Cited by 42Policing Practices and PerceptionsCrime Patterns and InterventionsCriminal Justice and Penology

The Impact of Hot Spots Policing on Collective Efficacy: Findings from a Randomized Field Trial

Open access
Rinehart Kochel, Tammy, Weisburd, David·2019·Justice Quarterly

Abstract

In disadvantaged neighborhoods, prior research has found reduced social cohesion and less willingness among residents to address disruptive behaviors and violations of social norms. This deficiency is commonly associated with higher levels of disorder and crime. Therefore, recent scholarship has begun to consider whether police can help foster collective efficacy, especially in places struggling with serious crime problems. Early results are somewhat mixed. Yet the cooperation hypothesis asserts that when neighborhood residents see police as a more viable and reliable resource, residents will be emboldened to exert informal social control to address problems. Over the last two decades, hot spots policing has been recognized as an effective method to reduce crime. At the same time, there have been few rigorous studies of whether this approach impacts collective efficacy at hot spots. To investigate this question, we conducted an experiment in 71 crime hot spots, comparing a collaborative problem solving versus a directed patrol (police presence) approach versus standard policing practices. Over time, a substantial increase in police presence did appear to promote modest improvements in collective efficacy. We attribute this finding to the cooperation hypothesis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07418825.2018.1465579

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Kochel and Weisburd (2019) found some long-term improvements in perceptions of informal social control among POP hot spot residents, with about a 7% improvement compared with baseline levels.

    “They did find some long‐term improvements in perceptions of informal social control among POP hot spot residents, with about a 7% improvement compared with baseline levels.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

20 of the 98 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rinehart Kochel, T., & Weisburd, D.
Affiliations
George Mason University (US)
Venue
Justice Quarterly
Published
2018-05-07
Volume
36
Issue
5
Pages
900-928
ISSN
  • 0741-8825 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-9109
OpenAlex
W2799456436
Cited by
42
References
98
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
FWCI
23.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Justice Quarterly (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National Institute of Justice (2011-IJ-CX-0007)
  • Office of Justice Programs
  • U.S. Department of Justice
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
Keywords
hot spot policing, collective efficacy, police presence, collaborative problem solving, informal social control, social cohesion, crime hotspots, disadvantaged neighborhoods, crime reduction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review