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.
