Skip to main content
SearchLoginLogin or Signup

Systematic evidence map of disparities in police outcomes: Dataset

This interactive evidence gap map was commissioned by New Zealand Police and created by a research team led by Dr Lisa Tompson at Te Puna Haumaru (NZ Institute for Security and Crime Science). It aims to provide coverage of the international research evidence on disparities ...

Published onFeb 02, 2022
Systematic evidence map of disparities in police outcomes: Dataset
key-enterThis Pub is a Version of
Systematic evidence map of disparities in police outcomes: Dataset
Description

This interactive evidence gap map was commissioned by New Zealand Police and created by a research team led by Dr Lisa Tompson at Te Puna Haumaru (NZ Institute for Security and Crime Science). It aims to provide coverage of the international research evidence on disparities in police outcomes in 2000-2018. The research question guiding this work was: “What is known about the nature and impact of possible bias in policing policies and practices internationally?” A video giving some guidance on how to view, filter and export studies from the map can be watched [at an external link]. The full inclusion criteria for the evidence map can be found in the associated report. Importantly, the impact of police decision-making is measured in these studies rather than intent. This means that studies on the perception of police decision-making are not included on the map unless they used a comparison group. We encourage researchers to use this evidence map as a resource for syntheses of subsets of studies (depending on the research area of interest). When doing so, it is helpful to keep the following in mind (see section 4.4 in our report for an elaboration of these): 1. You will need to search for more recent studies as the map only goes up to 2018. You can extract useful search terms from the studies on the map to assist with this. 2. Where disparities in police outcomes are found, it is not necessarily evidence of bias, particularly if there are legally relevant reasons for disparities. Disparities in police outcomes are often found to be operating in nuanced ways. 3. Robust research studies are ones which use theory to guide their data collection and analysis, use a suitable denominator for assessing disparities, and attempt to control for rival explanations to the disparities. 4. The commissioners of a research study will potentially have a vested interest in a certain outcome. No research is completely unbiased and it is worth bearing this in mind when you interpret the findings. 5. It is worth considering triangulating the quantitative studies on the map with qualitative studies on lived experiences regarding police decision-making. [Please cite this evidence map as: Tompson, L. et al (2022). Systematic evidence map of disparities in police outcomes: Dataset. Hamilton, New Zealand: University of Waikato.]

 

Comments
0
comment
No comments here
Why not start the discussion?