Cited by 46Policing Practices and PerceptionsCriminal Law and EvidenceDeception detection and forensic psychology

Activation of Body-Worn Cameras: Variation by Officer, Over Time, and by Policing Activity

Lawrence, Daniel S., McClure, David, Malm, Aili, Lynch, Mathew, La Vigne, Nancy·2019·Criminal Justice Review

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

Crossref · 10.1177/0734016819846228

Cites

2 of 2 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
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
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