Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 503

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Police Crackdowns: Initial and Residual Deterrence

Sherman, Lawrence W.·1990·Crime and Justice

Abstract

Police crackdowns are sudden increases in officer presence, sanctions, and threats of apprehension either for specific offenses or for all offenses in specific places. Of eighteen case studies of crackdowns, fifteen appeared to demonstrate initial deterrent effects, including two examples of long-term effects. In most long-term crackdowns with apparent initial deterrence, however, the effects began to decay after a short period, sometimes despite continued dosage of police presence or even increased dosage of police sanctions. However, five studies with postcrackdown data showed a "free bonus" of continued deterrence well after the crackdowns ended. Such "residual" deterrent effects lasted in two cases for a longer period than the crackdown itself. These findings of initial decay and residual deterrence suggest that crackdowns might be more effective if they were limited in duration and rotated across different targets. While such a policy raises certain ethical and legal questions, these should not preclude a program of experimental research to establish the residual deterrent effects of short crackdowns across a range of police tactics, offense types, and places.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/449163

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 503

Metadata

Authors
Sherman, L. W.
Venue
Crime and Justice
Published
1990-01
Volume
12
Pages
1-48
ISSN
  • 0192-3234 (ISSN-L)
  • 2153-0416
OpenAlex
W2008961057
Cited by
503
References
0
FWCI
25.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Police Crackdowns: Initial and Residual Deterrence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/449163
The paper
Sherman, L. W. (1990). Police Crackdowns: Initial and Residual Deterrence. Crime and Justice. https://doi.org/10.1086/449163

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.