Shocking…not
Not surprising, but very valuable. Could be used in training and on-going training of police officers.
Is anyone actually surprised?
Doubt many people are surprised.
The study paper itself: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/05/30/1702413114.full
No, not surprising at all, but hopefully the information will be used by law enforcement when they design their training.
Given that they used Oakland as the study area, it seems odd that they excluded stops of non-white non-black people from the comparison, since non-white non-black people make up about half of the population there and therefore would presumably produce significant samples of stops to include.
The study also noted that “Officer race did not contribute a significant effect.” See figure 4 in the article and the text nearby.
It doesn’t seem odd at all. They were looking at a specific question.
Someone can do a separate study on how Asians are treated, or Hispanics.
I think the fact that even black officers treated blacks less respectfully is telling indeed. It reinforces the results. Why do YOU think it is worth noting?
Because it indicates that people can be racist against their own race, which is something that many people seem to believe is impossible.
I’m not surprised at at all about Black officers being just as disrespectful. A lot of cops are on power trips, it doesn’t matter the color. There needs to be better screening of candidates who get into law enforcement for the wrong reasons.
There’s also been a long history of marginalized groups hired into lower-level elite/official positions such as LEOs, military personnel, and lower-level civil servants adopting the racism of the ruling majority/elite of the given society due to socialization and attempts to gain greater acceptance.
One instance of this was what occurred during the British Raj era in British Colonial India.
Another was how some Chinese(including Taiwanese) and Koreans who collaborated with the Imperial Japanese Empire before/during WWII often mistreated their own people just as brutally as their Japanese rulers. Incidentally, this very issue still affects modern politics in South Korea and the ROC to this very day.
I think there’s some variables the study didn’t or couldn’t control for. They rated verbal pauses as disrespectful and used more for blacks. People who use verbal pauses tend to do so with everyone they interact with. Any difference is likely related to differences between different officers conducting different stops rather than how the same officers respond in different situations.
Re: #10
They tracked the specific officers as well. See figure 4 in the paper ( http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/05/30/1702413114.full ), involving 90 officers who interacted with both black and white persons. Although some officers were found to be neutral or less respectful to white persons, more (regardless of the race of the officer) were less respectful to black persons.
If I understand fig 2 correctly, it looks like the biggies for whites are “safety” and a couple of others. The biggies for blacks were “for you” in the positive and “informal titles” in the negative. Did the study control for the characteristics of the stopped people (other than by race)?
In the section titled “Study 3: Racial Disparities in Respect”, the authors write:
I do not believe this to be true. I have interacted with many officers of different races with many different attitudes. with any sociology or psychology “study” tell me who did it and I will tell you the outcome before I read the article. there is no science in this so called study.
“The language officers used with blacks was not “really disrespectful,” she says. It was just less respectful.”–
subjective at best and they even admit they were respectful to everyone "just less respectful "using some made up criteria
and hardly a scientific study–this seriously is weak at best
"They transcribed what officers said at 981 traffic stops to come up with 36,738 usable “utterances,” or conversational turns. Next, they had college students read and rate about 400 utterances for how much respect they showed, taking into account what drivers said just before officers spoke. The students, who had no knowledge of the driver’s race, rated speech toward black drivers as less respectful than speech toward white drivers overall.
The researchers then analyzed which words and phrases correlated most strongly with respectfulness. Apologies, last names, formal titles like “sir,” and words that expressed gratitude, reassurance, and hesitation (“um” and “uh”) signaled higher respect. So did mentions of safety, positive words like “able,” and phrases that gave agency to the listener, such as “you may.” First names, informal titles like “brotha,” word fragments, negative words like “against,” and negations such as “not” signaled lower respect "
Of course you don’t, but the rest of us here believe in evidence and study, not pulling things out of our… gut. It’s difficult to have a conversation with someone who doesn’t care about facts.
and have you done this sometimes while being black and other times while being white? No? Then you don’t even have any anecdotal evidence to offer. You have literally nothing.
Cardinal fang look in the mirror and repeat those words to yourself.
you get your opion but you do not get to choose mine. Is that a hard concept to grasp.?The study was questionable and your “facts” are your highly subjective opions…that belong to you and those who agree with you.
The officers had the luxury of being black, white, or other according to the study paper. Not the drivers though?
NFN, I notice that when I talk to someone with a New Yawk accent, I start talking like where I am from, near New Yawk. I also will add things like please and thank you when the other person uses them.
And if the area is indeed 50% non-white non-black, not sure what the study is proving. If politeness is required by cops, they send those cops to work with kids, not to make traffic stops.
This is some guidance on traffic stops:
http://www.theiacp.org/ViewResult?SearchID=998
The word polite comes up several times, but only after things escalate.
Cardinal fang on your second post
The study was andetoal in itself with sophomoric criteria and of no pratical value. my point was that police are humans there are probably about 900,000 people who are in law enforcement in the united states all of them completly unique
indivuduals. Again i get you have little tolerance for people who disent from your view…you have made that obvious in the way you responded to me. But me thinks using your words “you litterally have nothing”