IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v39y2015i6p587-624.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Uses and Impacts of Mobile Computing Technology in Hot Spots Policing

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher S. Koper
  • Cynthia Lum
  • Julie Hibdon

Abstract

Background: Recent technological advances have much potential for improving police performance, but there has been little research testing whether they have made police more effective in reducing crime. Objective: To study the uses and crime control impacts of mobile computing technology in the context of geographically focused “hot spots†patrols. Research Design: An experiment was conducted using 18 crime hot spots in a suburban jurisdiction. Nine of these locations were randomly selected to receive additional patrols over 11 weeks. Researchers studied officers’ use of mobile information technology (IT) during the patrols using activity logs and interviews. Nonrandomized subgroup and multivariate analyses were employed to determine if and how the effects of the patrols varied based on these patterns. Results: Officers used mobile computing technology primarily for surveillance and enforcement (e.g., checking automobile license plates and running checks on people during traffic stops and field interviews), and they noted both advantages and disadvantages to its use. Officers did not often use technology for strategic problem-solving and crime prevention. Given sufficient (but modest) dosages, the extra patrols reduced crime at the hot spots, but this effect was smaller in places where officers made greater use of technology. Conclusions: Basic applications of mobile computing may have little if any direct, measurable impact on officers’ ability to reduce crime in the field. Greater training and emphasis on strategic uses of IT for problem-solving and crime prevention, and greater attention to its behavioral effects on officers, might enhance its application for crime reduction.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher S. Koper & Cynthia Lum & Julie Hibdon, 2015. "The Uses and Impacts of Mobile Computing Technology in Hot Spots Policing," Evaluation Review, , vol. 39(6), pages 587-624, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:39:y:2015:i:6:p:587-624
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X16634482
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X16634482
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X16634482?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wei Pan, 2001. "Akaike's Information Criterion in Generalized Estimating Equations," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 57(1), pages 120-125, March.
    2. Marie-Claude Boudreau & Daniel Robey, 2005. "Enacting Integrated Information Technology: A Human Agency Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 3-18, February.
    3. Luis Garicano & Paul Heaton, 2010. "Information Technology, Organization, and Productivity in the Public Sector: Evidence from Police Departments," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(1), pages 167-201, January.
    4. Jack E. Triplett, 1999. "The Solow productivity paradox: what do computers do to productivity?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 309-334, April.
    5. Rocheleau, Bruce, 1993. "Evaluating public sector information systems : Satisfaction versus impact," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 119-129.
    6. Bill Lehr & Frank Lichtenberg, 1999. "Information technology and its impact on firm-level productivity: evidence from government and private data sources, 1977-1993," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 335-362, April.
    7. Anthony Braga & Andrew Papachristos & David Hureau, 2012. "Hot spots policing effects on crime," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 1-96.
    8. Austan Goolsbee & Jonathan Guryan, 2006. "The Impact of Internet Subsidies in Public Schools," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(2), pages 336-347, May.
    9. Kevin J. Stiroh, 2002. "Information Technology and the U.S. Productivity Revival: What Do the Industry Data Say?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1559-1576, December.
    10. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 511-528, June.
    11. Samuel Nunn, 1994. "How capital technologies affect municipal service outcomes: The case of police mobile digital terminals and stolen vehicle recoveries," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(3), pages 539-559.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luis Garicano & Paul Heaton, 2010. "Information Technology, Organization, and Productivity in the Public Sector: Evidence from Police Departments," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(1), pages 167-201, January.
    2. Adel Ben Youssef & Ludivine Martin & Nessrine Omrani, 2014. "The Complementarities between Information Technologies Use, New Organizational Practices and Employees' Contextual Performance: Evidence from Europe in 2005 and 2010," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 124(4), pages 493-504.
    3. Stefan Schweikl & Robert Obermaier, 2020. "Lessons from three decades of IT productivity research: towards a better understanding of IT-induced productivity effects," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 461-507, November.
    4. Francesco Quatraro, 2011. "ICT capital and services complementarities: the Italian evidence," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(20), pages 2603-2613.
    5. Yunhee Kim & Jae Young Choi & Yeonbae Kim, 2009. "Complementarity and Contextuality in the Adoption of Information Systems in Korean Firms," TEMEP Discussion Papers 200919, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Oct 2009.
    6. Nicholas Bloom & Luis Garicano & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2014. "The Distinct Effects of Information Technology and Communication Technology on Firm Organization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2859-2885, December.
    7. Zand, Fardad & Van Beers, Cees & Van Leeuwen, George, 2011. "Information technology, organizational change and firm productivity: A panel study of complementarity effects and clustering patterns in Manufacturing and Services," MPRA Paper 46469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Merima Ali & Abdulaziz B. Shifa & Abebe Shimeles & Firew Woldeyes, 2021. "Building Fiscal Capacity in Developing Countries: Evidence on the Role of Information Technology," National Tax Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(3), pages 591-620.
    9. Luis Garicano & Luis Rayo, 2016. "Why Organizations Fail: Models and Cases," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(1), pages 137-192, March.
    10. Dawei (David) Zhang & Barrie R. Nault & Xueqi (David) Wei, 2019. "The Strategic Value of Information Technology in Setting Productive Capacity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 1124-1144, December.
    11. Alda, Erik, 2020. "The effects of body-worn cameras on police efficiency: A study of local police agencies in the US," MPRA Paper 103994, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Polák, Petr, 2017. "The productivity paradox: A meta-analysis," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 38-54.
    13. Seri, Paolo & Zanfei, Antonello, 2013. "The co-evolution of ICT, skills and organization in public administrations: Evidence from new European country-level data," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 160-176.
    14. Fabiano Schivardi & Tom Schmitz, 2020. "The IT Revolution and Southern Europe’s Two Lost Decades [Lack of Selection and Limits to Delegation: Firm Dynamics in Developing Countries]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(5), pages 2441-2486.
    15. Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2003. "Computing Productivity: Firm-Level Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 793-808, November.
    16. Stefanie Haller & Iulia Siedschlag, 2011. "Determinants of ICT adoption: evidence from firm-level data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(26), pages 3775-3788.
    17. Garicano, Luis, 2010. "Policemen, managers, lawyers: New results on complementarities between organization and information and communication technology," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 355-358, July.
    18. Jung, Hyun-Joon & Na, Kyoung-Youn & Yoon, Chang-Ho, 2013. "The role of ICT in Korea’s economic growth: Productivity changes across industries since the 1990s," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 292-310.
    19. Federico Biagi, 2013. "ICT and Productivity: A Review of the Literature," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2013-09, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Paul Chwelos & Ronald Ramirez & Kenneth L. Kraemer & Nigel P. Melville, 2010. "Research Note ---Does Technological Progress Alter the Nature of Information Technology as a Production Input? New Evidence and New Results," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 392-408, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:39:y:2015:i:6:p:587-624. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.