密苏里州堪萨斯城枪弹探测技术对证据收集和案件结案的影响

IF 1.8 2区社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY

Journal of Experimental Criminology Pub Date : 2023-11-13 DOI:10.1007/s11292-023-09594-6

Eric L. Piza, Rachael A. Arietti, Jeremy G. Carter, George O. Mohler

{"title":"密苏里州堪萨斯城枪弹探测技术对证据收集和案件结案的影响","authors":"Eric L. Piza, Rachael A. Arietti, Jeremy G. Carter, George O. Mohler","doi":"10.1007/s11292-023-09594-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objectives</h3><p>This study tests whether (1) shots fired calls for service in the gunshot detection technology (GDT) target area are more likely to be classified as unfounded; (2) police responses to shootings in the GDT target area are more likely to recover ballistic evidence or firearms; and (3) shootings in the GDT target area are more likely to be cleared.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>Entropy balancing created a weighted control group that equaled the treatment group across a range of covariates. GDT effect was tested through logistic regression models with entropy balancing weights set as probability weights.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Shots fired occurring in the GDT target area were 15% more likely to be classified as unfounded compared to control cases. GDT did not significantly influence the likelihood of evidence collection or case clearance in shooting incidents.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>GDT may not add investigative value to police responses to shooting incidents and may increase patrol workload.</p>","PeriodicalId":47684,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Criminology","volume":"32 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effect of gunshot detection technology on evidence collection and case clearance in Kansas City, Missouri\",\"authors\":\"Eric L. Piza, Rachael A. Arietti, Jeremy G. Carter, George O. Mohler\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11292-023-09594-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Objectives</h3><p>This study tests whether (1) shots fired calls for service in the gunshot detection technology (GDT) target area are more likely to be classified as unfounded; (2) police responses to shootings in the GDT target area are more likely to recover ballistic evidence or firearms; and (3) shootings in the GDT target area are more likely to be cleared.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>Entropy balancing created a weighted control group that equaled the treatment group across a range of covariates. GDT effect was tested through logistic regression models with entropy balancing weights set as probability weights.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>Shots fired occurring in the GDT target area were 15% more likely to be classified as unfounded compared to control cases. GDT did not significantly influence the likelihood of evidence collection or case clearance in shooting incidents.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusions</h3><p>GDT may not add investigative value to police responses to shooting incidents and may increase patrol workload.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Criminology\",\"volume\":\"32 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Criminology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-023-09594-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-023-09594-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本研究检验(1)在枪弹探测技术(GDT)目标区射击报警是否更容易被归类为无根据;(2)警察对GDT目标区域的枪击事件的反应更有可能找到弹道证据或枪支;(3) GDT目标区域的枪击事件更容易被清除。方法随机平衡创建一个加权对照组，在一系列协变量上与治疗组相等。通过logistic回归模型检验GDT效应，将熵平衡权设置为概率权。结果与对照病例相比，发生在GDT目标区域的射击被归类为无根据的可能性高15%。GDT对枪击事件中证据收集或案件结案的可能性没有显著影响。结论sgdt可能不会增加警察应对枪击事件的调查价值，并可能增加巡逻工作量。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The effect of gunshot detection technology on evidence collection and case clearance in Kansas City, Missouri

Objectives

This study tests whether (1) shots fired calls for service in the gunshot detection technology (GDT) target area are more likely to be classified as unfounded; (2) police responses to shootings in the GDT target area are more likely to recover ballistic evidence or firearms; and (3) shootings in the GDT target area are more likely to be cleared.

Methods

Entropy balancing created a weighted control group that equaled the treatment group across a range of covariates. GDT effect was tested through logistic regression models with entropy balancing weights set as probability weights.

Results

Shots fired occurring in the GDT target area were 15% more likely to be classified as unfounded compared to control cases. GDT did not significantly influence the likelihood of evidence collection or case clearance in shooting incidents.

Conclusions

GDT may not add investigative value to police responses to shooting incidents and may increase patrol workload.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Experimental Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-

CiteScore

6.20

自引率

6.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Experimental Criminology focuses on high quality experimental and quasi-experimental research in the advancement of criminological theory and/or the development of evidence based crime and justice policy. The journal is also committed to the advancement of the science of systematic reviews and experimental methods in criminology and criminal justice. The journal seeks empirical papers on experimental and quasi-experimental studies, systematic reviews on substantive criminological and criminal justice issues, and methodological papers on experimentation and systematic review. The journal encourages submissions from scholars in the broad array of scientific disciplines that are concerned with criminology as well as crime and justice problems.