DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL

LAW UNIVERSITY

PSYCHOLOGY - III
Police Psychology & Issues in Police Psychology

Submitted to :- Submitted by :-

Ms. Tanya Dixit Chaitanya

Assistant Professor IIIrd Semester

(Psychology) 170101047

1
INTRODUCTION 3
Selection of Police Officers 4
Personal Interview 5
Situational Tests 5
Psychological Tests 6
Current Trends 7
THE VALIDITY OF POLICE SCREENING 8
The Purpose of Psychological Screening 8
Crisis and Hostage Negotiation 9
Team Composition and Tactics 10
The Effects of Time and the Stockholm Syndrome 13
The Influence of Power Tactics and Face-Saving 14
Active Listening and the Resolution Process 14
Police Stress & Negative Consequences 15
Negative Consequences 16
ISSUES IN POLICE PSYCHOLOGY 18
Police brutality 18
Why Does Excessive Force Occur? 18
Police Interrogation and Confessions 20
Assessing the Legitimacy of a Confession 20
Tactics to Get Confessions 20
Types of False Confessions 20
Voluntary False Confessions 20
Coerced Confessions 21
Tortured Confessions 21
Coerced-Internalised Confessions 21
Police Corruption 21
Types of Corruption 22
Counteracting and Preventing Corruption 23
Gender and Ethnic minority issue 24
The Ethics of Police Deception 25
CONCLUSION 27
2
 INTRODUCTION

Police psychology, also referred to as "police and public safety psychology," was formally
recognized in 2013 by the American Psychological Association as a specialty in professional
psychology. The goal of police psychology is to ensure law enforcement is able to perform their
jobs safely, effectively, ethically, and lawfully. Police and public safety psychologists have specialty
knowledge about the nature of police work. This specialized knowledge consists of police working
environments, the goals of the agencies, stressors and trauma that public safety personal experience,
their responses to these stressors, and the interventions used to treat symptoms of PTSD.
Additionally, police psychologists are aware of confidentiality and testimonial privilege when
serving this community. These psychologists then apply the science and profession of psychology in
four primary domains of practice: assessment (primarily preemployment assessments of prospective
candidates and fitness-for-duty evaluations of incumbent personnel), clinical intervention,
operational support, and organizational consultation. Police and public safety psychology
intervention strategies primarily include short-term cognitive behavioral treatments and approaches.
Training also includes review of research regarding the relative efficacy as well as the limitations of
post-crisis interventions unique to law enforcement personnel (e.g., post-shooting incidents, line-of-
duty deaths, deep undercover stress reactions). In addition, various modalities of treatment and
programs are typically integrated within the training (e.g. peer support teams, EMDR, suicide
intervention training, wellness coaching). Preparation for practice in operational psychology
includes review of research in: crisis intervention, hostage negotiation, criminal profiling,
psychological autopsy, and epidemiological factors affecting outcomes of various tactical situations.

3
 SELECTION OF POLICE OFFICERS

Police selection is a process by which police agencies decide on which applicants are suitable for
law enforcement training. The application of psychology to the selection of police officers has long
been a part of the process, usually in the form of a psychological evaluation performed by a licensed
clinical psychologist. The evaluation typically involves considering a selection strategy,
administering a battery of psychological tests, carrying out a personal interview, giving situational
tests, and making a selection recommendation.
“Selecting-in” police applicants who demonstrate the qualities necessary to be successful on the job
is one strategy some psychologists use to evaluate applicants’ suitability for law enforcement
training. A job-task analysis, usually performed by industrial organisational psychologists, is one
way psychologists obtain select-in information about necessary job skills and traits to perform
them. The evolving nature of policing, however, can lead to selecting in applicants who have “no-
longer-needed skills” and traits to perform the job well. Though some psychologists use select-in
criteria to accept police applicants, there is a lack of consensus among police and community
stakeholders on the qualities needed to be successful in the police profession. There is more
agreement on the unwanted qualities of police applicants.
In practice, the selection of suitable police applicants often involves screening out those applicants
who demonstrate undesirable police characteristics. Psychologists are concerned with mental
stability because an unstable officer, not surprisingly, is more likely to perform poorly on the job
than a stable one. Empirical evidence suggesting that a screening-out focus best predicts which
candidates are more likely to experience on-the-job difficulties falls short of being consistent.
Today, many psychologists use an evaluation strategy that screens out psychopathology and selects
in ideal police characteristics. Their select-in and screen-out procedures must (a) adhere to ethical
principles and standards of practice, (b) focus on applicants’ ability to perform necessary job
functions, (c) avoid clinical diagnoses, and (d) use objective and validated tests that specify what
police functions they intend to measure. Psychologists must carry out select-in and screen-out
procedures that include evaluations of mental health in accordance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act, and only after a conditional offer of employment to the police applicant. Prior to
conditional offers, psychologists can use personality tests and other methods that do not include
evaluations of mental health. Both conditional- and pre conditional offer psychological evaluations,
however, focus on screening for suitable applicants.

4
Personal Interview
Personal interviews are a common selection component of psychological evaluations. Psychologists
use police applicants’ interview performance to supplement their psychological test scores. They
usually gather background information obtained from a personal history questionnaire, which
includes questions about work, family, health, and criminal behaviour. Sometimes, police agencies
supply psychologists with applicants’ background investigation reports. Such reports help
psychologists check applicants’ psychological test data.
Interviews can involve asking standardised questions, while allowing psychologists to probe the
responses of police applicants. Standardised interviews let psychologists compare applicants and
check cross-interviewer reliability. The interview process can expose personal characteristics not
revealed by self-report questionnaires; for example, the applicant’s body language during the
interview may show anxiety or tension. Sometimes, psychologists ask questions requested by their
police clients who have uncovered personal characteristics of applicants that are suspect. Personal
interviews, when used with psychological tests, help interpret test data and help answer the complex
question, Who is a suitable applicant?

Situational Tests
Psychologists have used situational tests or role-playing exercises designed to measure a sample of
behaviours the police applicant might use on the job. Situational tests are usually representative of
job-related work conditions. Some preliminary empirical evidence supports the use of situational
tests in the selection of police officers. For example, police applicants who performed well on a
“Clues Test,” which asked them to investigate clues about the disappearance of a hypothetical
employee, also performed well during their recruit training.
Situational tests have a practical appeal. Advanced computer technology allows police trainers to
administer situational training and tests to incumbent officers. For example, an interactive computer
simulation asks police officers how they would respond to different suspect behaviours directed
toward them during an arrest. Officers make decisions, and trainers evaluate them.
Police psychologists appear to be slow at developing situational tests and using computer
technology to administer them as part of the selection process. Law enforcement assessment
centres, however, are typically private agencies that have a history of using situational tests to
evaluate incumbent officers and sometimes police applicants. Situational tests make possible the
observation of hidden values that only appear under conditions that require quick decisions. With
situational tests, psychologists can measure behaviours deliberately concealed from pencil-and-
5
paper tests and personal interviews. Situational tests have a lifelike quality, are time-consuming and
expensive, but are becoming attractive to psychologists.

Psychological Tests
The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), the California Psychological Inventory
(CPI), and the Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI) are the psychological tests commonly used for
screening police applicants. The MMPI and the CPI are general self-report, paper-and-pencil,
personality inventories used to assess the relatively stable characteristics of applicants. They tap a
number of dimensions thought to make up a police applicant’s personality, which can affect his or
her on-the-job performance. The MMPI is a clinical instrument designed to measure dimensions of
deviant personality and maladaptive behaviour. It is composed of 550 true-or-false items. Above-
average scale scores suggest a greater probability of having job performance problems. Some
empirical support has linked MMPI scores with police performance ratings and disciplinary actions
such as termination and suspension from duty. Authors have updated and restandardized the original
MMPI; its current version is the MMPI-2.
The CPI is a nonclinical instrument designed to measure normal personality traits important for
social living and interaction. Test takers complete 480 true-false questions. Empirical studies have
found that below-average scale scores increase the chances of police applicants having job-related
problems such as using illegal drugs, using excessive force, and violating other department rules
and procedures. The authors of the MMPI and the author of the CPI did not design the instruments
to screen police applicants. There are, however, police and public safety reports available for both
the MMPI and the CPI.
In contrast to the MMPI and CPI, the IPI, designed to screen police applicants, predicts normal and
deviant police job performance patterns of test takers. It is a self-report, paper-and-pencil
questionnaire, which consists of 310 true-or-false items developed from more than 2,000
preemployment interviews with law enforcement candidates. Test scales measure behaviours such
as absenteeism, lateness, trouble with the law, depression, suspiciousness, and anxiety. Research has
shown an association between above-average IPI scale scores and negative behaviours by police
recruits, such as lateness, absenteeism, and dereliction of duty during academy training.
Besides the MMPI, CPI, and IPI, psychologists have used other psychological tests, such as the
Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, Five Factor
Personality Test, and Hilson Safety/Security Risk Inventory. Psychologists usually couple
personality tests with cognitive ability tests such as the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test, which have
6
some empirical support for predicting on-the-job and police academy performance. Some
psychologists also use projective tests that ask applicants to respond to unstructured stimuli or
situations, such as completing a series of unfinished sentences or describing a set of inkblots;
however, the use of projective tests in the selection of police officers has declined.
Psychological tests capture a sample of the police applicant’s behaviours. Psychologists generally
administer multiple tests, sometimes three or four. The diagnostic value of these tests is to forecast
what the applicant might say or do under police work conditions. Research has linked personality
test data from the MMPI, CPI, and IPI with police job-related problems and success. However, not
all psychologically suitable police applicants are free from job-related problems. Poor work
performance might be an artefact of attitudes and belief systems that develop after selection. Police
experience and effects of the occupational culture might lead to job-related problems not predicted
by applicants’ psychological profiles. Situational factors might interact with personal factors to
determine some inappropriate job behaviours. In short, psychological test responses, in part, help
select in and screen out police applicants, but applicants might lean toward making favourable
impressions in an effort to appear well suited for police work. Psychological tests together with
personal interviews and situational tests round out the selection of suitable police applicants for law
enforcement training and work.

Current Trends
The Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies and the International Association
of Chiefs of Police have recommended the psychological evaluation of police applicants. Most
police agencies recognise and use the psychological evaluation as one component of the police
selection process, but not all states legislatively mandate it or require applicants to pass it. Those
police agencies that do not use police selection procedures that include a psychological evaluation
are mostly small departments. Some courts have looked at the failure to screen police applicants’
mental fitness as negligence.
Despite the limitations associated with pre-employment psychological evaluations, psychologists
predict a greater number of unsuitable police applicants than one would expect to find by chance
alone. Psychologically evaluating police applicants continues to be an integral and evolving
component of the selection of police officers.

7
 THE VALIDITY OF POLICE SCREENING
Police agencies that psychologically screen their police applicants consider the importance of the
evaluation differently. Some consider it modestly, with other selection procedures frequently used,
such as the civil service exam, physical fitness assessment, background investigation, and personal
interview with police personnel. Most consider it a pass-or-fail component of the selection process.
They no longer consider employing applicants whom psychologists fail. Psychologists’ selection
recommendations are not always simple dichotomies: pass or fail, or suitable or unsuitable for law
enforcement training. There are psychologists who use Likert-type scales to make their
recommendations—3, 4, or 5 points ranging from not suitable to suitable.
A favourable recommendation or endorsement of an applicant by a psychologist does not guarantee
that the applicant will be successful on the job. Selection recommendations are probabilistic events.
They might be wrong because psychologists make their decisions under probable or uncertain
conditions and with limited information that is sometimes imperfect. Psychologists will be incorrect
(or False Accept) if their decision is “suitable” when the applicant’s actual status is “not suitable.”
Psychologists will also be incorrect (or False Reject) if their decision is “not suitable” when the
applicant’s actual status is “suitable.” Best evaluation practices to maximise “True Accept” and
minimise the total number of “False Accept” and “False Reject” errors involve psychologists using
personal interviews and multiple tests and validating them.

THE PURPOSE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL

SCREENING
Pre-employment psychological screening evaluates a number of personality traits to help formulate
an opinion about whether or not a candidate would be a good hiring choice. According to Dr. Gary
Fischler, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Minnesota and a forensic
psychologist whose practice specialises in the evaluation of potential law enforcement officers,
those traits include:
• Impulse control

• General intelligence

8
 • Judgment
• Ability to perform boring or tedious tasks
• Reasonable courage
• Honesty

• Integrity
• Personal bias or lack of bias
• Ability to tolerate stress
• What motivated the candidate to choose law enforcement

• Dependability
• Ability to deal with supervision
• Appropriate attitudes towards sexuality
• Prior drug use
These particular traits represent areas that have been determined over time to be important areas to
explore when evaluating law enforcement candidates. Understandably, law enforcement officer are
held to be high ethical standard and thus the psychological exam serves as one more way to screen
out candidates who may demonstrate unacceptable or undesirable personality traits.

CRISIS AND HOSTAGE NEGOTIATION

Since the 1970s, some clinical psychologists (often referred to as operational psychologists) have
become more actively involved in the resolution of critical incident situations, which are classified
as either hostage situations or crisis intervention situations. Police psychologists are valuable
contributors to the training of tactical and crisis and hostage negotiators. On-scene responsibilities
for operational psychologists include providing professional consultation on the potential
behavioural effects of psychopathology and psychopharmacology, selection of primary and backup
negotiators, suggestions and input regarding the actual negotiation process, and operational
consultation to the tactical commander. Research shows that police departments that employ
psychologists during special operation responses have significantly fewer casualties of both
hostages and hostage takers and more incidents that are peacefully resolved via a negotiated
surrender than by a tactical entry or violent confrontation. Police psychologists, in providing cogent

9
consultation and robust training dynamics to specialised police crisis response teams, have made a
dramatic contribution to reducing the risk of injury and death for all participants in these critical
events.
Within both federal and local law enforcement environments, a hostage situation has defined as any
situation in which individuals are being held via active coercion by another person or people and
demands are being made by the hostage taker(s). These demands are by design established by the
hostage taker(s) to gain compliance as well as establish an inherent power by the hostage taker(s)
over the responding law enforcement agency. Typically, a hostage situation results from the
interruption of a criminal act in which the perpetrators take hostages with an ultimate goal of
forcing law enforcement to comply with their demands for escape. At the other end of the
continuum are hostage situations initiated by a terrorist group whose goal is to communicate their
political agenda via media exposure. The terrorists attempt to actualise this confrontation by using
the hostages as political pawns, as the terrorists have the option of choosing martyrdom for
themselves and/or death to the hostages if their demands are not met.
As hostage negotiation developed over the decades of the 1970s and 1980s, it was observed that the
majority of negotiator incidents were either initiated by an individual or within some family dyad.
As such, the typical negotiator intervention entailed interaction with a barricaded subject, a suicidal
individual, or a couple who were engaged in a violent domestic confrontation. These incidents
required the application of crisis-intervention techniques and active listening skills. The overall
principle in crisis negotiation is that time is on the side of the negotiator in that the passage of time
will provide a “cooling off” period for the individual who is seen as a victim rather than as a
perpetrator. Over time, the emotional lability of the individual will dissipate, which allows for the
introduction of active listening techniques by the negotiator. This system of communication
provides a spectrum of responses that facilitate viable, objective problem-solving options to the
individual in crisis.

Team Composition and Tactics

A hostage/crisis negotiation event is a complicated and potentially dangerous undertaking for any
law enforcement agency. Almost all these situations demand the response of a two-pronged team,
the special weapons and tactics team (SWAT). The SWAT team consists of a heavily armed and
specially trained group of police officers, while the second component of the team is the group of
police negotiators. The primary function of the tactical team is for the protection of the SWAT team,
especially the negotiators, the victims of the event, the general public, hostages (if any), and, lastly,
10
the subject(s). The tactical team is also responsible for initiating any proactive or reactive options
during the progression of the event. The negotiator team is responsible for the acquisition of any on-
scene information deemed relevant to both the tactical and negotiator teams. The second primary
function of the negotiators is, obviously, the active negotiation process.
On the arrival of the SWAT team, the tactical members will diligently establish an inner perimeter
that allows for the establishment of a safe (within the constraints of the actual situation)
environment for the tactical operations centre (TOC). The TOC is the central decision and
command area for the supervisory personnel. The TOC consists of the tactical commander, typically
a lieutenant; a tactical team leader (sergeant); a negotiator team leader (lieutenant or sergeant); and
the police psychologist. These individuals have been trained in the dynamics of critical events and
usually are certified tactical commanders, with the police psychologist having received at least 80
hours in specialised courses in hostage and crisis negotiation. In major metropolitan police
departments, such command and supervisory personnel have responded to more than 300 to 1,200
of these SWAT callouts to date. The responsibility of the TOC is to initially determine if the
presence of the SWAT team at the specific scene is legal and/or necessary. A second task is to
develop an initial action plan. Third, the TOC is responsible for maintaining an ongoing acceptable
and risk-effective course of action. Within this action plan are typically four options: immediate
assault on the location, selected sniper fire (an exigent situation to prevent the loss of life to
innocent participants), introduction of chemical agents, and a negotiation process. It should be noted
that these four options are fluid in nature and can be used in combination and in no specific order.
The decision process to use any option is predicated on the anticipated outcome following the
initiation of any one or more of these actions.
Most negotiation teams consist of a lead and backup negotiator, an electronics technician/negotiator,
several support negotiators, a team leader, and a mental health consultant. Unless there is an exigent
situation, the mental health consultant is never the lead negotiator (for ethical reasons), nor does just
one negotiator initiate and maintain the negotiation process (for safety reasons). The lead negotiator
is the police officer responsible for speaking directly to the subject and for developing and
maintaining active listening skills and verbal tactics that will increase the likelihood for a successful
resolution of the crisis. The most effective negotiators are those who are the best listeners, for it is
only through listening that the negotiator will begin to understand and emotionally connect with the
subject. The secondary negotiator is responsible for physically protecting (typically by preventing
the lead negotiator from gradually placing his body and head in the line of fire while distracted by
the negotiation process) the lead negotiator, monitoring the radio frequency, and listening to the
11
negotiation process and relaying information and suggestions (typically made by the mental health
professional) back to the lead negotiator. If necessary, during a protracted negotiation process, the
backup negotiator may relieve the primary negotiator. The electronics technician/negotiator is
responsible for maintaining all negotiator equipment, setting up all the required equipment at the
scene, and interfacing with local telephone companies and national cellular companies, as well as
coordinating the dispatch and arrival of the local power/utility company crew (in the event the
tactical commander decides to cut the electrical power in the subject dwelling). The support
negotiators are responsible for gathering all relevant information regarding the subjects (e.g.,
physical description, clothing, weapons, prescription/nonprescription medications, contact phone
numbers, and arrest and psychiatric history). This is done via records checks and interviewing on-
scene family members, friends, and witnesses. The support negotiators also maintain a running log
of times and relevant events during the SWAT callout. A final responsibility of the support
negotiators is to interview/debrief any hostages who are released during a hostage situation. The
negotiator team leader assists the mental health consultant in the assignment of team responsibilities
for the specific callout as well as providing consultation at the TOC. The mental health consultant
provides assistance to the negotiator team leader in negotiator assignments, provides psychological
personality assessment, psychotropic consultation, monitors negotiator team performance and stress
reactions, and provides dispositional consultation to the TOC.
Once the team responsibilities are determined, the TOC commander, tactical and negotiator team
leaders, and the mental health consultant determine the communication mode by which the primary
negotiator will attempt to make contact with the subject. This decision is predicated on officer
safety first and the type of crisis situation. There are four means by which to communicate with the
subject: police vehicle public address (PA) system, parabolic PA, telephone (land-line, cell phone,
throw phone), or voice to voice. If the situation is a criminal, barricaded subject with no hostages,
then either PA system is typically used for officer safety as well as the commanding tone of the PA.
For all other situations, it is preferable to use some form of phone system and optimally establish
tactical presence to support the use of voice to voice (the negotiator and subject are close enough to
one another to communicate by simply speaking in a conversational tone to one another) for the
resolution phase.

12
The Effects of Time and the Stockholm Syndrome
Hostage and crisis negotiation is an extremely complicated process incorporating three basic
principles. First is the concept of time, in which, during most critical events, the extension of time
invariably works in favour of successful resolution. During this so-called 60- to 90-minute rule, the
passage of time allows for the ventilation of extreme emotional responses (for the subjects,
hostages, and police officers). This dissipation of emotion allows for the introduction of more
logical and rational problem solving, the influence of physiological needs, as well as, in the hostage
situation, the opportunity for the hostages to escape.
However, it should never be assumed that hostages, if given the opportunity, will proactively initiate
an escape or will assist the SWAT team in the successful resolution of the crisis. The underlying
process, which is extremely powerful in most hostage situations, has become known as the
Stockholm syndrome. This gradually occurs as a natural process of the passage of time (typically
over hours and days); however, if there is significant violence at the onset of the taking of hostages,
this syndrome compels an immediate and powerful influence. This syndrome compels one of the
following behaviours: The hostages will begin to have positive feelings toward the hostage takers,
the hostages will begin to develop negative feelings toward law enforcement, and the hostage takers
will begin to develop positive feelings toward their hostages. The effect of the Stockholm syndrome
on the negotiation process is rather consistent for the hostage takers and the hostages. The positive
dynamic is that as time elapses, and if the hostage takers have begun to develop positive feelings
toward their hostages, they are actually less likely to harm, much less kill, their hostages, whom
they now begin to see as humans and not just objects for barter. However, negative aspects include
the hostages’ inability to self-initiate their escape, communication by hostages of unreliable
information to the negotiators either on release or during captivity, or hostages’ interference with the
rescue operation. In rare cases, if the Stockholm syndrome is not severe, some hostages have been
known to exaggerate the motives and weaponry of the hostage takers to the negotiators, with the
intent of having the SWAT team conclude the hostage takers were more dangerous than in fact they
were, and the tactical team eventually would feel compelled to initiate an active entry and perhaps
kill the hostage takers.

13
The Influence of Power Tactics and Face-Saving
The second component in the negotiation process is incremental display of power, in the hope of
avoiding its actual use during the negotiation process. A highly visible tactical containment
combined with the third component, the presentation of face-saving issues, becomes the most
integral component of the negotiation process. The process of negotiation and active listening
assumes that the interchange among individuals even within a crisis situation possesses rewards and
costs for both factions. The goal is to maximise mutual benefits while concurrently minimizing
costs—an interaction in which the lead negotiator emphasises a process of quid pro quo (something
for something). Face-saving techniques allow both law enforcement and the subjects to maintain
some semblance of control while agreeing on options of mutual gain. For example, a barricaded
subject may have agreed to resolve the crisis by meeting the tactical officers outside his home, but
the media have positioned their cameras where he will easily be videotaped being taken into
custody. A face-saving negotiation is for both the TOC personnel and the subject to agree that he or
she will be taken into custody at the back of his or her home to avoid the humiliation of his or her
arrest being filmed by the local media.

Active Listening and the Resolution Process

The successful negotiator is highly skilled in active listening, the ability to focus on what the
subject is speaking and to accurately process not only what the subject is saying but also the
accurate emotional content that is actually being communicated. In other words, active listening is a
technique to maximise an empathic exchange between the negotiator and the subject. There are 14
identified communications techniques within the active listening process. Experience has
established that the most effective techniques are those of clarification and paraphrasing, primary-
level empathy, and especially self-disclosure. Clarification and paraphrasing are most typically used
during the initial contacts with the subject so that during these more emotionally laden contacts, the
likelihood of miscommunication and misunderstanding is minimised. For example,
Negotiator: By “old lady,” do you mean your wife? Subject: Yeah, that’s right, her. Negotiator: So,
it sounds like things have been going very badly between you two today. Now, over time, the
negotiator will begin to insert primary-level empathy and self-disclosure: Negotiator: Boy, it sure
sounds like everything appears to be falling apart, and you’re pretty angry and scared. Subject:
Yeah, but you really don’t know what it’s like for me now! Negotiator: Maybe, maybe not, but I
know that I was feeling really hurt and scared when I was going through my divorce a few years
ago.
14
The relatively long process of establishing an empathic rapport between the lead negotiator and the
subject is known as the “hook.” The hook is the point at which the negotiator has established a
position of trust with the subject and is now able to lead the subject through the concrete process of
either releasing hostages and/or being taken into custody. In all situations, once the subject is taken
into custody by the SWAT team, the individual is arrested and taken to jail or, in the case of a crisis
situation (suicidal subject), he or she is transported to the nearest crisis response unit.
The negotiation process for hostage and barricade incidents is the responsibility of highly trained
and experienced SWAT teams. Communication, a clearly articulated and flexible plan, creativity,
and patience are the key components predictive of a successful outcome. The negotiator’s
application of active listening skills and the demonstration of empathic communication are critical
skills for the successful resolution of critical incidents.

POLICE STRESS & NEGATIVE

CONSEQUENCES
The police occupation has long been recognized as a stressful occupation (Kroes, 1976; Maslach &
Jackson, 1979; Haarr & Morash, 1999; Morash, Haarr, & Kwak, 2006; Reiser, 1974; Stinchcomb,
2004; Violanti, 1980). Previous studies have examined levels of police stress, sources of police
stress, and the negative effects of untreated stress. Based on the volumes of research in the area of
police stress, we know that police stress emanates from a variety of sources. While the terminology
may differ between studies, the majority of studies have focused on stress arising from one of two
broad categories: operational stressors and organizational stressors.
Operational stressors are comprised of stress resulting from the demands and duties of the
occupation. These may include shiftwork, overtime, excessive paperwork, exposure to job-related
violence and critical-incidents (Anshel, Robertson, & Caputi, 1997; Atkinson-Tovar, 2003; Collins
& Gibbs, 2003; Stevens, Muller, & Kendall, 2005; Violanti & Aron, 1995b; Waters & Ussery,
2007). Critical-incident stress has been described as “any situation faced by emergency services
personnel that causes them to experience unusually strong emotional reactions which have the
potentiality to interfere with their ability at the scene, or later generates unusually strong feelings in
the emergency services worker” (Mitchell, 1983, p. 36). Critical-incidents may include officer-

15
involved shootings, response to multiple death incidents, attendance at grisly crime scenes, or
traumatic death of a child. While critical-incidents are rare, they are considered acute stressors that
are have the potential to overwhelm an individual’s natural ability to cope (Mitchell & Bray, 1990).
Some researchers find that the emphasis on occupational stressors, particularly critical-incidents,
has reduced the focus on a more persistent and ever-present area of police stress, organisational
stressors (Collins & Gibbs, 2003; Copes, 2005; Stinchcomb, 2004)
Organizational stressors are those that arise from within the organization and stem from
interpersonal relationships within the hierarchical and quasi-military nature of the police
organization. Organizational stressors may include pressure from supervisors, inadequate
administrative support, lack of promotional opportunities, arbitrary and inconsistent disciplinary
procedures, and perceived favoritism in assignments (Beehr, Johnson, & Nievia, 1995; Copes,
2005; Liberman et al., 2002; McCarty, Zhao, & Garland, 2007; Stinchcomb, 2004; Violanti, 2011;
Violanti & Aron, 1995a). Numerous studies have indicated that organizational factors may actually
have a stronger overall impact on officer stress than the inherent dangers of the occupation (Collins
& Gibbs, 2003; Graf, 1986; Maguen et al., 2009; Morash et al., 2006; Norvell, Belles, & Hills,
1988; Violanti & Aron, 1993, 1995a).
It should be noted that while occupational and organisational stressors are the most often studied
categories, other areas of stress remain. Regardless of the source of the stress, studies have clearly
demonstrated negative consequences of stress in the lives of police officers.

Negative Consequences
The literature has thoroughly documented negative consequences of police stress. Negative
consequences of police stress are generally separated into three major areas: psychological and
mental disorders, behavioural issues, and physical health concerns.
A number of studies have found that police officers have high rates of post-traumatic stress disorder
(Fox et al., 2012; Green, 2004; Kureczka, 1996; Mann & Neece, 1990; Stephens & Long, 1999).
One study concluded that 12%-35% of police suffer from PTSD (Stephens & Long, 1999). Another
found PTSD to be the fifth most common problem presented to police psychologists (Mann &
Neece, 1990). Other psychological or mental issues that have been referenced in the literature on
police stress include “burnout” (Burke & Deszca, 1986; Ellison, 2004; Golembiewski & Kim, 1990;
Martinussen et al., 2007; Sterns & Moore, 1993; Walsh et al., 2012) and depression (Hart et al.,
1994; Hartley et al., 2011; Violanti & Aron, 1993).

16
Researchers have concluded that the law enforcement population suffers from higher than average
rates of domestic problems, substance abuse, and suicide (Atkinson-Tovar, 2003; Barron, 2010;
Copes, 2005; Cross & Ashley, 2004; O’Hara et al., 2013; Violanti et al., 2012; Violanti et al., 1986).
As early as 1971, research indicated that the suicide rate for police was the second highest out of 36
occupations (Labovitz & Hagedorn, 1971). Others have found a police suicide rate higher than that
of the general public (Aamodt & Stalnaker, 2001; Violanti et al., 1986). There is some evidence that
the actual suicide rate is higher than reported as police officer suicides tend to be misclassified as
accidental or undetermined deaths (Violanti, 2010).
Like suicide, early studies have concluded that police officers have higher than average rates of
divorce (Durner, Kroeker, Miller, & Reynolds, 1975). However, later empirical assessments of law
enforcement divorce have found that police actually have lower rates when compared to the
national average (Niederhoffer & Niederhoffer, 1978; Terry, 1981) and in comparison to other
occupations (McCoy & Aamodt, 2009; Terry, 1981). Several studies have found that approximately
40% of American police families have experienced domestic violence(Johnson et al., 2005; Neidig
et al., 1992). While studies on divorce and domestic violence are sometimes contradictory and
inconclusive, practitioners report that the majority of non-mandated referral from police agencies is
in relation to family and relationship problems (Miller, 2007; Woody, 2007).
Studies indicate that the police culture is conducive to a high level of alcohol consumption (Cross &
Ashley, 2004; Kohan & O’Connor, 2002; Miller, 2005; Paton & Violanti, 1997; Paton et al., 1999;
Violanti et al., 1983, 1985). There is extensive evidence to suggest that drinking by police officers is
often a maladaptive coping mechanism in response to stress (Carter, 1990; Carter & Stephens,
1988; Violanti et al., 1986; Wagner & Brzeczek, 1983).
The literature is replete with data on the harmful effects of stress on the physical health of police
officers. Studies of police populations have found that police tend to suffer from obesity,
cardiovascular, and gastrointestinal disorders (Collins & Gibbs, 2003; Hartley et al., 2011;
Liberman et al., 2002; Violanti et al., 1986). A recent study suggests that police officers also have
increased risk for certain types of cancers (Wirth et al., 2014). There is evidence that these health
problems decrease lifetime expectancies of individuals in the occupation of police officer (Violanti,
Vena, & Petralia, 1998). A paradox exists where police officers are expected to start their careers in
top physical and psychological condition, but little is done in most police departments to assure that
police officers’ health and welfare is maintained throughout his or her career.

17
 ISSUES IN POLICE PSYCHOLOGY

Police brutality
Police brutality oftentimes falls under the category of excessive force or unreasonable force.
Excessive force occurs in any situation where a government official who is allowed to use force
against other people uses too much force. Remember that a police officer is allowed to use force as
long as it is reasonably necessary. The issue occurs when there are not grounds for force or the force
gets escalated to an inappropriate level.
If a conflict occurs, a police officer should use gradual methods to resolve the situation. Ideally, a
police officer won’t need to use force at all. Their mere presence or verbal interactions with a
suspect would be enough to resolve any issues. This is oftentimes what happens.
But, if conflict persists, the police officer might escalate to what is known as “empty hand control”.
This means that the officer uses their bodily force to resolve a situation, (ex. grabbing or holding a
suspect).
In most situations, this is all the force that is needed for the police officer to do their job. However,
if a threat persists, the police officer might then use less lethal weapons such as a taser, a club, or a
police dog to resolve the situation. Lethal weapons such as firearms are used as a last resort.
Sometimes excessive force is clearcut – for example, if a police officer shoots at a person who is
cooperating and who has their hands in the air. Other times, it is harder to determine if the force that
a police officer was necessary or excessive.

Why Does Excessive Force Occur?

From Rodney King in the 1990’s to Abner Louima in the 2000’s to Eric Garner and Michael Brown
in 2014, ordinary citizens have strong feelings regarding these incidents.We often hear about issues
of police brutality in the news. Despite these issues, many people still believe that these are
unfortunate but rare instances that do not represent the norm. However, there are many reasons why
excessive force and police brutality might be systemic problems instead of the case of “a few bad
eggs”.
One systemic issue is that most departments do not provide adequate training for their officers. A
few weeks of training cannot prepare police officers for the issues that they might face when out in
the field. Accidents happen when people do not properly know how to handle a situation.

18
In addition, consequences for excessive force are oftentimes not significant enough to deter that
behaviour. Most administrative consequences are minimal.The majority of federal police brutality
cases never even make it to trial. Without serious consequences, officers are more likely to display
inappropriate behaviour.
Police officers themselves admit to excessive force. A studyconducted by the Department of Justice
found that 84% of police officers surveyed say they have seen colleagues use excessive force. Over
60% also admit that they do not always report police brutality.
Preventing Police Brutality
If we want to stop police brutality, there are a lot of steps that can be taken. First of all, filming
officers while they are on the job helps them maintain professional. It will also help to better
educate and better diversify our police force.
But what are some things that you can do to reduce your risk of being a victim of police brutality? If
you have an encounter with the police, here are a few things to do:
• Remain calm and be respectful to the officer. Set the tone early that you will cooperate and
that you aren’t a threat.
• Listen carefully to the officer and follow their instructions.

• Show the officer your hands at all times. If you need to reach for something, tell the officer
what you are doing and ask for permission (ex. “My car registration is in the glove
compartment, is it ok if I reach in there to get it?”)

Do “body cams” worn by police officers offer a solution to

ending police misconduct?
MICHAEL WHITE: Police officer body-worn cameras (BWCs) are not a silver bullet. But the
technology can serve as an important tool in the larger package of accountability mechanisms that a
department can put in place. Relatedly, the technology may serve as a solution to the split-second
syndrome. Police-citizen encounters are transactional events, with each participant making
decisions and responding to the decisions of the other participant. As a result, use of force by a
police officer is the culmination of a series of earlier actions and reactions. However, review of
force incidents traditionally ignores earlier stages of an encounter and focuses entirely on the final-
frame decision. James Fyfe called this the split-second syndrome, and he argued that this narrow
focus excuses unnecessary violence resulting from poor decisions made by officers at earlier stages
of the encounter. BWCs represent an opportunity to overcome the split-second syndrome because
the technology allows for a full review of all decisions made by the officer during an encounter,
from start to finish.
19
Police Interrogation and Confessions
When someone is suspected of committing a crime, one of the most effective ways to convict the
individual is to present a confession from him or her admitting to the crime.
This confession is an extremely damaging piece of evidence. It can be difficult for a criminal
defendant to later recant a confession or try to explain it away to a judge or jury. People have a hard
time understanding why someone would confess to committing a crime he or she had not
committed.

Assessing the Legitimacy of a Confession

A confession can only be admitted into evidence if it was a confession that was voluntarily and
knowingly made. If the defendant challenges the confession, the court assesses the circumstances
surrounding the confession, including the length of the interrogation, the tactics law enforcement
used to obtain the confession and factors specific to the defendant, such as his or her age, level of

education and intelligence.

Tactics to Get Confessions

Due to the potential strength of obtaining a confession, law enforcement may be encouraged to try a
number of different tactics to extract a confession. However, many of these tactics often extract
false confessions.

Types of False Confessions

There are a number of different types of false confessions. These include:

Voluntary False Confessions

These are confessions that a person makes that do not involve any type of police interrogation. For
example, a person may walk into a police station and confess to making a crime without any
encouragement from law enforcement. These types of confessions are more common in cases
involving notorious crimes. These confessions were believed to be at play in the Lindbergh baby
kidnapping of 1932. It is estimated that more than 200 people falsely confessions to the crime.
Likewise, the JonBenet Ramsey case was believed to involve a false confession. Many false
confessions are made during highly publicised criminal investigations, potentially because the

person making the confession wants the notoriety or wants to share the public spotlight.

20
Coerced Confessions
A coerced confession is one in which a person makes a confession due to police coercion. This is
how many false confessions are made. In order to end the interrogation, individuals may confess,
wrongly thinking that if they just confess, they will be able to go home. There may be other ways
that the confession is coerced, such as the suspect being afraid due to police intimidation or because
they are promised some advantage by police that police cannot really deliver, such as a lighter
sentence.
This type of confession is premised on there being an inconsistency between how a person’s public
behaviour is perceived and private opinion. The person who made the confession knows that he or
she is actually innocent but makes an outward confession anyway. In some situations, people may
make a confession because they are raised to be compliant with authority figures. One test showed
that many people knowingly gave a wrong answer to avoid being singled out. Add the
manipulation, threats, sleep deprivation, deprivation of food and drink and other factors common in

police interrogations.

Tortured Confessions
In rare instances, confessions are the result of torture treatment. A person may be deprived of food,
drink or sleep. He or she may be subject to police brutality. They may be tortured in other ways.
While such tactics are not supposed to be present in modern interrogations in this country, they are
sometimes used.
Coerced-Internalised Confessions
In some situations involving false confessions are coerced, the defendant truly believes that he or
she actually committed the crime. The things that the law enforcement officer says are internalised
in the mind of the suspect. Various reactions may arise when a person is interrogated and
undergoing a tremendous amount of stress. How a person reacts in a stressful situation depends on
the particular temperament of the individual. Individuals who are highly suggestible may start to
doubt themselves and may become confused about what actually occurred, especially when a
confident law enforcement officer is front of him or her.

Police Corruption
CRASH stands for 'Community Resources Against Street Hoodlums' and was an elite anti-gang
unit. It was part of the Los Angeles Police Department until a 1999 investigation of nearly 70
officers found the unit was involved in drug sales, the theft of money from drug dealers, assaults,
fabricated arrests and false police reports. Dozens of criminal convictions attributed to CRASH

21
were overturned. Many CRASH officers were convicted of crimes themselves, and the city paid
over $40 million to settle civil lawsuits. It was one of the worst police corruption scandals in U.S.
history.
Narrowly defined, corruption refers to police personnel who use their position and authority for
personal rather than public benefit. More broadly, corruption refers to any violation of rules even
when there is no personal gain, as in perjury, physical abuse of prisoners, sexual misconduct,
robbery, and racial profiling. The Los Angeles Police Department issued a report by a board of
inquiry into the “Ramparts Area Corruption Incident” in 2000, prompted by allegations of bank
robbery, false arrest and beating of a handcuffed suspect, and theft of cocaine from the police
property room. For example, the CRASH officers had access to drugs and drug money because of
their positions as anti-gang officers.
Police corruption hurts both law enforcement and the community. Scandals, like the CRASH one,
damage the police's public image and undermine a community's trust of law enforcement. Crime
flourishes in these communities, because criminal activity is protected rather than abated. As a
result, the protected criminal activities often contribute to organised crime rings. This is because the
protected activities, like drug dealing or prostitution, quickly become lucrative sources of income
for all involved.

Types of Corruption
There are many different types of police corruption. Let's take a look at some of the most common
forms. In the context of police corruption, bribery is giving or receiving any item of value in order
to influence an officer. For instance, an officer might accept money in exchange for not arresting a
suspect. It might help to remember that a bribe is usually money.
Extortion is also somewhat common and is similar to bribery. Extortion is threatening someone in
order to obtain money or property. Here, an officer might threaten to have someone falsely
prosecuted if that person doesn't pay the officer. Just remember that to extort means to threaten.
Extortion always involves a threat.
Many police corruption investigations have also uncovered officers dealing in stolen goods and
selling drugs. Officers have access to these items through their investigations. Once police
confiscate certain items as evidence, corrupt officers find that they can easily profit by reselling
those items.

22
Counteracting and Preventing Corruption
Preventing corruption completely is a tall order. However, steps can be taken to reduce it
significantly. There are a few fundamental ideas that can be implemented that can, by their very
nature, curb corruption. The three areas that need attention are the officer training, personal
characters, and the incentives program. It is my theory that following all or some of these ideas
would have changed the situation in Philadelphia.
The first step is to hire police officers of good character, which is difficult for a number of reasons.
Officers are human. Giving a person the kind of power a policeman has can overwhelm one. It is
predictable what can happen, as history illustrates so well. What is unpredictable with any kind of
reliability is what will happen to a given individual. That is the problem, because that is ideal
information to know. It is predictable that some officers will be corrupt. It is also predictable that a
large majority will do the job they were hired to do, and do it honestly.
Stricter screening methods need to be implemented to decrease the chance that a potential hire will
become corrupt. If he can successfully complete all the integrity obstacles, then it becomes more
likely that he will be honest. Unfortunately, because policemen are human, no department has been
successful in creating test that will reliably predict officer conduct. However, the department can
reinforce ethical behaviour by example, just like it can reinforce the idea that the Academy does not
know what it is like on the streets.
Once an officer is hired, the department should do all it can to promote ethics on the job. Officer
safety is extremely important. If police are incapacitated, who will be left to protect the citizenry in
the future? Along with such indoctrination, ethical indoctrination is paramount. The department
must understand that the citizens trust the police to be ethical, and a breach of that trust is unjust.
Further, it is not practical to act unethically. People eye the police and their behaviour constantly.
Corruption in the force makes it easier for a citizen to rationalise acting unlawfully, which just
creates more work for the police. If a police officer, who is allegedly the pillar of the law, can defy
it, why cannot the citizens who pay for the police services? The credibility of the police vanishes.
A corrupt police officer cannot very well express effectively why citizens should obey the law, for
he has no consistency and thus no credibility.

23
Gender and Ethnic minority issue
One of the responses to the recent police-involved killings of unarmed black men has been a call for
police departments to diversify. If police forces were more racially diverse, do you think this would
alleviate tensions between police and communities?
MICHAEL WHITE: Racial diversity in a police department is important. The Commission on
Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA) recommends that a police department be
representative of the community it serves. On conceptual and perceptual levels, the arguments
favouring representativeness are persuasive. Representativeness can demonstrate to a minority
community that their police department cares about their needs, interests and well-being. Perception
matters a great deal in this regard. The conceptual arguments are equally compelling. Presumably,
minority officers will have a better understanding of the cultural norms and beliefs of the residents
in a minority neighbourhood. Presumably, citizens will feel better about police officers who look
and think like them; and who have an understanding of the issues in their community. Presumably,
minority officers will be better able to manage difficult encounters with citizens of their own race,
because of their more intimate understanding of the background, history and experiences of the
people in those minority neighbourhoods who may require police service. Though the empirical
evidence supporting these perceptual and conceptual arguments is mixed, police departments should
be racially and ethnically diverse.
AMANDA GELLER: Diversity among police officers can certainly help improve community
relationships on some fronts – resolving linguistic challenges in immigrant communities, for
example. To the extent that officers have personal ties to the communities they police, that can also
help to establish and reinforce community trust. But diversity alone won’t alleviate tensions if the
officers are behaving in ways that the community finds illegitimate. In order to alleviate police-
community tensions, community members will need to believe that the police will deal with them in
a constitutional way, and treat them with respect.
RONALD WEITZER: Racial diversification of police departments is endorsed by the vast majority
of Americans. Some departments have made substantial progress in diversification, but many others
are out of sync with the local population.Officers of different racial backgrounds generally behave
similarly when they interact with members of the public. They are trained similarly and differ little
in performing their duties. But because diversification is popular with the public, it can have
intangible, symbolic benefits: helping to build trust and confidence in the police. A police
department that reflects the composition of the local population can enhance its reputation and
status among residents. A diverse police force can also help to decrease the sense that people are
24
being stopped and questioned solely because of their race. In a majority-black city like Ferguson,
where 50 of the 53 officers are white, it is not surprising that African Americans who are stopped
might feel like they have been racially profiled.
ROBERT KANE: Diversity is crucial to achieve a well functioning police department. Indeed, as
police departments diversify, they tend to become better “behaved” (that is, organisational rates of
misconduct decline). To reap the full benefits of diversity, however, police agencies must open all
ranks (e.g., detective, supervisory, command, administrative) to minority officers, so that minority
officer influence doesn’t just come from the bottom-up, but also from the top-down in the form of
policies, practices, and procedures. This shift in organizational culture can only occur if minority
officers advance beyond line level ranks.

The Ethics of Police Deception

Deception can occur in any or all three stages of the detecting process–investigation, interrogation,
and court testimony.In the investigation phase of a case police are permitted by the courts to engage
in deception and are trained to do so.The line between what is acceptable and what is not is that of
entrapment–the deception may be employed to up to the point that an ‘…agent of the government
initiates a course of action that induces an otherwise innocent person to commit a crime in order
that the government may then prosecute.It is being recognised that these deceptive practices will be
used against those who are reasonably suspected of engaging in criminal behaviour or otherwise
acting in an unjust manner–people who are willing to do anything they can to avoid being detected
and made accountable for their crimes . Criminals have every reason to expect that force and
deception will be used against them, as they employ it in their own escape . The police officer in
this situation must take several things into account including what sorts of methods are permissible
and what the costs are.
Interrogation tactics employing deception vary widely, though they all represent the adversarial
nature of this phase of a case. The goal of an interrogation or criminal interview is to obtain factual
information about a crime and the confession of the person responsible for it. Some methods seem
clearly illegal, like those that deny or distort the meanings of the Miranda rules that guarantee at
least certain minimum conditions of conduct. Others may take the form of distorting the seriousness
of the crime–engaging in victim blame or suggesting to a murder suspect that, for example, the
victim is still alive. Threats or promises may also be opportunities for deception–telling a suspect

25
that confessing will result in less jail time or engaging in the good cop/bad cop method of
questioning.
Testimonial deception may be undertaken for any number of reasons, including cases where the
motivation is to conceal criminal behaviour on the part of the investigator or cover up investigative
incompetence
Police placebos are lies commonly told by police officers for the benefit of the person being lied to.
Examples of placebos can be as simple as telling a homeowner who was burglarised that the
burglary was probably committed by a small-time crook who picked the house at random when the
officer can clearly see that the crime was effected by a professional housebreaker who likely
scouted it out ahead of time or telling the family of a car accident fatality that their relative died
instantly and painlessly when his experience as a highway patrolmen indicates otherwise. Others
may be more elaborate– a case where a police sergeant tells two brothers, who are likely
schizophrenic that he has called Washington, D.C. and requested a team of highly trained invisible
agents who deal exclusively with the sorts of invisible attackers that are bothering them. These
placebos are told for the purpose of easing a person’s fears and work only so long as the credibility
of the deceiver is intact. To be morally justifiable the placebo must be given partly for the benefit of
the person being lied to.
Blue-lies are told to control a person, not offer comfort or help, as was the case with police
placebos. Officers derive the legitimacy of this deceptive practice from a general right to take
control of an emergency situation. Blue-lies are always risky–both legally and situationally–if there
is another more efficient method available, lying may simply be a stupid choice. Occasionally
police may feel compelled to lie and pursue non-legal intervention when the legal legitimacy
required to do the work is somehow lacking . In other cases, though, employing deception is
preferred to using physical force An example of a blue-lie involves a police officer telling an
abortion clinic protester that he is recovering from surgery and would be caused great pain if he
were to have to pick her up and carry her from the building, prompting the woman to agree to walk
out with them . Brooks offers a scenario in which the police falsely tell a newspaper that they have
disrupted a major drug supplier in an effort to use the resulting news report to complete an
undercover sting operation . So blue-lies may exert control directly or indirectly over a suspect.

26
 CONCLUSION
Police psychologists have a wide range of duties, but they’re most commonly hired to perform one
of four tasks: assessments, fitness for duty evaluations, clinical interventions, and operational
support.
Police psychologists have been used for decades to screen candidates who apply for jobs as police
or public safety officers. Obviously, police departments must apply very high standards when hiring
new personnel, but in actual practice, this is easier said than done. Since the mid-20th century, law
enforcement departments have availed themselves of psychologists to assess the suitability of
potential candidates. Police psychologists recommend those candidates who appear to be a
satisfactory psychological match and rule out those who are inappropriate – or who may even be
dangerous in the position.
Evaluations for fitness for duty take place in a wide range of workplace settings, such as
construction or medicine, but in no situation are these evaluations more important than in law
enforcement. Officers who take time off, suffer a physical or mental setback, or who perform poorly
must be examined to determine whether they are able to resume their duties. Sometimes, they are
not mentally or physically sound, possibly because they are incapable of going back to work after a
distressing incident, or because they are experiencing difficulties in another area of their lives that
compromises their ability to behave safely and professionally.
Police psychologists also are frequently called in for clinical interventions. Because traumatizing
events are much more likely to occur in police work than in other jobs, police psychologists stay
busy, offering short-term behavioral treatments to help traumatized police officers cope with their
experiences. They also may intervene to help shell-shocked victims or vulnerable witnesses assist in
investigations, and they frequently assist family members of both officers and victims in learning
how to respond to stressors in a healthy manner.
Lastly, police psychologists are called upon to provide operational support. For instance, they often
assist with the paperwork involved in the staffing, interviewing, hiring, evaluating, and training
process of law enforcement officers.

27