Improving Officer Safety and Decision-making by Understanding and Harnessing Within-Officer States and Between-Officer Traits

通过理解和利用军官内部状态和军官之间特征来提高军官安全和决策

• 批准号: 1949083
• 负责人: Brent Scott
• 金额: $ 49.99万
• 依托单位: Michigan State University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2020
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2020-03-01 至 2023-02-28
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1949083&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Improving; Officer; Safety; Decision; making

To understand why people make “good” versus “bad” decisions, much research has focused on identifying stable factors that differentiate one individual decision-maker from another. These factors include characteristics of the person (e.g., personality, attitudes) and characteristics of the situation (e.g., type of task, nature of the environment). Although these factors have helped to differentiate “good” decision-makers from “bad” decision-makers, they cannot explain why a given decision-maker makes good decisions at sometimes and bad decisions at other times. To do so, it is necessary to compare not just one person to another person, but also how and why one person differs from himself or herself from one point in time to the next. In other words, research needs to identify momentary factors (e.g., emotions) that explain why any one person is an effective decision-maker in one context but not in another context. This research aims to improve our ability to explain differences in decision-making effectiveness by examining the combination of momentary and stable factors within a nationally important context: policing. Momentary, or “within-person” factors include emotions, physiological arousal, and sleep quality, and stable, or “between-person” factors include personality traits and perceptions of the environment. Gaining a better understanding of when and why a given police officer makes good versus bad decisions not only promotes the progress of science, but it also advances the health, prosperity, and welfare of citizens, ultimately benefitting society.This project will take a multilevel approach and examine police officer decision-making in the field at the episodic level. By viewing officer decision-making as a multilevel phenomenon, shaped by within- and between-person factors, our goal is to explain more variance in key decisions. The hypothesis is that between-person differences a) influence within-person states, which in turn affect decision-making processes and outcomes, and b) moderate the relationship between within-person states and decision-making processes and outcomes. To test this, we will utilize experience-sampling methodology with a sample of police officers in the field, surveying them twice daily for two-weeks, at two points in time, spaced nine months apart. We will assess police officers’ emotions felt during positive and negative interactions with civilians and decisions made during those interactions. During the experience-sampling phase, we also will capture momentary assessments of physiological arousal and sleep quality via wearable sensors. In addition, we will measure stable factors by surveying officers about their personality traits (e.g., conscientiousness, self-monitoring) attitudes (e.g., trust in the public), and perceptions of their agency (e.g., fair culture). The identification of both within- and between-person factors should enhance police officer decision-making and lead to more consistent decisions by identifying event-level, momentary triggers that cause officers to stray from high levels of performance. Findings from this study will help agencies identify the types of encounters that increase officer anxiety or stress and leverage the advantages and disadvantages associated with emotions and, in so doing, may optimally position them to: (a) pinpoint ways to improve de-escalation strategies, (b) increase the self-awareness of officers when it comes to their emotional states, (c) reduce stress and promote officer well-being, and (d) develop training programs that might improve citizen and officer safety.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.

要了解为什么“好”与“坏”的重点是确定稳定的因素，这些因素与另一个因素不同。任务，环境的性质）。换句话说，研究的时间是一个时间。通过在国家重要的背景下检查瞬时和稳定因素的结合来解释决策有效性的差异：暂时的OUSAL和睡眠质量，稳定或“人之间的”因素包括人格特征特征特征特征特征特征特征特征特征的特征特征的特征环境变得更好，何时以及为什么给定的警察办公室糟糕的决定不仅促进了STO的进步，还可以使公民的健康，繁荣和福利最终受益，最终使社会受益。官员的决策 - 托迪级的领域。人体内部的国家在人体内部和决策过程和结果中都会影响决策过程和结果。每天对两周的调查，在与平民的积极互动和互动过程中，我们将在经验采样阶段进行互动时，将对警察的情绪进行评估此外，我们将通过对人格（例如，自我监控）的态度（例如，对公众的信任），Ando Percency（例如，公平文化）的态度来衡量稳定的因素。并通过确定事件级别的瞬时触发器来实现更加一致性的决定可以最佳地位以：（a）查明改善降级策略的方法，增加情绪状态的官员的自我意识，（c）减轻压力并促进官员的福祉，以及（d）制定公民和公民和官员安全。该奖项反映了NSF'SFLETORY任务，并使用基金会的知识分子优点和更广泛的Impactigts审查标准获得了值得支持的评估。