The document summarizes issues with past research on police use of force and proposes a new framework. It outlines two main problems with previous research: a lack of foundational evidence due to non-cooperation from police departments, and a lack of proper measurements in data collection. This led to inconsistent results and policies. The document then proposes a new "authority maintenance theory" framework based on social expectations in police-citizen encounters. This theory could provide structure for future research to better understand the causes of police use of force and help develop more effective policies.

1. Running Head: Issues in Policing SAR 2 1
Issues in Policing SAR 2
Marcos Corley
University of Texas at Arlington

2. Issues in Policing SAR 2 2
Abstract
The book “Understanding Police use of Force: Officers, Suspects, and Reciprocity” by
Geoffrey Alpert, outlines the issues that researches have faced while trying to find a link
to police use of force. This essay summarizes the problems with research in its current
state, analyzes the impact of those problems as well as the proposed solution, and
responds to the suggested theory.

3. Issues in Policing SAR 2 3
Law Enforcement is an essential part of the base construct of a governed society,
as the burden of responsibility falls to them to maintain order and facilitate justice.
Because of the inherent role they play, it is imperative that police officers maintain
legitimate authority over the people placed in their care. Because of the American check
and balance system, public perception of legitimacy is the most significant factor in its
resilience. In order to preserve this legitimacy, there has been an overwhelming amount
of research done on how police conduct themselves, with specific regard to their use of
force on civilians. All of these studies have produced conflicting results, and often point
toward every possible outcome in the researchers theories. These hazy conclusions have
lead to hasty generalizations about how police should or should not operate. Every aspect
of police procedure has been analyzed through this fractured kaleidoscope with the intent
of forging policies that uphold the aforementioned legitimacy. In the book
“understanding police use of force: officers, suspects, and reciprocity” by Geoffrey
Alpert, the flaws of previously established research methods are brought to light and new
theories are drawn as to how the successful procurement of accurate, qualitative data can
be obtained in the future. In order to obtain a firm grasp on why the previous methods
have failed and how to correct them, the problems with past research methods must be
outlined. Following that, the significant impact those issues have on policymaking should
be analyzed and compared to the proposed solution. Finally, a distinct response should be
established, showing a positive impact on the future of effective policy making.
The first of two glaring issues with research methods that have been used thus far
is the lack of foundational evidence that is necessary to draw a conclusion with certainty.
One of the issues that researchers have encountered is the significant number of police

4. Issues in Policing SAR 2 4
departments that refuse to share their reports on use-of-force with the researchers
requesting them. Some departments have even gone so far as to keep researchers from
interviewing officers or suspects who have been involved in use-of-force cases. Another
problem is the various standards held by each department for determining what the
starting point is for use-of-force. Additionally, a majority of departments have the
officers who were involved with use-of-force filing their own official report. These
reports are generally logged and accepted with no significant investigation as to the
validity of the narrative, even when it conflicts with the story told by the suspect (Alpert,
2004).
The second problem in use-of-force research is the lack of measurements used
when examining a use-of-force encounter. For example, there is plenty of work that has
been done on police discretion; however there has been no set standard to attempt to
determine a functional link in use-of-force incidents. Moreover, most of the research has
focused on police responses towards specific demographics or attitudes, leaving the
interpersonal structure of expected human interaction entirely untapped. The other
measurement that has fallen short in past research is the study of where force encounters
fall on the use-of-force continuum. A majority of these studies only show the highest
level of force used by an officer measured against the highest level of resistance used by
the suspect instead of showing the starting and ending point with an explanation of the
shift in levels (Alpert, 2004).
The implications that these two problems hold for effective data collection are
monstrous. A lack of foundational evidence creates sizable holes in the generalizations
that researchers have to make. This either leads to a stagnant response to the issues, or a

5. Issues in Policing SAR 2 5
possible over reaction that is caused by overestimated generalizations, leading to an
unintentional and certainly unwarranted decrease in police legitimacy. The way some of
this data might be skewed for instance, occurs when a police department refuses to share
their use-of-force reports with researchers. That scenario leaves the researcher with the
task of either making a broad generalization of all departments based on the reports they
do receive, or making conclusions based on lawsuits, civilian complaints, and observable
behavior, which is not the most reliable data to make assumptions about an entire
department. Data comparison gets to the point of absurd when arriving to the traffic block
that is different departmental standards for defining use-of-force. Varying definitions
have the potential to make it appear as if the departments that carry more strict policy are
using unreasonable amounts of force when compared to a more lenient department. The
final problem that is commonly seen is when departments have the officers who were
involved with use-of-force write the official report on the case, leaving room for major
discrepancies in how much force was actually used (Alpert, 2004).
A lack of properly structured measurements when studying use-of-force cases can
be just as detrimental to the collection of useful information. In order to obtain good
empirical data once research has begun, all available aspects of a use-of-force encounter
should be considered. Simply reporting the fact that an officer used force on a subject
does nothing to further the understanding of why it was done or if any procedural
changes could have prevented it. The entire perspective and understanding of the
situation changes when the data includes the level of force the officer began with, at what
point the level increased, and what caused the spike (Alpert, 2004). The other aspect that
has generally been left unaddressed is the disparity in the levels of authority between the

6. Issues in Policing SAR 2 6
officer and the suspect. This causes a negative impact on data collection due to the fact
that there is too much focus on the characteristics of the actors, rather than the breach in
reciprocity that destroyed the social expectations in the first place (Alpert, 2004).
The absence of a tangible theory or structure is the most significant problem
outlined in the book. Through the compiling of several theories on interpersonal
encounters, Alpert put forth the “authority maintenance theory” to be tested and used in
future research. The authority maintenance theory is based on the authority maintenance
ritual, which encompasses all human interaction with the implication that everyone
approaches social encounters with a prescribed expectation of how it will unfold based on
the authority of each actor. In relation to police interactions, it is understood that police
have been granted innate authority over citizens and expect people to adhere to that
authority during an interaction (Alpert, 2004).
The theory itself is broken down into seven basic propositions that make it
distinctly in regard to police-citizen interactions. Through these propositions the
authority maintenance theory provides several implications to further an understanding of
police-citizen interactions, as well as a measure for future data analysis on the subject.
The first two propositions are used to define the nature of police-citizen relationships, and
outline the information that is necessary to test the theory. The third and fourth
propositions are the crux of the theory, implying that an officer has inherent authority
over citizens, which creates general expectations for any encounter. The implication is
that the officer is more likely to use force if his authority is undermined, in a break down
of reciprocity. Propositions five and six suggest that goal blockage is the most likely
reason for resistance. Proposition seven is used to indicate that every interaction has a

7. Issues in Policing SAR 2 7
negotiation period, if negotiations fail, then force and resistance will escalate until one
party is willing to change their expected goals (Alpert, 2004).
In order to develop effective use-of-force policies, there needs to be a clear
understanding what causes the onset of force, so that situations which have the potential
for violence can be better managed or prevented. The implications depicted in the
authority maintenance theory hold promising potential to foster the understanding of use-
of-force interactions. Research still needs to be conducted to prove the theory, but now
there is a logical construct to base future research off of. This route holds more promise
than the midnight snipe hunt of attempting to link actions to constantly varying
characteristics.
In conclusion, previously used research methods have had problems obtaining
consistent empirical data on use-of-force. The implications provided were analyzed to
show why they were unable to gather necessary information. This lead to the adoption of
the authority maintenance theory, which would give researchers the construct they need
to gather the missing empirical data, for the purpose of eventually making effective
policies based on their findings, and effectively solving for the inconsistencies facilitated
by the status qu.

8. Issues in Policing SAR 2 8
References
Alpert, P. G. (2004). Understanding Police use of Force: Officers, Suspects, and
Reciprocity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.