Building Community-Police Relations to Reduce Crime and Promote Safety

Background:

Social and environmental conditions of neighborhoods have been connected to violence, leading to social disconnectedness. In neighborhoods where there is a high sense of connectivity and trust, research has found lower rates of homicide and violence, thereby positively impacting resident health. Conversely, neighborhoods where engagement is low are found to have higher levels of social disorganization. Social disorganization theory posits that place matters—neighborhood environment, relationships and social cohesion. Collective efficacy describes a community’s ability to regulate behaviors of community members that facilitate social order.

Community policing asserts crime is reduced and neighborhood safety is improved when police build ties with residents through proactive partnerships. This strategy assumes that residents and police have a shared perspective on neighborhood collective efficacy. However, little research to date examines predictors of perceived collective efficacy from both the community and police perspectives. The purpose of this study is to examine collective efficacy from the perspectives of residents and law enforcement, and differences in factors associated with crime in predicting perceptions of collective efficacy.

Methods:

Survey data from officers and residents in a place-based, violent-crime reduction initiative in the southern US were examined. Given several variables of interest were complex constructs (i.e., collective efficacy, perceptions of crime, and perceptions of law enforcement), the first step involved using SEM to establish a measurement model of latent variables. The second step involved creating factors based on the measurement model. Third, factors were included in a moderation analysis within a regression framework to examine whether the relationships between predictors and collective efficacy differed for officers and residents. The sample size was 202.

Results:

The results of the final regression model indicated adequate model fit [F(3, 198) = 24.63, p < .001)]. The variables accounted for 27% of the variance in collective efficacy (R² = .272). Perception of crime, perception of law enforcement, and status (officer vs. resident) were significant predictors of perceived collective efficacy. On average officers reported collective efficacy scores .217 standard deviations lower compared to residents. Each standard deviation increase in the perception of crime scale was associated with a .414 standard deviation decrease in collective efficacy. Each standard deviation increase in the perception of law enforcement scale was associated with a .319 standard deviation increase in collective efficacy.

Conclusions:

Study findings indicated residents perceived a significantly higher level of their own efficacy than officers’ perceptions of collective efficacy. Further, positive perceptions of police was a significant predictor of higher levels of community efficacy for both officers and residents. These findings are important to social workers because it provides evidence to support the need to build community-police relations in order to reduce crime and promote safety in vulnerable communities. Addressing differential perceptions of collective efficacy could be considered a prerequisite to implementing effective crime reduction interventions. As community members and police perceive law enforcement as a positive resource for the community, both community members and law enforcement perceive a higher level of the community’s own ability to regulate and disrupt criminal activity and crime-related behaviors.