IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v44y2025i2p403-427.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Police reform from the top down: Experimental evidence on police executive support for civilian oversight

Author

Listed:
  • Ian T. Adams
  • Joshua McCrain
  • Daniel S. Schiff
  • Kaylyn Jackson Schiff
  • Scott M. Mourtgos

Abstract

The accountability of police to the public is imperative for a functioning democracy. The opinions of police executives—pivotal actors for implementing oversight policies—are an understudied, critical component of successful reform efforts. We use a pre‐registered survey experiment administered to all U.S. municipal police chiefs and county sheriffs to assess whether police executives’ attitudes towards civilian oversight are responsive to 1) state‐level public opinion (drawing on an original n = 16,840 survey) and 2) prior adoption of civilian review boards in large agencies. Results from over 1,300 police executives reveal that law enforcement leaders are responsive to elite peer adoption but much less to public opinion, despite overwhelming public support. Compared to appointed municipal police chiefs, elected sheriffs are less likely to support any civilian oversight. Our findings hold implications for reformers: we find that existing civilian oversight regimes are largely popular, and that it is possible to move police executive opinion towards support for civilian oversight.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian T. Adams & Joshua McCrain & Daniel S. Schiff & Kaylyn Jackson Schiff & Scott M. Mourtgos, 2025. "Police reform from the top down: Experimental evidence on police executive support for civilian oversight," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(2), pages 403-427, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:44:y:2025:i:2:p:403-427
    DOI: 10.1002/pam.22620
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22620
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/pam.22620?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:jpamgt:v:44:y:2025:i:2:p:403-427. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    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.