The Reverse Racism Effect: Are Cops More Hesitant to Shoot Black Than White Suspects?
Abstract
Research Summary: Race‐related debates often assume that implicit racial bias will result in racially biased decisions to shoot. Previous research has examined racial bias in police decisions by pressing “shoot” or “don't‐shoot” buttons in response to pictures of armed and unarmed suspects. As a result of its lack of external validity, however, this methodology provides limited insight into officer behavior in the field. In response, we conducted the first series of experimental research studies that tested police officers and civilians in strikingly realistic deadly force simulators. Policy Implications: This article reports the results of our most recent experiment, which tested 80 police patrol officers by applying this leading edge method. We found that, despite clear evidence of implicit bias against Black suspects, officers were slower to shoot armed Black suspects than armed White suspects, and they were less likely to shoot unarmed Black suspects than unarmed White suspects. These findings challenge the assumption that implicit racial bias affects police behavior in deadly encounters with Black suspects.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
James et al. found that 78% of patrol officers exhibited a moderate or strong anti-Black unconscious bias on an implicit association test by more quickly associating weapons with Black people than with White people.
“James et al. (2016) found that 78% of patrol of fi cers exhibited a moderate or strong anti-Black unconscious bias on an implicit association test by more quickly associating weapons with Black people than with White people.”
From A call to dismantle systemic racism in criminal legal systems. (2022) · cites this paper as James et al., 2016
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Bird's Eye View of Civilians Killed by Police in 2015: Further Evidence of Implicit Bias
Nix, J., Campbell, B. A., Byers, E. H., & Alpert, G. P. (2017) · Criminology & Public Policy · doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12269 · Cited by 336 · see citing works
Reducing fatal police shootings as system crashes: Research, theory, and practice
Sherman, L. W. (2018) · Annual Review of Criminology · doi:10.1146/annurev-criminol-032317-092409 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Nix, J., Pickett, J. T., Wolfe, S. E., & Campbell, B. A. (2017) · Justice Quarterly · doi:10.1080/07418825.2017.1334808 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
A call to dismantle systemic racism in criminal legal systems.
Najdowski, C. J., & Stevenson, M. C. (2022) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1037/lhb0000510 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- James, L., James, S. M., & Vila, B. J.
- Affiliations
- Washington State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- James, Lois
- Venue
- Criminology & Public Policy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-01-14
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 457-479
- ISSN
- 1538-6473 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-9133
- OpenAlex
- W2234997330
- Cited by
- 138
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 87.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2019-12-20)
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Criminology & Public Policy (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
- Keywords
- implicit racial bias, lethal force, police use of force, police decision-making, race and policing, patrol officers
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