Activation of Body-Worn Cameras: Variation by Officer, Over Time, and by Policing Activity
Abstract
This study assessed the early deployment of the Anaheim Police Department’s body-worn camera (BWC) program in 2015 by examining camera activations across officers, trends in activations over time, and how different police–community contacts predict BWC activations. These were assessed with correlational analyses among 40 BWC-equipped officers in the first 6 months of their use. Activation of the BWCs among officers varied widely, with 6-month average activations ranging from 0% to 72%. Average activation rates increased over time from 3% to 54%. Officers disproportionately activated their cameras for events related to crimes; for example, activation rates for other categories were significantly lower compared to violent crimes, with odds ratios ranging from 0.148 to 0.663. The article concludes with a discussion on how the failure to activate a BWC limits the potential benefits of the technology. While officers have considerable discretion on when to activate their BWCs, law enforcement agencies must not only train and deploy BWCs among their officers but also audit and supervise individual use to ensure successful BWC programs.
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?
Any intervention or program, including BWCs, will not be effective if it is not appropriately implemented.
“any intervention or programincluding BWCswill not be effective if it is not appropriately implemented (Lawrence et al., 2019).”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al., 2019
Anaheim, California officers activated their BWCs in 54% of required incidents.
“Anaheim, California (54%; Lawrence et al., 2019)”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al., 2019
Boivin et al. (2022) and Lawrence et al. (2019) reported a greater likelihood of BWC activation given certain incident-level and officer characteristics.
“Boivin et al. (2022) and Lawrence et al. (2019) similarly reported a greater likelihood of activation given certain incident-level (e.g., call type) and officer characteristics (e.g., experience, gender).”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al. (2019)
Low activation compliance is a form of implementation failure.
“low activation compliance is a form of implementation failure”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al., 2019
Activation rates can vary greatly among officers in a single department, with individual officer rates ranging from 0% to over 70%.
“Lawrence et al. (2019) and White et al. (2018) documented individual officer rates ranging from 0% to over 70%.”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al. (2019)
Many law enforcement departments have struggled with officers' failure to activate BWCs.
“As BWCs have spread in law enforcement, many departments have struggled with their officers' failure to activate the devices (Boivin et al., 2022;Hedberg et al., 2017;Lawrence et al., 2019).”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al., 2019
Age and officer experience were unrelated to BWC activation in Anaheim.
“Lawrence et al. (2019) reported that age and officer experience were unrelated to BWC activation in Anaheim (see also Adams et al., 2021).”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al. (2019)
Officer self-initiated calls are less likely to result in BWC activation than community member calls-for-service.
“Both Katz and Huff (2023) and Lawrence et al. (2019)found that officer self-initiated calls are less likely to result in BWC activation than a community member call-for-service.”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al. (2019)
The selection of 2-week periods for displaying change over time is consistent with prior research that assessed officer BWC activation every 2 weeks.
“The selection of 2-week periods for displaying change over time is consistent with prior research that assessed officer BWC activation every 2 weeks (e.g., Lawrence et al., 2019).”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al., 2019
Prior research in Anaheim found that officer activation rates ranged from 0-72%.
“This is consistent with prior research in Anaheim, which similarly found that officer activation rates ranged from 0-72% (Lawrence et al., 2019).”
From An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation (2025) · cites this paper as Lawrence et al., 2019
Cites
Ariel, B., Farrar, W. A., & Sutherland, A. (2015) · Journal of Quantitative Criminology · doi:10.1007/s10940-014-9236-3 · Cited by 621 · see citing works
Ariel, B., Sutherland, A., Henstock, D., Young, J., Drover, P., Sykes, J., Megicks, S., & Henderson, R. (2016) · Journal of Experimental Criminology · doi:10.1007/s11292-016-9261-3 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An Officer-Level Examination of the Prevalence and Correlates of Police Body-Worn Camera Activation
Huff, J., White, M. D., Malm, A. E., & Katz, C. M. (2025) · Police Quarterly · doi:10.1177/10986111241241751 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Lawrence, D. S., McClure, D., Malm, A., Lynch, M., & La Vigne, N.
- Affiliations
- Urban Institute (US)
- Police Executive Research Forum (US)
- California State University, Long Beach (US)
- New York City Department of Probation (US)
- Urban Institute, Washington, DC, USA
- Corresponding author
- Lawrence, Daniel S.
- Venue
- Criminal Justice Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-05-02
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 339-355
- ISSN
- 0734-0168 (ISSN-L)
- 1556-3839
- OpenAlex
- W2943466959
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 24.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Criminal Justice Review (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Laura and John Arnold Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Law and Evidence
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
- Keywords
- body-worn cameras, police discretion, police use of force, violent crime, police oversight
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