CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8Policing Practices and PerceptionsPublic Policy and Administration ResearchCriminal Justice and Penology

Speaking of reform: experimental insights into influencing police executives’ perspectives on civilian oversight

Open access
Mourtgos, Scott M., Adams, Ian T., McCrain, Joshua, Schiff, Kaylyn Jackson, Schiff, Daniel S.·2024·Criminology & Public Policy
DOI 10.1111/1745-9133.12674
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Research summary: This study investigates how information about public opinion and peer practices influences police executives' views on civilian review boards. We applied structural topic modeling in an experimental paradigm, a novel approach diverging from traditional experimental survey methods, to the open‐ended responses of 1331 police executives collected in an original survey experiment. This technique enables the capture of subtle shifts in belief directly from the executives' own words. The experiment systematically varied the information provided to police executives, including state‐level public opinion data from a representative sample of 16,840 U.S. residents, and peer practices in major city police agencies. Our findings reveal that police executives, although generally aligned in their views, demonstrate a readiness to update their beliefs when presented with cohesive local public opinion and information about peer practices in policing. Policy implications: In a democratic society, the core policy beliefs of police executives critically shape the existence and efficacy of civilian oversight mechanisms. Our findings demonstrate the adaptability of police executives in updating their policy positions, reflecting their commitment to informed decision making in response to the dynamic nature of police governance. We find that police executives are willing to update their beliefs related to the public's ability to oversee policing in an unbiased and qualified manner when presented with information about reforms adopted by peer agencies. In contrast, information about public demand for more aggressive forms of oversight can lead to a backlash, increasing the likelihood of police executives to favor existing oversight mechanisms and to doubt the public's qualification. For executives, reformers, and scholars, these findings highlight the limitations of public opinion and benefits of peer influence as mechanisms for policy learning in policing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1745-9133.12674

Cites

49 of 49 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?

  • The asymmetry helps explain why police leaders, wary of these downside risks, often resist fully embracing civilian oversight.

    “This asymmetry helps explain why police leaders, wary of these downside risks, often resist fully embracing civilian oversight (5, 12).”

    From Does civilian oversight impact police legitimacy? (2025) · cites this paper as [12]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mourtgos, S. M., Adams, I. T., McCrain, J., Schiff, K. J., & Schiff, D. S.
Affiliations
  • University of South Carolina (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Corresponding author
Mourtgos, Scott M.
ORCID
Venue
Criminology & Public Policy
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2024-06-05
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
689-720
ISSN
  • 1538-6473 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-9133
DOI
10.1111/1745-9133.12674
OpenAlex
W4399367555
Semantic Scholar
d7f36be1d3ac8477422885346ea46a8ef1f52700
Cited by
8
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2
FWCI
12.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Criminology & Public Policy (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
Keywords
citizen oversight of police, police executives, public opinion, peer influence, police reform, belief updating, police governance, structural topic modeling, police accountability

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