Bias-Based Policing and How It Affects Police Officers

By Scot DuFour  |  06/11/2024

Throughout my policing career, I’ve heard others express ideas that suggest the existence of certain patterns, biases, or beliefs. Often, the evidence doesn't support these ideas.

For example, many cops hold the belief that critical incidents, like officer-involved shootings, come in sets of three or that a shift is going to be busy when there is a full moon.

Similarly, most cops have, at some point, been told in roll call that they are doing a great job because crime statistics are down. But why do command staff automatically assume that a decrease in reported crime is because of the efforts of patrol officers?

These examples point to flawed human psychology, which can also cause us to conduct incomplete investigations. In order to conduct a more fair and thorough criminal investigation, officers need to understand and recognize normal cognitive biases like confirmation bias and the tendency to misunderstand things like statistical data.

Understanding Confirmation Bias and Selective Observation

Humans like to find consistency and patterns in their daily lives. It makes us feel better to think there is some kind of correlation or cause when things go right or wrong.

Take the game of blackjack or poker, for example. Every real player knows that to win over the long term, you must play the odds. Relying on a gut feeling might let you win here and there, but you will quickly be out of money if you play with your gut feeling every hand.

As police officers, we try to deter crime, render assistance, and aim to reduce the risks we take by utilizing sound tactical training and treating unknown situations as worst-possible scenarios until we can prove otherwise. For instance, officers would never saunter into a hotel room where a man was reportedly armed with a rifle because they had a gut feeling he was not planning on shooting anyone that day. However, officers are still susceptible to making common errors in everyday reasoning.

One common error in reasoning is called confirmation bias or selective observation. Confirmation bias occurs when people, often subconsciously, only take note of things that align with their existing beliefs.

For example, cops who respond to three critical incidents within a workweek will be quick to point out how it proves their theory that critical incidents happen in groups of three. Those same officers likely do not take note of the next week when only one critical incident occurs.

This same type of selective observation is why some officers might believe more crime occurs during a full moon. An officer working on a particularly busy night will say to himself, “It must be a full moon tonight!” and then see a full moon and conclude that his theory is correct. But busy nights without full moons are not noticed or counted against his theory.

Selective Observation Compromises Police Work

David Blake, a retired California peace officer and a court-certified expert in human factors psychology and use of force, suggests humans are naturally biased. There has been increased attention on implicit bias in policing in recent years.

For officers, there are many pitfalls involving acting unethically or even just inefficiently during an investigation. For example, selective observation can lead to racism and discrimination at one end of the scale and complacency and poor investigations at the other end.

Officers must actively work to stop selective observation from bolstering their implicit biases. The obvious example is in cases involving racism, but even an officer who believes that “domestic violence victims never leave their abuser” or “the courts don’t prosecute offenders anyway” is in danger of ineffective policing.

Misunderstanding Statistical Data and the Clustering Illusion

Another common error in reasoning in addition to selective observation is misunderstanding statistical data. People in general do not understand what is called the clustering illusion.

A clear example of the clustering illusion from researcher Thomas Gilovich showed that in a series of 10 coin flips, there are often clusters of tails or heads. Over a long series of coin flips, there would be something close to a 50/50 split.

But if we focus on the patterns we perceive based on a small sample, it can lead us to incorrectly believe those results are representative of the actual statistical probability. So while well-trained crime analysts are familiar with statistics, average street cops are probably in danger of seeing the crimes they respond to as a pattern rather than a random distribution of events.

Another error related to the clustering illusion is the failure to recognize statistical regression. For example, Gilovich provides an example of how people might believe a decrease in crime immediately following a crime wave is the result of a new law enforcement policy.

This belief occurs because people tend to assign too much meaning to random events. Students who have taken a statistics or research class know that statistical regression guarantees that extraordinary data will be followed by a deterioration in that data, or that exceptionally high or low data points are likely to be followed by data points that are closer to the average.

Think of sports players who go on hot streaks or crime rates that go up and down. Crime rates always fluctuate, and they always will, so a short drop in crime rarely relates to the level of effort given by patrol officers. It also means that your police force is not suddenly underperforming if crime rates rise again, which they will.

Errors in Reasoning Can Lead to Investigative Mistakes

Cops are in the business of finding evidence to prove that a person committed a crime. But studies have shown that officers who believe an offender is lying cannot be made to change their mind easily, even if there is evidence that says otherwise.

Instead, officers who think an offender is guilty tend to choose further investigative steps that they believe will gather more evidence against the offender. Furthermore, the more severe the crime is, the more easily officers are convinced of the accused’s guilt.

Exculpatory evidence, which is evidence that clears a person of blame, is a legitimate law enforcement technique to avoid arresting the wrong person. Cops should recognize their common errors in reasoning and focus on disproving a hypothesis.

To garner accurate results in science and academic research, researchers are constantly trying to disprove their theories, rather than find more examples that confirm their belief. The only things officers risk by searching for exculpatory evidence is clearing the innocent of wrongdoing and building a stronger case against the guilty.

Avoiding Bias-Based Policing

It is essential for officers to avoid letting biases related to race, sexual orientation, national origin, or economic status to influence their decisions during investigations and interactions with the public. Utilizing legitimate law enforcement techniques ensures that investigations are conducted fairly and without bias. There is a need to distinguish between legitimate criminal profiling, which is based on behavioral and investigative data, and bias-based profiling, which is discriminatory.

Law enforcement officers must be trained to recognize and mitigate their biases to ensure fair treatment of all individuals. Decisions involving suspected criminal activity should be based on evidence and reasonable suspicion, rather than stereotypes.

For example, when providing suspect or vehicle description, officers should rely on specific, observable details rather than generalizations based on race, gender, or economic status. Equal treatment should be given to everyone by all employees of a police department.

Ensuring fair and equal treatment in a timely manner for all individuals is a cornerstone of ethical policing. Racial or ethnic stereotypes should never influence an officer's decisions or actions. Actions taken by law enforcement officers should be based on reasonable suspicion supported by factual evidence. It is critical to avoid practices that lead to bias-based policing, which undermines the legitimacy of law enforcement efforts.

Criminal Justice Degrees at AMU

For adult learners interested in criminal justice, bias-based policing, and other related criminal justice topics, American Military University (AMU) provides four criminal justice degrees:

• An online associate of arts in criminal justice
  
• An online bachelor of arts in criminal justice
  
• An online bachelor of science in criminal justice
  
• An online master of arts in criminal justice

Courses in these programs cover numerous topics, including:

• Legal and ethical issues
  
• Terrorism’s impact
  
• Criminology
  
• Community relations
  
• Corrections and incarceration
  
• The causes of crime
  
• Forensic science
  
• Digital evidence
  
• Security
  
• Criminal law

These courses are taught by experienced faculty with a deep understanding of the criminal justice and corrections fields. In addition, AMU’s asynchronous online format allows students to more easily balance professional and personal responsibilities. For more information, visit our program page.