the cost of installing and maintaining cameras. The growing use of this technology by law enforcement agencies attests to its long-term value. Benefits such as fewer complaint settlements, shorter investigation times, and lower administrative and oversight costs outweigh the existing negatives because their full value depends on further study. Besides, considerable variation in BWC implementation and degree of impact alone should not deter an agency from adopting the technology.
Conclusion
Overall, body-worn cameras (BWC) studies indicate the technology may benefit civilians and law enforcement if applied appropriately. Benefits associated with BWCs include reducing public complaints, potentially curbing police use of force, evidence documentation, and oversight of police-civilian behaviors during encounters. Besides, video camera footage has also been essential in supporting investigations, prosecutions, and public defense cases. However, the success of the technology is limited to police oversight and policies on how the gadget should be used. Guidelines on using BWCs, such as officers’ propensity to activate the device when dealing with violent conduct instead of any encounter, have limited the technology’s impact (Counsel on Criminal Justice, 2021). However, the true extent of the BWC value depends on continued research to keep pace with the growing adoption and implementation of the technology.
Further research should explore direct and spillover effects on the civility of police-civilian encounters and police work activities, as highlighted by Braga et al. (2019). It would be possible to evaluate the possibility of partially implementing the BWCs to minimize adoption and maintenance costs based on the spillover approach to new research. Additionally, the BWCs should be routinely used in officer training, performance reviews, and supervisory audits.
References
American Civil Liberties Union. (2019). An act to require law enforcement officers to wear body cameras. Maine. Web.
Braga, A., Barao, L., Zimmerman, G., Douglas, S., & Sheppard, K. (2019). Measuring the direct and spillover effects of body-worn cameras on the civility of police-citizen encounters and police work activities. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 36(1), 851-876. Web.
Braga, A., Coldren, J., Sousa, W., Rodriguez, D., & Alper, O. (2017). The benefits of body-worn Cameras: New findings from a randomized controlled trial at the Las Vegas metropolitan police department. National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Web.
Chapman, B. (2019). Body-worn cameras: What the evidence tells us. National Institute of Justice, 1(280), 1-5. Web.
Counsel on Criminal Justice. (2021). Body-worn cameras. Foleon. Web.
Koslicki, W. (2019). Accountability or efficiency? Body-worn cameras as replicative technology. Criminal Justice Review, 44(3), 356-368.
Lum, C., Koper, C., Wilson, D., Stoltz, M., Goodier, M., Eggins, E.,… Mazerolle, L. (2020). Body-worn cameras’ effects on police officers and citizen behavior: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 16(3), 1-40.
Lum, C., Stoltz, M., Koper, C., & Scherer, J. (2019). Research on body-worn cameras. Criminology and Public Policy, 18(1), 93-118.
Maskaly, J., Donner, C., Jennings, W., Ariel, B., & Sutherland, A. (2017). The effects of body-worn cameras (BWCs) on police. International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 40(4), 672-688.
National Institute of Justice. (2022). Research on Body-Worn Cameras and Law Enforcement. National Institute of Justice. Web.
Sousa, W., Miethe, T., & Mari, S. (2017). Inconsistencies in public opinion of body-worn cameras on police: Transparency, trust, and improved police–citizen relationships. A Journal of Policy and Practice, 12(1), 100-108.