Cited by 37Policing Practices and PerceptionsAdministrative Law and GovernancePublic Policy and Administration Research

High‐Stakes Administrative Discretion: What Drives Body‐Worn Camera Activations?

Adams, Ian T., Mourtgos, Scott M., Mastracci, Sharon H.·2021·Public Administration Review

Abstract

Administrative discretion can range from benign to troubling, and law enforcement officers possess the power to use physical violence in the discharge of their duties. Body‐worn cameras (BWCs) are a workplace surveillance technology intended to monitor officer behavior in the field, but officers exercise discretion over whether or not to activate their cameras. So, what drives officers to activate BWCs? Combining unique survey and administrative data, three competing explanations of BWC activation are compared in one department: Officer demographics, job function, and attitudes. Job function covariates offer robust predictive power of BWC activation frequency. Demographics do not predict BWC activations except rank, which negatively correlates with activation. Though the bulk of attitudinal measures do not predict BWC activations, negative relationships are noted with how officers perceive BWCs to impact their professional discretion, and their belief that cameras expose officers to public outrage and disapproval.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/puar.13339

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Adams, I. T., Mourtgos, S. M., & Mastracci, S. H.
Affiliations
University of Utah (US)
Corresponding author
Adams, Ian T.
Venue
Public Administration Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-04-05
Volume
81
Issue
4
Pages
691-703
ISSN
  • 0033-3352 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-6210
OpenAlex
W3117229228
Cited by
37
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2
FWCI
13.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Public Administration Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Administrative Law and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
Keywords
body-worn cameras, administrative discretion, police behavior, workplace surveillance, officer ranks, officer attitudes, public outrage, 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