Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management

The effects of aggressive policing of disorder on serious crime

Kenneth J. Novak Jennifer L. Hartman Alexander M. Holsinger Michael G. Turner
Article information:
To cite this document:
Kenneth J. Novak Jennifer L. Hartman Alexander M. Holsinger Michael G. Turner, (1999),"The effects of
aggressive policing of disorder on serious crime", Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies &
Management, Vol. 22 Iss 2 pp. 171 - 194
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13639519910271229
Downloaded on: 27 November 2016, At: 05:58 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 56 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1262 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(1996),"The effects of aggressive policing: the Dayton traffic enforcement experiment", American Journal of
Police, Vol. 15 Iss 3 pp. 45-64 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07358549610129622
(1998),"Citizen perceptions of community policing: are attitudes toward police important?", Policing:
An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, Vol. 21 Iss 3 pp. 547-561 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/13639519810228822

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:514603 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The effects of aggressive Effects of
aggressive
policing of disorder policing

on serious crime
Kenneth J. Novak 171
Department of Sociology/Administration of Justice,
University of Missouri, Kansas City, Missouri
Jennifer L. Hartman
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

College of Criminal Justice, Northeastern University, Boston,

Massachusetts
Alexander M. Holsinger
Department of Sociology/Administration of Justice,
University of Missouri, Kansas City, Missouri and
Michael G. Turner
College of Criminal Justice, Northeastern University, Boston,
Massachusetts
Keywords Crime, Enforcement, Police
Abstract This paper adds to a growing body of research which explores the relationship between
aggressive police strategies and serious crime. For one month, police enforced disorder crime in a
small section of one community. An interrupted time series analysis was utilized to evaluate the
effects of this intervention on robbery and aggravated burglary in a target area and a control
area. The strategy was found to be unrelated to levels of aggravated burglary and robbery in the
target area. There was no spatial displacement of crime. Explanations for the findings are offered.

Introduction
The relationship between police activities and crime has been researched
extensively in the past several decades. Related issues include patrol allocation
(Kelling et al., 1974; Larson, 1975), detective effectiveness (Brandl and Frank,
1994; Greenwood and Petersilia, 1975), and one versus two officer cars
(Boydstun et al., 1977; Kaplan, 1979; Kessler, 1985). In addition, specific police
initiatives such as crackdowns (Kleiman, 1988; Sherman, 1990; Zimmer, 1993),
fencing stings (Langworthy, 1989), domestic assault (Dunford et al., 1990;
Sherman, 1992; Sherman and Berk, 1984) and community policing (Greene and
Mastrofski, 1988; Kratcoski and Dukes, 1995; Rosenbaum, 1994) have received
equal attention. Despite our current understanding of allocating police
resources, the debate continues over the most efficient means by which to
implement police crime reduction strategies.
A previous version of this paper was presented at the 1997 meetings of the Academy of
Criminal Justice Sciences in Louisville, Kentucky. The authors would like to express thanks to Policing: An International Journal of
Police Strategies & Management,
Mitchell B. Chamlin for his suggestions on earlier drafts, as well as Editor, Lawrence F. Travis Vol. 22 No. 2, 1999, pp. 171-190.
III and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. # MCB University Press, 1363-951X
 PIJPSM Wilson and Kelling (1982) and, more recently, Kelling and Coles (1996) have
22,2 indicated that proactive foot patrols that specifically target disorder in
communities can restore informal social control which in turn prevents the
criminal invasion into the area. Additional research has revealed that
aggressive enforcement activities by the police in target areas can reduce the
incidence of crime (Cordner, 1981; Sherman and Rogan, 1995). This existing
172 research includes serious predatory crimes which previously were thought to
be difficult to suppress. Despite growing concern, many empirical studies on
the effectiveness of the police to suppress serious street crime such as robbery
and aggravated burglary suggest that the police typically have minimal impact
on these crimes.
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

The present research adds to this body of literature by exploring the

relationship between aggressive police practices and the subsequent
diminution of serious crime in one community. This study seeks to discover
whether police enforcement of disorder affects serious crime. The program of
interest involved inter-agency cooperation focusing on disorder crime (e.g.
public intoxication and loitering). We begin by outlining the proposed link
between disorder and serious crime, reviewing prior research on crime control
policies and their effectiveness, and its impact on suppressing robbery and
aggravated burglary, and research on displacement of criminal activity. We
follow by describing the nature and intent of the program and the community
within which it was implemented. Finally, we describe the methods used,
present results, and provide plausible explanations for these findings.

Prior research
Disorder and serious crime
Several researchers have hypothesized a link between disorder and serious
crime (Kelling and Coles, 1996; Skogan, 1990; Wilson and Kelling, 1982), and
have suggested that limited tolerance of community disorder is a promising
tactic the police can utilize to realize crime prevention goals of more serious
crimes (Sherman, 1997). Disorder pervades cities and often is ubiquitous.
Serious crimes such as murder, robbery, burglary, and assault, however, are
considered mala in se. Although definitively different, Wilson and Kelling
(1982) hypothesized that these two concepts are intertwined: areas which allow
disorder to flourish serve as fertile ground for the ``criminal invasion'' of serious
crime. Stated differently, disorder, if left unattended, gives the perception that
the area is unsafe, that residents do not care about their neighborhood, and thus
provides potential criminals with reason to believe that citizens in these areas
are less likely to call the police if a serious crime is committed. This broken
windows hypothesis suggests that if a broken window goes unchecked and
unrepaired, other windows will be broken, eventually leading to serious crime.
In this analogy, the ``broken window'' is disorder (Kelling and Coles, 1996;
Wilson and Kelling, 1982), and thus a preferred tactic for reducing serious
crime is to target disorder within communities.
 Contemporary research by Skogan (1990) empirically tested the Effects of
hypothesized relationship between disorder and serious crime. In his aggressive
assessment of 40 urban areas, Skogan found that disorder and serious crime go policing
hand in hand, whereby disorder was more strongly linked to serious crime than
traditional structural correlates (i.e. poverty, mobility, and heterogeneity).
Further, Skogan (1990) reports that the two are temporally linked in that
disorder preceded serious crime within neighborhoods. 173
In short, there is both theoretical and empirical research which suggests that
one method of suppressing serious crime in neighborhoods is through the
maintenance of order. To achieve this, police may use at least two strategies.
First, they can engage in aggressive order maintenance, otherwise known as
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

order maintenance crackdowns (Kelling and Coles, 1996). Here, police can
aggressively enforce disorder crimes within neighborhoods utilizing proactive
enforcement. Second, the police can engage in non-confrontational interaction
with the citizens of the neighborhood to understand their perceptions of
disorder and allow the community to set behavioral norms. The advocated
strategy for this second method is often foot patrol (Wilson and Kelling, 1982)
or perhaps community oriented policing or problem oriented policing (Eck and
Spelman, 1987; Goldstein, 1990; Skolnick and Bayley, 1986).
The present study fills this void by assessing the effects aggressive
enforcement of disorder has on serious crime. This research does not represent
a strict test of the broken windows hypothesis, rather it draws on some of the
assumptions set forth by Wilson and Kelling regarding the link between
disorder and crime. The following section outlines the empirical basis for
conducting this inquiry.

Aggressive policing
Research assessing the effects of aggressive policing has been conducted at
both the city level and smaller geographic units. Assessing the effect of
aggressive patrol levels in 35 large cities, Wilson and Boland (1978) found that
robbery rates were lower among cities having a greater proportion of police on
patrol to population size as well as cities issuing a greater number of traffic
citations. Further, the authors suggested that the more aggressive a police
agency was in its patrol practices, the lower the rates of robbery for that city.
These findings suggest an inverse linear relationship between aggressive
policing and rates of serious crime (i.e. robbery). A replication and extension of
this study used a larger sample of cities and confirmed that rates of robbery
were inversely related to aggressive police patrol tactics (Sampson and Cohen,
1988). Although later studies utilizing longitudinal data suggest that the
authors overstated the effect of aggressive patrol and robbery (see Jacob and
Rich, 1981), the findings by Wilson and Boland (1978) and Sampson and Cohen
(1988) suggest there is a possible link between police practice and the incidence
of serious crime.
Focusing on a smaller geographic unit of analysis is another tactic used in
research analyzing the relationship between aggressive policing and serious
 PIJPSM crime. This approach rests on the research suggesting that criminal activity is
22,2 not evenly distributed throughout a city (Sherman et al., 1989). In other words,
some areas within a city experience a greater proportion of the overall crime
and are therefore suggested to be ``hotter'' than other less active areas. These
``hot spots'' of crime are places which produce a large number of calls for police
services or reported crimes. As evidence, Sherman et al. (1989), exploring the
174 relationship between crime and place, found that over half of all calls for police
service originated in just 3.3 per cent of all places in Minneapolis. If police can
identify these places and aggressively intervene, the overall rate of crime
within a city and the targeted locations should decrease. Furthermore, it may
represent a more rational and cost effective allocation of finite police resources.
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

By empirically assessing what effect police presence had on hot spots,

Sherman and Weisburd (1995) identified 110 hot spot areas in Minneapolis, and
randomly assigned half to an experimental group and half to a control group.
In the experimental hot spots, officers were instructed to conduct surveillance
at its epicenter, leaving to answer calls for service, and returning to the hot spot
at the end of the call. Thus, they measured police presence, and not police
activity while at the hot spot. In comparison to the control areas the
experimental areas sustained a decrease in overall crime and observed
disorder, with modest effects on ``hard crime'', which included burglary
(Sherman and Weisburd, 1995). The percentage decrease in crime in the
experimental area, however, was not statistically significant. The authors
concluded that increased presence of police in crime hot spots can have a
general deterrent effect on crime. Though this research did not analyze
aggressive police activity per se, it did demonstrate the usefulness of increased
police presence within specific target areas.
Several prior studies considered the impact of aggressive enforcement
efforts at specific places. Cordner (1981) considered the effects of directed patrol
± the antithesis of random preventive patrol ± on the incidence of crime in
Pontiac, Michigan. Officers were instructed to perform aggressive activities at
specific locations during non-committed time. While at this location, they were
given instructions to perform specific proactive and aggressive police tactics.
In analyzing the relationship between directed patrol activities and target crime
± specifically robberies, burglaries, auto thefts and larcenies from automobiles
± Cordner (1981) observed that the number of arrests during program periods
increased significantly. Results suggested that what officers did while on patrol
(here, aggressive directed patrol) had more of an effect on crime than simply
how many police were on patrol or how much time was devoted to directed
patrol. Proactive patrol, such as arrests, vehicle stops, and field interrogations
``can lead to decreases in at least some categories of reported crime'' (Cordner,
1981, p. 52). The city as a whole did not experience any decrease in the level of
crime, thus suggesting that a displacement of criminal activity from the target
areas to other locations within the city may have occurred. Unfortunately, this
research failed to compare crime and arrest rates in the target areas to control
 areas, and random assignment of the target areas was not conducted. Effects of
Therefore, assessment of the true effectiveness of this policing strategy was not aggressive
accomplished. policing
In a similar study to the current one, Sherman et al. (1986) examined the
relationship between crackdowns on illegal parking and disorder on street
crime within the Georgetown bar district of Washington, DC. The crackdown
had specific components, including publicity of the activities, increased 175
parking and disorder enforcement, and a back-off stage. Despite reported
decreases in robberies in this area, the change was not statistically significant
and may have occurred by chance. They did find, however, that citizens'
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

perception of apprehension remained high, even after the back-off was

terminated. Sherman (1990) suggested that crackdowns will have their optimal
deterrent effect when citizens overestimate the certainty of apprehension and
police can maximize this free bonus deterrence by rotating the crackdown from
place to place and time to time. The critical components of this strategy
included increasing the ratio of police to potential offenders, sanctions (such as
stopping cars and making arrests), media publicity, and a back-off stage.
Extant research has also addressed the issue of aggressive traffic patrol and
its effects on serious crime. Weiss and McGarrell (1996) analyzed eight beats in
Indianapolis which experienced abnormally high levels of aggressive traffic
enforcement during a six-week period. In their study, officers patrolled an extra
four hours at the end of their shift; thus there were more police on patrol than
the prior comparison time. Beats experiencing a significant decrease in
reported burglaries and auto vehicle thefts were those in which officers
concentrated solely on stopping as many vehicles as possible (Weiss and
McGarrell, 1996). Significant reductions in auto vehicle theft were also realized
in other beats where officers focused on consent searches for drugs and greater
use of computer criminal history checks of persons and vehicles. In addition,
there was a diffusion of program benefits to contiguous beats.
Additionally, Weiss and Freels (1996) evaluated the effects of aggressive
traffic patrol in Dayton, Ohio. Two street segments were randomly selected as
experimental or control areas. In the experimental area, officers were instructed
to aggressively enforce traffic laws. The researchers found that special arrests
(those which involved weapons, drugs, and DUI arrests) in the experimental
area increased significantly while the control area had no such increase.
However, aggressive traffic enforcement had no effect on accidents, robbery,
index arrests, auto theft offenses or auto theft arrests.
In summary, prior research suggests that police may have an effect on crime
if they use their resources efficiently. Crime is not distributed equally across
time and space and, to make optimal use of resources, places targeted for
intervention should have a high rate of crime. With the exception of Sherman et
al. (1986), however, prior research has not systematically assessed the
relationship between aggressive enforcement of disorder and serious crime.
 PIJPSM Specifically, research has not assessed the effect of aggressive policing of
22,2 disorder in a target area, its relationship to serious crime, and possible
displacement to contiguous areas.

Displacement
To systematically assess the impact an aggressive enforcement strategy will
176 have on a target area, consideration must be given to the potential
displacement effects that may occur as a result of the intervention. Here, our
focus is specifically on the spatial displacement effects within the surrounding
areas of the target site. It is important to examine these catchment areas for
territorial displacement of crime because any benefits experienced in the target
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

area may result in an increase in crime in the surrounding area not receiving
the treatment. Here, crime may simply move around the city instead of
reducing (Gabor, 1978; Lab, 1992; Reppetto, 1976). Displacement would hamper
the effectiveness of any intense intervention.
Although somewhat inconclusive, the extant research provides insight into
the potential spatial displacement effects of implementing crime prevention
strategies. Some intervention-based research suggests that any decreases in
crime experienced in the target areas were met by a corresponding increase in
crime in those areas which did not receive the intervention (Press, 1971;
Tyrpak, 1975). Conversely, others reveal that the contiguous areas not
receiving the treatment experienced no displacement (Clarke, 1992) or even a
decrease in crime (Green, 1994). This diffusion of program benefits (Clarke and
Weisburd, 1994) suggests that crime can decrease in areas beyond that area
which received treatment. Of the prior research outlined above on aggressive
policing strategies, only one considered the effects of spatial displacement. In
this study, Sherman and Rogan (1995) report a diffusion of benefits to
contiguous areas, though they qualify this by stating that it most likely
occurred by chance. At a minimum, however, they suggest that there was
neither displacement nor diffusion of benefits.
Taken together, this research emphasizes three specific implications which
bear relevance to the current study. First, there are theoretical reasons to
believe that the existence of unfettered disorder crime affects more serious
crime (Kelling and Coles, 1997; Skogan, 1990; Wilson and Kelling, 1982).
Second, specific policing strategies have been found to impact on more serious
crime, including robbery (Cordner, 1981; Sampson and Cohen, 1988; Wilson and
Boland, 1978) and burglary (Cordner, 1981; Sherman and Weisburd, 1995;
Weiss and McGarrell, 1996). Third, there is some reason to believe these efforts
by police can displace crime to contiguous areas, or conversely, these areas can
experience a diffusion of benefits (Clarke and Weisburd, 1994; Green, 1994;
Sherman and Rogan, 1995).
This study extends this body of literature by analyzing the relationship
between aggressive enforcement of disorder crime, an increased presence of
police positioned stationary on residential street corners, and the incidence of
serious crime within the target area. As noted previously, aggressive
 enforcement of these types of disorder can affect the two specific types of Effects of
serious crime in several ways. First, aggressive enforcement of individuals aggressive
engaged in disorder may decrease the number of potential offenders from the policing
community. Second, by removing these individuals, the target area may
experience a decrease in the number of suitable targets. In turn, this may
potentially reduce the possibility of individuals becoming offenders or victims
of a robbery or burglary (Cohen and Felson, 1979). Third, aggressive 177
enforcement may also decrease serious crime by increasing individuals' overall
perception of police presence in the community. In other words, some persons
who intend to commit these crimes may notice an increase in police presence,
and thus be deterred or displaced (Cordner, 1981). Potential offenders who were
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

not actually arrested for the disorder may be deterred by the random saturation
of police presence within the area. A description of the intervention follows.

Description of the intervention

The current study analyzes a crackdown of disorder crimes within a section of
one community, and whether this intervention had any impact on serious
crime. Crackdowns involve ``an abrupt increase in police activity, especially
proactive enforcement, which is intended to dramatically increase the perceived
and/or actual threat of apprehension for specific types of offenses in certain
places or situations, and so to produce a general deterrent effect'' (Worden et al.,
1994, pp. 95-6; see also Sherman, 1990). In the previous summers, community
residents reported a high level of ``joyriding''[1] up and down residential streets
with loud music playing as late as 3.00 a.m., and people on the street drinking
and disturbing pedestrians. Community leaders approached the local police
and the assistant agent in charge of the state regulatory agency requesting
assistance. The community leaders and enforcement officials agreed that the
enforcement effort would take place during the time period which had been
most problematic in the past. A combined effort was undertaken by these
agencies (the local police department and a state regulatory agency) in order to
curb this behavior.
The regulatory agency, whose jurisdiction included alcoholic beverages,
assigned six undercover agents in the target area and instructed them to make
arrests and issue citations for open containers of alcoholic beverages. They
allocated agents dressed in battle dress uniforms (or black raid gear marked
``POLICE'') in three undercover vehicles in the 10 by 12 block area. These
agents were not normally assigned to this area of the city. From June 28,
through July 21, 1992, the agents drove randomly through the area and
aggressively enforced disorder crimes. This time period was selected by
community leaders and enforcement officials because in the past the disorder
had been particularly prevalent. In all, 140 arrests and citations were issued to
individuals for open containers of alcohol on the street or in a motor vehicle,
possession of alcohol by a minor, selling alcoholic beverages to a minor, drug
abuse, and outstanding warrants.
 PIJPSM In addition, the local police department agreed to allocate several police cars
22,2 on the corners of residential blocks to dissuade the joyriding. The police sat
stationary in their patrol cars at these intersections from 11.00 p.m. to 3.00 a.m.,
and were highly visible to passers-by. These officials did not have their vehicle
emergency lights on, and were not ordered to take any particular type of action
(e.g. problem solving). Ultimately their behavior was highly discretionary. In
178 addition, the beat officers who were routinely assigned to this area continued to
patrol as usual. Finally, during the time period these officers were not
dispatched to calls for police service, and thus their presence in the
neighborhood was continuous. These officers worked overtime details, and
were not normally assigned to this area, representing an increase in police
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

presence in the target area.

In summary, the combination of the local police presence and state
regulatory agents represented an increase in the dosage level of police presence
in an identifiable area of the city. This increase in dosage level[2] did not affect
the level of law enforcement in the other areas within the city.
The study has some similarities to, but also important differences from,
aforementioned research. Agents were instructed to enforce certain disorder
crimes, as they were in Washington, DC (see Sherman et al., 1986). Also, like the
crackdown in Washington, DC and directed patrol in Pontiac (see Cordner,
1981), there was an increase in police dosage levels during the project, and an
increase in the number of arrests. The increased dosage levels, in part, involved
undercover police officers. Thus, the deterrent impact these officers had may
have been minimized[3].
Although the project length of one month was considerably shorter than any
of the aforementioned studies, this should not drastically affect the outcome
measures or the question at hand. In addition, the target area was a specified 10
by 12 block area within a community, which is smaller in size than a beat, yet
much larger than a hot spot as defined by Sherman et al. (1989). Unlike the
crackdown in Georgetown, there was no media publicity. Also, unlike other
studies discussed above, there was considerable interagency cooperation
between the local police department and the participating regulatory agency.
It is important to clarify the purposes of this intervention. This endeavor
was undertaken by the local police department and the state regulatory agency,
upon request of local community leaders. Unfortunately, we were not involved
in the planning of the intervention; thus many methodological issues such as
selection of adequate control groups, randomization and community surveys
could not be conducted. The enforcement effort targeted disorder crime in the
community. This project was not designed to directly impact on serious crime,
such as robbery and burglary. However, the discussion earlier in this paper
outlined the hypothesized links between disorder and serious crime, coupled
with the proposition that controlling disorder can negatively affect serious
crime. This intervention provides an opportunity to test such a relationship,
and whether this type of intervention would be beneficial for law enforcement
officials and police policy makers.
 This study does not address three tangential issues due to the fact that the Effects of
research began after the intervention had already occurred. First, we do not aggressive
address the militarizing of local law enforcement, and its role in a free society policing
(Kraska, 1996; Kraska and Kappeler, 1997). Second, the issue of police/
community relations cannot be addressed. Clearly, this militarization may have
an effect on this relationship; however, no baseline data are available in which
to compare. Third, we cannot accurately assess the intervention's effect on 179
disorder crime. In other words, we cannot address the effect that the police
effort had on the type of crime it was designed to address. This is primarily due
to incomplete and unreliable records of this type of crime. Nevertheless, there is
merit in utilizing robbery and aggravated burglary[4] as variables of interest.
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

Project location
The city where this project was conducted is a major midwestern industrial
city. As Table I indicates, the area where the project was implemented
(hereafter, target area) was demographically different from the city as a whole.
Specifically, the target area included a higher percentage of African-Americans,
a higher percentage of female heads of household, and a lower median
household income. Additionally, the target area had a higher robbery and
burglary rate compared to the rest of the city. Changes in the crime rate in the
target area were compared to a control area, located north of, but not
contiguous to, the target area, as well as comparing crime rates to the rest of the
city. The control area was selected based on its comparable crime rate and
demographic make-up to the target area. Both the target and control areas had
a higher rate of robberies and aggravated burglaries than the rest of the city[5].
Demographic information was obtained from the City and County Data Book
(1994).
In addition to analyzing the target and the control areas, we also analyzed
fluctuations in crime in the areas contiguous to the target and control areas for
possible crime displacement. The catchment areas extend approximately three

Target Control City

n % n % n %

Population 9,096 100.0 4,980 100.0 332,943 100.0

Age 18-24 868 9.5 784 15.7 36,815 11.1
African-American 8,521 93.7 4,120 82.7 65,659 19.7
Total households 3,238 100.0 1,610 100.0 130,774 100.0
Female headed
households 1,110 34.3 570 35.4 20,173 15.4
Median household
income $13,963 $13,218 $24,819
Robbery rate a 373.8 742.0 197.9 Table I.
Burglary rate a 1,187.3 1,084.3 530.5 Demographic and
crime characteristics of
a
Note: per 10,000 persons areas of interest
 PIJPSM to four streets past the boundary of the target and control areas. Geographic
22,2 layouts of the streets and traffic patterns were considered, and the catchment
areas represent an area in which activity would most reasonably be expected to
be displaced. The catchment areas in the present study are greater than those
used by prior researchers who utilize a two-street boundary (Green, 1994;
Weisburd and Green, 1995) in part because prior research analyzed a much
180 smaller target area.

Methods
The dependent variables are the number of total crimes reported to the police
within the assigned areas, and thus represent offenses known to the police.
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

These data were obtained from the Crime Analysis Bureau of the local police
department. Researchers were able to identify the exact location, date, and time
of each offense and were thus able to determine where in the city the reported
crime occurred[6]. The streets and corresponding addresses were identified for
the target, control, and their respective catchment areas. Crimes occurring close
to a border of one of the four areas were also geocoded using MapInfo to insure
validity in the coding process. Crime data were collected for the 52 weeks prior
to and 52 weeks subsequent to the four-week impact. In all, a total of 108 weeks
were analyzed.

Analysis and findings

Several independent sample t-tests were conducted, comparing the two
dependent variables in each area of interest (target, control, and the
corresponding catchment areas) before and after the impact. This analysis
examines changes in the rate of robbery and aggravated burglary in each of
these areas one year before and one year after the intervention. Second, an
interrupted time series analysis was performed to assess the impact of the
policing strategy on crime within the target area. Using Box and Jenkin's
ARIMA (autoregressive, integrated, moving average) statistical technique, we
estimated the transfer function most appropriate for each model. Additionally,
this technique permitted us to identify whether crime had been displaced, or if
there had been a diffusion of benefits from the target area to its contiguous
areas.

Difference of means
Initial analyses included a difference of means test of weekly crime between the
pre-intervention period, and the post-intervention period. Tests were conducted
for each crime type and across all geographic areas of interest. The crime rates
for the actual intervention period were not included in the difference of means
test and thus not influenced by changes in crime rates which may have
occurred during the intervention.
Comparisons of weekly robbery and burglary crime rates across areas
yielded no significant differences between groups[7]. The results of the t-tests
indicate that reductions in serious criminal activity were at best minimal,
 though some areas experienced non-significant increases for particular crimes. Effects of
Although employment of t-tests is useful in eliminating pre- and post- aggressive
intervention differences in the crimes under analysis, they fail to capture any policing
proximal changes that may have occurred as a result of the intervention. In
other words, it remains feasible that the intervention had a short-term
reduction in the incidences of crime only to return to and exceed pre-
intervention levels (see Langworthy, 1989). Additionally, it is necessary to first 181
examine t-tests between groups prior to conducting a time series analysis.

Interrupted time series analysis

The second analysis utilizes an interrupted time series design using an ARIMA
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

method. This quasi-experimental design was used to assess the impact of the
project on the three outcome measures in the target, control and contiguous
catchment areas[8]. Prior research has used this method to assess the impact of
other phenomena, including capital punishment (Cochran et al., 1994), fencing
stings (Langworthy, 1989) and changes in legislation (McDowall et al., 1992;
Singer and McDowall, 1988). Any observed changes in the target area but not
in the control area would suggest the project impacted on robbery or
aggravated burglary. If the observed changes occur in both the target and
control area, we can conclude the change was most likely due to some other
effect beyond the police intervention. Changes within the target catchment area
would, depending on the direction of change, suggest either a territorial
displacement of crime to that area, or conversely, a diffusion of benefits of the
program to that area. The target areas and control areas are not directly being
compared; however, changes in crime in the control areas relative to those in
the target areas have been considered.
By evaluating the data using an interrupted time series analysis, we are able
to examine patterns in the weekly data which may not be apparent by simply
comparing the differences in mean number of crimes before and after the
impact. Specifically, a time-series can reveal changes which are short in
duration (pulse functions) or gradual changes in the patterns of crime, as well
as abrupt changes in crime patterns associated with project commencement.
Changes in the weekly rate of crime during the project period have been
examined.
The fundamental problem with time series analysis is that the series may be
autocorrelated. In other words, it cannot be assumed that the current
observation (t) is not related and thus independent of prior observations (t ± 1),
which would lead to spurious results. Therefore, before an impact assessment
can be examined, we must ``pre-whiten'' the series, removing any
autocorrelation from the series, leaving a white noise model (McCleary and
Hay, 1980).
Eight separate univariate models were analyzed for autocorrelation (each of
the two crime types in each of the four areas of interest). Models which
contained autocorrelation were then differenced, and upon examination of the
ACF and PACF, several models displayed a noticeable spike at only the first
 PIJPSM lag, while others appear to be influenced by the sum of past observations.
22,2 Spikes which appear to be the sum of their past observations are indicative of
an autoregressive function, where single spikes are typical of moving-average
functions. To remove this autocorrelation, a first order moving-average or
autoregressive function was added to the various models (consistent with the
observation of the spikes in the ACF) and the constant was removed.
182 Additionally, the natural log of the data in three univariate series was created
to induce stationarity in the variance. The last model (for aggravated burglary
in the target area) also displayed a spike at the eighth lag of the ACF. It
appeared that this lag was independent and unrelated to prior lags; thus an
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

eighth order moving-average was included in the model. The final process of
(0,1,[1,8]) removed the autocorrelation from this model. This model building
process is necessary before we can conduct an impact assessment[9]. Figures 1
to 4 display the distribution of the raw data, and the Appendix displays the
white noise model estimates.
After the model was pre-whitened an impact assessment was conducted.
This is done by selecting an appropriate transfer function from among three
common types. The first type is a zero order transfer in which there is ``an
abrupt, immediate pattern of impact'' (McCleary and Hay, 1980, p. 146). The
second type is a first-order transfer function, in which there is a ``gradual,
permanent change in the process level'' (McCleary and Hay, 1980, p. 155). The

Raw frequencies
20

Intervention start Intervention end

15

10

0
1 10 20 30 40 50 53 56 60 70 80 90 100 108
Figure 1.
Target robberies by Key
control robberies
Targ. Robb. Cont. Robb.
 20
Raw frequencies Effects of
aggressive
Intervention start Intervention end policing

15

183

10
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

0
1 10 20 30 40 50 53 56 60 70 80 90 100 108
Figure 2.
Key
Target burglaries by
control burglaries
Targ. Burg. Cont. Burg.

Raw frequencies
20

Intervention start Intervention end

15

10

0 Figure 3.
1 10 20 30 40 50 53 56 60 70 80 90 100 108
Target catchment
Key
robberies by control
catchment robberies
Target Catch. Robb. Control Catch. Robb.
 PIJPSM 20
Raw frequencies

22,2
Intervention start Intervention end

15

184

10
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

Figure 4.
Target catchment 0
1 10 20 30 40 50 53 56 60 70 80 90 100 108
burglaries by control
catchment control Key
burglaries
Target Catch. Burg. Control Catch. Burg.

final common transfer function is the first order transfer function to a

differenced time series (or pulse function), in which there is an abrupt but
temporary change in the series. After this process, a series of diagnostic checks
of the data were performed to test the model for adequacy (see Table II). Each of

Target Control
Target catchment Control catchment
Coef. t-stat Coef. t-stat Coef. t-stat Coef. t-stat

Zero order transfer function

Robbery 0 0.002 0.026 ±0.019 ±0.475 ±0.211 ±1.49 0.007 0.234
Aggravated burglary 0 ±0.014 ±0.907 0.010 0.344 ±0.008 ±0.548 ±0.006 ±0.998
First order transfer function
Robbery 0 0.014 0.097 ±0.011 ±0.011 ±0.802 ±0.285 0.000 0.012
1 ±0.932 ±0.119 0.332 0.005 0.654 0.532 ±1.181 ±0.822
Aggravated burglary 0 ±0.033 ±0.807 0.003 0.0378 ±0.018 ±0.594 ±0.000 ±0.043
1 ±0.997 ±0.689 0.706 0.087 ±1.038 ±8.856* 0.948 0.512
First order transfer function to a differenced series
Robbery 0 ±0.506 ±0.697 0.000 0.006 0.557 0.737 ±1.404 ±1.339
1 ±0.905 ±4.016* ±1.131 ±0.427 0.139 0.106 ±0.911 ±7.713*
Aggravated burglary 0 ±1.693 ±0.982 0.760 0.566 0.515 0.915 0.402 0.639
1 ±0.938 ±9.644* ±0.809 ±1.066 ±0.544 ±0.493 0.163 0.127
Table II.
Impact assessment Note: * indicates p < 0.05
 these three impact assessments was performed using the data from the four Effects of
different areas of the city. The impact assessment consists of a dummy variable aggressive
series, where 0 is represented before the project start date and 1 is represented policing
after the June 28 start date.
Table II presents the parameter estimates ( 0 ) for the three transfer
functions for the eight univariate models. For the zero-order transfer function, a
significant input parameter would indicate an abrupt, permanent change in the 185
observed time series. Additionally, the input parameter estimates indicate
direction ± that is, if the estimate is positive, this would indicate an increase in
crime after the start of the project. A negative estimate would indicate a
significant decrease in crime. Consistent with the difference of means tests, no
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

parameter estimates were found to be significant. This suggests that

aggressive enforcement of disorder crime does not lead to an abrupt, immediate
and permanent change in robbery or aggravated burglary within the target
area. The control area and corresponding catchment areas also were unaffected
by the aggressive policing effort.
Table II also presents the zero-order input ( 0 ) and first-order output ( 1 )
parameters for a first order transfer function. Significant estimates for a first
order transfer function would suggest a gradual, permanent change in crime
for the respective area. To accept this function, both parameters must be
statistically significant (p < 0.05). Table II displays no pair of parameters which
are both statistically significant, suggesting robbery or aggravated burglary
rates did not experience a gradual increase or decrease in any of the areas of
interest.
Finally, a first-order intervention on a differenced series was conducted on
the eight univariate models. Significant parameter estimates for 0 and 1
would suggest there was a sudden, abrupt and temporary shift in crime. Table
II displays no pair of parameters which are both statistically significant,
suggesting robbery or aggravated burglary rates did not experience a gradual
increase or decrease in any of the areas of interest.
In summary, the time-series analysis revealed the intervention had no
statistically significant impact on serious crime in any of the areas examined.
However, this finding may be due to a lack of statistical power. The probability
of finding statistical significance is dependent upon several factors, one being
the variability of the population under study or, in other words, the variation in
weekly robberies and burglaries. The mean number of serious crimes in the
target region is quite low, which suggests that the likelihood of finding a
significant relationship is decreased from the start (robberies in target area: =
1.23, s.d. = 0.982; burglaries in the target area: = 4.40, s.d. = 2.71). One option
is to increase the power of the statistical test by expanding the critical region
used to reject the null hypothesis of no difference (Hays, 1981). A test utilizing a
significance level of 0.10 is more powerful than the conventional 0.05 level.
Acknowledging this possibility, we re-examined the t-values for each of the
coefficients in Table II. Utilizing the liberal significance level of 0.20, only one
of the 24 t-values in the time-series models would be significant, and none of the
 PIJPSM t-values in the target region approaches significance at the new level. It is
22,2 reasonable to assume that the discovery of one significant finding may have
occurred by chance alone. Therefore using a more powerful test of the time-
series models yields no greater likelihood of rejecting the null hypothesis.

Conclusion and discussion

186 This paper examined whether reductions in serious crime were realized from
one particular aggressive police intervention in a large midwestern city. For
four weeks, agents from a state regulatory agency aggressively enforced
disorder crimes such as open containers of alcohol in public and in vehicles,
consumption of alcohol by minors, and drug abuse. At the same time, the local
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

police department placed three to four officers in marked cars sitting stationary
on residential street corners to curb joyriding and loud music in the early
morning hours. We do not address the types of crime which were the intended
focus of the project. Instead, we analyzed rates of less police suppressible crime
(robbery and aggravated burglary). Results suggest there was no difference in
the incidence of these crimes before or after the project in the target area,
control area, or either of the catchment areas for the 52 weeks before and after
the intervention period. An interrupted time series analysis revealed no
significant findings, suggesting the treatment had no effect on serious crime in
the target area.
There are several possible conclusions which could be drawn from this
research. One possible conclusion could be that this project had no benefits as
measured above. In light of the research presented earlier, there can be several
explanations for this phenomenon. First, there was no media coverage of the
project. Sherman (1990) suggests media coverage is an essential ingredient of
crackdowns such as the current one, and is necessary to increase citizens'
perceptions of the risk of apprehension. Second, the intervention was quite
short in duration. It lasted only four weeks, whereas crackdowns in
Georgetown lasted 20 weeks (Sherman et al., 1986), the directed patrol project in
Pontiac lasted 33 weeks (Cordner, 1981), and the Minneapolis Hot-Spot
experiment was conducted for almost one year (Sherman and Weisburd, 1995).
It should be noted, however, that Weiss and McGarrell (1996) found reductions
in some serious crimes in only a six-week period. Nevertheless, it appears such
projects benefit from long-term durations within the specific areas, which may
be necessary to make the police presence more visible.
A third possible explanation for the results is that the dosage level was not
high enough. Though there were increases in the number of arrests (140) and
officers (six regulatory officers and three to four uniformed officers), the
aforementioned studies without question had higher levels of dosage in terms
of arrests and police presence. Additionally, some suggest that the act of sitting
stationary in one spot for a prolonged period of time quickly reaches the point
of diminishing returns. Koper (1995), in his analysis of the Minneapolis Hot-
Spot experiment, concluded that officers located in a single area had a
maximum deterrent effect at about 14 - 15 minutes. As time in a specific area
 continued to increase, the benefit of police presence decreased[10]. In essence, Effects of
police presence becomes too predictable. Therefore, instead of being present at aggressive
one location for four hours, the officers would have made better use of their policing
time by rotating to other residential intersections within the target area.
Finally, regulatory agents did not patrol the target area in marked police
cars. Thus the perception of police presence may have been diminished even
though their uniforms clearly indicated that they were law enforcement 187
officers. All of the previous studies assessing aggressive policing efforts
utilized uniformed officers patrolling on foot or in police cars. This fact alone
may indicate that the efficacy of using officers in this fashion may not bring
about the increased perception of apprehension that was desired.
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

This study questions other empirical research which argues that increased
police presence in specified high crime areas can bring about limited
unanticipated benefits. Policy makers must be cognizant of all the important
ingredients necessary to realize these results. Media publicity, duration, rotation
of officers in the area from place to place, visibility of officers, and of course
budgetary constraints, should be well planned and calculated beforehand.
Notes
1. Joyriding, in the current study, refers to individuals driving up and down residential
streets, typically at slow speeds, playing the vehicle radio loudly. It was this type of
disorderly behavior which prompted community residents to complain to the police.
Joyriding does not refer to any form of auto theft.
2. Dosage level refers to the number of officers in the target area. The current intervention
did not decrease the number of officers in other parts of the city, and as such the total
number of officers city-wide increased. Had the number remained constant, and officers
been simply assigned to the target area in lieu of patrolling other sections of the city, it
would make intuitive sense that there may be an increased likelihood of displacing crime
from the target area to other parts of the city.
3. In interviews with regulatory agents, they report that by the end of the project, they felt
that many of the residents began to recognize them as police officers, noting that many
stopped to wave as they drove past in their undercover vehicles.
4. The act of aggravated burglary is defined by statute as a trespass in an occupied structure
by force, threat or deception with the purpose to commit any theft offense or felony during
which there is infliction of physical harm, the offender possesses a deadly weapon or the
structure is habitation for a person who is present or likely to be at the time of the offense.
5. It should be noted that the target and control groups were not randomly selected. The
control group represents a non-contiguous area of the city with roughly similar structural
characteristics of the target area. Though it is not a perfect match to the target area,
particularly regarding robbery rates, the control group represents the closest comparison
group available. As such, results should be interpreted with caution.
6. Information available for each crime includes the exact street address or intersection of the
incident.
7. Results from the t-tests not provided.
8. This study incorporates a quasi-experimental design. While random assignment within an
experimental design would present a methodologically stronger model, this was not
possible. Using a quasi-experimental design necessitated rigorous statistical control
through the use of time series analysis.
 PIJPSM 9. The model building strategy employed in the current investigation is summarized by
McCleary and Hay (1980, pp. 93-103).
22,2
10. It should be noted, however, that Koper's dependent variable was observed disorder, not
reported crime. However, the logic of his argument bears weight in the current study.

References
188 Boydstun, J., Sherry, M. and Moelter, N. (1977), Police Staffing in San Diego: One or Two Officer
Units, Police Foundation, Washington, DC.
Brandl, S. and Frank, J. (1994), ``The relationship between evidence, detective effort, and the
disposition of burglary and robbery investigations'', American Journal of Police, Vol. 13,
pp. 149-69.
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

Clarke, R.V. (1992), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, Harrow and Heston,
Albany, NY.
Clarke, R.V. and Weisburd, D. (1994), ``Diffusion of crime control benefits: observations on the
reverse of displacement'', in Clarke R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 2, Willow
Tree, Monsey, NY, pp. 165-83.
Cochran, J.K., Chamlin, M.B. and Seth, M. (1994), ``Deterrence or brutalization? An impact
assessment of Oklahoma's return to capital punishment'', Criminology, Vol. 32, pp. 107-34.
Cohen, L.E. and Felson, M. (1979), ``Social change and crime rate trends: a routine activity
approach'', American Sociological Review, Vol. 44, pp. 588-608.
Cordner, G.W. (1981), ``The effects of directed patrol: a natural quasi-experiment in Pontiac'', in
Fyfe, J.J. (Ed.), Contemporary Issues in Law Enforcement, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA,
pp. 37- 58.
County and City Data Book (1994), US Department of Commerce, US Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC.
Dunford, F., Huizinga, D. and Elliot, D. (1990), ``The role of arrest in domestic assault: the Omaha
police experiment'', Criminology, Vol. 28, pp. 183-206.
Eck, J.E., and Spelman, W. (1987), ``Who ya gonna call? The police as problem busters'', Crime
and Delinquency, Vol. 33, pp. 31-52.
Gabor, T. (1978), ``Crime displacement: the literature and strategies for its investigation'', Crime
and Justice, Vol. 6, pp. 100-7.
Goldstein, H. (1990), Problem-Oriented Policing, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Green, L. (1994), Policing Places with Drug Problems, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Greene, J.R. and Mastrofski, S. (1988), Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality?, Praeger, New
York, NY.
Greenwood, P. and Petersilia, J. (1975), The Criminal Investigation Process: Volume 1: Summary
and Police Implications, Rand, Santa Monica, CA.
Hays, W.L. (1981), Statistics, 3rd ed., Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York, NY.
Jacob, H. and Rich, M.J. (1981), ``The effects of the police on crime: a second look'', Law and Society
Review, Vol. 15, pp. 109-22.
Kaplan, E.H. (1979), ``Evaluating the effectiveness of one-officer versus two-officer patrol units'',
Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 7, pp. 325-55.
Kelling, G.L. and Coles, C.M. (1996), Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing
Crime in Our Communities, Free Press, New York, NY.
Kelling, G.L., Pate, T., Dieckman, D. and Brown, C.E. (1974), The Kansas City Preventive Patrol
Experiment: Technical Report, The Police Foundation, Washington, DC.
 Kessler, D.A. (1985), ``One- or two-officer cars? A perspective from Kansas City'', Journal of Effects of
Criminal Justice, Vol. 13, pp. 49-64.
aggressive
Kleiman, M. (1988), ``Crackdowns: the effects of intensive enforcement on retail heroin dealing'', in
Chaiken, M.R. (Ed.), Street Level Drug Enforcement: Examining the Issues, National policing
Institute of Justice, Washington, DC.
Koper, C.S. (1995), ``Just enough police presence: reducing crime and disorderly behavior by
optimizing patrol time in crime hot spots'', Justice Quarterly, Vol. 12, pp. 649-72.
189
Kraska, P.B. (1996), ``Enjoying militarism: political/personal dilemmas in studying US
paramilitary units'', Justice Quarterly, Vol. 13, pp. 405-29.
Kraska, P.B. and Kappeler, V.E. (1997), ``Militarizing American police: the rise and normalization
of paramilitary units'', Social Problems, Vol. 44, pp. 1-18.
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

Kratcoski, S. and Dukes, D. (1995), Issues in Community Policing, Anderson, Cincinnati, OH.
Lab, S.P. (1992), Crime Prevention: Approaches, Practices and Evaluations, 2nd ed., Anderson,
Cincinnati, OH.
Langworthy, R. (1989), ``Do stings control crime? An evaluation of a police fencing operation'',
Justice Quarterly, Vol. 6, pp. 27-45.
Larson, R. (1975), ``What happened to patrol operation in Kansas City? A review of the Kansas
City preventive patrol experiment'', Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 3, pp. 267- 97.
McCleary, R. and Hay, R. Jr (1980), Applied Time Series Analysis for the Social Sciences, Sage,
Beverly Hills, CA.
McDowall, D., Loftin, C. and Wiersema, B. (1992), ``A comparative study of the preventive effects
of mandatory sentencing laws for gun crimes'', Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology,
Vol. 83, pp. 378-91.
Press, S.J. (1971), Some Effects of an Increase in Police Manpower in the 20th Precinct of New
York City, Rand, New York, NY.
Reppetto, T.A. (1976), ``Crime prevention and the displacement phenomenon'', Crime and
Delinquency, Vol. 13, pp. 166-77.
Rosenbaum, D.P. (1994), The Challenge of Community Policing: Testing the Promises, Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Sampson, R.J. and Cohen, J. (1988), ``Deterrent effects of the police on crime: a replication and
theoretical extension'', Law and Society Review, Vol. 22, pp. 163-89.
Sherman, L.W. (1990), ``Police crackdowns: initial and residual deterrence'', in Tonry, M. and
Morris, N. (Eds), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, IL, pp. 1-48.
Sherman, L.W. (1992), Policing Domestic Violence, Free Press, New York, NY.
Sherman, L.W. (1997), ``Policing for crime prevention'', in Sherman, L.W., Gottfredson, D.,
MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P. and Bushway, S. (Eds), Preventing Crime: What Works,
What Doesn't, What's Promising, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice,
University of Maryland.
Sherman, L.W. and Berk, R. (1984), ``The specific deterrent effects of arrest for domestic assault'',
American Sociological Review, Vol. 49, pp. 261-72.
Sherman, L.W. and Rogan, D.P. (1995), ``Effects of gun seizures on gun violence: `hot spots' patrol
in Kansas City'', Justice Quarterly, Vol. 12, pp. 673-94.
Sherman, L.W. and Weisburd, D. (1995), ``General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime `hot
spots': a randomized, controlled trial'', Justice Quarterly, Vol. 12, pp. 625-48.
Sherman, L.W., Gartin, P.R. and Buerger, M.E. (1989), ``Hot spots of predatory crime: routine
activities and the criminology of place'', Criminology, Vol. 27, pp. 27-55.
 PIJPSM Sherman, L.W., Roschelle, A., Gartin, P.R., Linnell, D. and Coleman, C. (1986), Cracking Down and
Backing Off: Residual Deterrence, National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC.
22,2 Singer, S.I. and McDowall, D. (1988), ``Criminalizing delinquency: the deterrent effects of the New
York Juvenile Offender Law'', Law and Society Review, Vol. 22, pp. 521-35.
Skogan, W.G. (1990), Disorder and Decline: Crime and the Spiral of Urban Decay in American
Neighborhoods, Free Press, New York, NY.
190 Skolnick, J. and Bayley, D. (1986), The New Blue Line: Police Innovations in Six American Cities,
Free Press, New York, NY.
Tyrpak, S. (1975), Newark High-impact Anti-crime Program: Street Lighting Project Interim
Evaluation Report, Officer of Criminal Justice Planning, Newark, NJ.
Weisburd, D. and Green, L. (1995), ``Policing drug hot spots: the Jersey City drug market analysis
experiment'', Justice Quarterly, Vol. 12, pp. 711-35.
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

Weiss, A. and Freels, S. (1996), ``The effects of aggressive policing: the Dayton traffic
enforcement experiment'', American Journal of Police, Vol. 15, pp. 45-64.
Weiss, A. and McGarrell, E.F. (1996), ``The impact of increased traffic enforcement on crime'',
paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Chicago,
IL.
Wilson, J.Q. and Boland, B. (1978), ``The effect of police on crime'', Law and Society Review, Vol.
12, pp. 367-90.
Wilson, J.Q. and Kelling, G.L. (1982), ``Broken windows: the police and neighborhood safety'',
Atlantic Monthly, pp. 29-38.
Worden, R.E., Bynum, T.S. and Frank, J. (1994), ``Police crackdowns on drug abuse and
trafficking'', in MacKenzie, D.L. and Uchida, C.D. (Eds), Drugs and Crime: Evaluating
Public Policy Initiatives, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA., pp. 95-113.
Zimmer, L. (1993), ``Proactive policing against street-level drug trafficking'', American Journal of
Police, Vol. 12, pp. 43-74.

Further reading
Feeney, F. (1986), ``Robbers as decision makers'', in Cornisch, D.B. and Clarke, R.V. (Eds), The
Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending, Springer-Verlag, New
York, NY.
Lynch, J.P. and Cantor, D. (1992), ``Ecological and behavioral influences on property victimization
at home: implications for opportunity theory'', Journal of Research in Crime and
Delinquency, Vol. 29, pp. 335-62.

Appendix

Target Target catchment Control Control catchment

Robbery (1,1,0)a (0,1,1) (0,0,0)a (0,1,1)

Table AI. Aggravated burglary (0,1,[1,8]) (0,1,1) (0,1,1) (0,1,1)a
Form of the univariate
a
ARIMA models Note: natural log transformation
 This article has been cited by:

1. Sondra M Tower, Elizabeth Groff. 2016. Examining the disorder–crime connection in Philadelphia parks.
Security Journal 29:3, 520-537. [CrossRef]
2. Li He, Antonio Páez, Desheng Liu, Shiguo Jiang. 2015. Temporal stability of model parameters in crime
rate analysis: An empirical examination. Applied Geography 58, 141-152. [CrossRef]
3. Lallen T Johnson, Jerry H Ratcliffe. 2014. A partial test of the impact of a casino on neighborhood crime.
Security Journal . [CrossRef]
4. Charles CrawfordBroken Windows 1-5. [CrossRef]
5. H. Veigas, C. Lum. 2013. Assessing the evidence base of a police service patrol portfolio. Policing 7:3,
248-262. [CrossRef]
6. Jonathan W. Caudill, Ryan Getty, Rick Smith, Ryan Patten, Chad R. Trulson. 2013. Discouraging window
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

breakers: The lagged effects of police activity on crime. Journal of Criminal Justice 41:1, 18-23. [CrossRef]
7. Hyunseok JangDepartment of Police Administration, Kyonggi University, Suwon‐Si, South Korea Chang‐
Bae LeeDepartment of Police Science, College of Social Sciences, University of Ulsan, Ulsan, South Korea
Larry T. HooverCollege of Criminal Justice, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas, USA.
2012. Dallas’ disruption unit: efficacy of hot spots deployment. Policing: An International Journal of Police
Strategies & Management 35:3, 593-614. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
8. Emmanuel P. Barthe, B. Grant Stitt. 2011. Impact of increased police presence in a non-criminogenic area.
Police Practice and Research 12:5, 383-396. [CrossRef]
9. Scott W. Phillips, James J. Sobol, Sean P. Varano. 2010. Work attitudes of police recruits: is there a family
connection?. International Journal of Police Science & Management 12:3, 460-479. [CrossRef]
10. Jacinta M. Gau, Travis C. Pratt. 2010. Revisiting Broken Windows Theory: Examining the Sources of
the Discriminant Validity of Perceived Disorder and Crime. Journal of Criminal Justice 38:4, 758-766.
[CrossRef]
11. Davin Hall, Lin Liu. 2009. Cops and robbers in Cincinnati: a spatial modeling approach for examining
the effects of aggressive policing. Annals of GIS 15:1, 61-71. [CrossRef]
12. Joshua C. Hinkle, David Weisburd. 2008. The irony of broken windows policing: A micro-place study
of the relationship between disorder, focused police crackdowns and fear of crime. Journal of Criminal
Justice 36:6, 503-512. [CrossRef]
13. ANTHONY A. BRAGA, BRENDA J. BOND. 2008. POLICING CRIME AND DISORDER HOT
SPOTS: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL*. Criminology 46:3, 577-607. [CrossRef]
14. JACINTA M. GAU, TRAVIS C. PRATT. 2008. BROKEN WINDOWS OR WINDOW DRESSING
CITIZENS'(IN) ABILITY TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DISORDER AND CRIME.
Criminology & Public Policy 7:2, 163-194. [CrossRef]
15. Aili E. Malm, George E. Tita. 2007. A spatial analysis of green teams: a tactical response to marijuana
production in British Columbia. Policy Sciences 39:4, 361-377. [CrossRef]
16. John L. Worrall, Larry K. Gaines. 2006. The effect of police-probation partnerships on juvenile arrests.
Journal of Criminal Justice 34:6, 579-589. [CrossRef]
17. Dr Kenneth J. NovakRobert A. BrownSchool of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University
Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA James FrankDivision of Criminal Justice,
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. 2005. Police‐citizen encounters and field citations.
 Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 28:3, 435-454. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
18. Arrick L. JacksonDepartment of Criminal Justice, Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau,
Missouri, USA John E. WadeDepartment of Criminal Justice, Southeast Missouri State University, Cape
Girardeau, Missouri, USA. 2005. Police perceptions of social capital and sense of responsibility. Policing:
An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 28:1, 49-68. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
19. Andrew GolubNational Development and Research Institutes, New York, New York, USA Bruce D.
JohnsonNational Development and Research Institutes, New York, New York, USAAngela TaylorNational
Development and Research Institutes, New York, New York, USA John EternoNew York City Police
Department, New York, New York, USA. 2003. Quality‐of‐life policing. Policing: An International Journal
of Police Strategies & Management 26:4, 690-707. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
20. Danny Cole. 2003. The effect of a curfew law on juvenile crime in Washington, D.C. American Journal
Downloaded by FREIE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN At 05:58 27 November 2016 (PT)

of Criminal Justice 27:2, 217-232. [CrossRef]

21. Blair J. BerkleyManagement Department, School of Business and Economics, California State University,
Los Angeles, California, USA, and John R. ThayerSanta Barbara Police Department, Santa Barbara,
California, USA. 2000. Policing entertainment districts. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies
& Management 23:4, 466-491. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]