Information, apprehension, and deterrence: Exploring the limits of police productivity

Abstract The capacity of police departments to solve crimes and apprehend offenders is low for many types of crime, particularly crimes of profit. This article reviews a variety of studies of police apprehension and hypothesizes that an important determinant of the ability of the police to apprehend criminals is information. The complete absence of information for many types of crime places fairly clear upper bounds on the ability of the police to effect solutions. To discover whether these boundaries are high or low we analyzed data from the 1973 National Crime Panel about the types and amount of information potentially available to police through victim reports and patrol activities. The evidence suggests that if the police rely on information made readily available to them, they will never do much better than they are doing now. On the other hand, there appears to be more information available to bystanders and passing patrols than currently is being used, which suggests that surveillance strategies and improved police methods for eliciting, recording, and analyzing information supplied by victims and witnesses might increase the probability of solving crimes and making arrests. In light of this we review a few possibly helpful innovations suggested in the literature on police productivity and procedure.

[1]  Marvin E. Wolfgang Uniform Crime Reports: A Critical Appraisal , 1963 .

[2]  A. Reiss,et al.  The police and the public , 1971 .

[3]  W. Skogan Crime and Crime Rates , 1976 .

[4]  George L. Kelling,et al.  The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment : a technical report , 1974 .

[5]  William B. Sanders Detective Work: A Study of Criminal Investigations , 1977 .

[6]  Adrianne W. Weir,et al.  THE PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF ROBBERY , 1975 .

[7]  H. Garn Models for Indicator Development: A Framework for Policy Analysis. , 1976 .

[8]  Wesley G. Skogan,et al.  Sample surveys of the victims of crime , 1976 .

[9]  J. E. Conklin,et al.  Robbery and the criminal justice system , 1972 .

[10]  Wesley G. Skogan,et al.  CITIZEN REPORTING OF CRIME Some National Panel Data , 1976 .

[11]  Richard C. Larson,et al.  WHAT HAPPENED TO PATROL OPERATIONS IN KANSAS CITY? A REVIEW OF THE KANSAS CITY PREVENTIVE PATROL EXPERIMENT' , 1975 .

[12]  D. J. Pittman,et al.  Patterns in Criminal Aggravated Assault , 1964 .

[13]  L. Curtis Criminal violence: National patterns and behavior , 1974 .

[14]  J. Macdonald Armed Robbery: Offenders and Their Victims , 1975 .

[15]  Bernard Greenberg Felony Investigation Decision Model: An Analysis of Investigative Elements of Information. , 1977 .

[16]  B. Forst What Happens After Arrest? A Court Perspective of Police Operations in the District of Columbia. , 1978 .

[17]  Marvin E. Wolfgang,et al.  Patterns in Criminal Homicide , 1958 .

[18]  E. Bittner,et al.  BURGLARY IN A SUBURB , 1973 .

[19]  A. Blumstein,et al.  Deterrence and incapacitation : estimating the effects of criminal sanctions on crime rates , 1980 .

[20]  Isaac Ehrlich,et al.  The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: A Question of Life and Death , 1973 .

[21]  G. Antunes,et al.  Impact of Certainty and Severity of Punishment on Levels of Crime in American States: An Extended Analysis, The , 1973 .

[22]  D. Seidman,et al.  Getting the Crime Rate Down: Political Pressure and Crime Reporting , 1974 .

[23]  Menachem Amir Patterns in Forcible Rape , 1971 .

[24]  Arthur L. Stinchcombe,et al.  Institutions of Privacy in the Determination of Police Administrative Practice , 1963, American Journal of Sociology.