Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Proactive Police Response in Property Crime Micro-time Hot Spots: Results from a Partially-Blocked Blind Random Controlled Trial

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Quantitative Criminology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of proactive police response on residential burglary and theft from vehicle in micro-time hot spots as well as whether spatial displacement occurs.

Methods

Over 2 years, 114 treatment and 103 control micro-time hot spots were assigned to groups using “trickle-flow” randomization. Responses were implemented as part of the police department’s established practices, and micro-time hot spots were blocked based on their temporal proximity—sprees or ongoing. The study was blinded and tested proactive patrol versus a no-dosage control condition.

Results

The department responded to each micro-time hot spot with, on average, five 20-min responses per day for 19 days. Eighty percent of the response time involved conducting directed patrol without encountering suspicious activity. Results show that treatment micro-time hot spots had significantly fewer crimes after 15 days (79%) and 30 days (74%). Treatment effects were greatest in the first 15 days (1.15) followed by days 16–30 (.83).

Conclusions

The study examines a real-world strategy institutionalized into the day-today operations of a police department. The largest impact on crime was seen during response. In addition, crime reductions that occurred while micro-time hot spots received response held for 2 months after the responses end with no evidence of spatial displacement. Our findings reveal larger effect sizes than most hot spots policing studies which may be due to how the unit of analysis was defined, the systematic nature of the response implementation, and the use of a no-dosage, blind control condition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Stratified policing is an organizational model for carrying out proactive problem-based, placed-based, offender-based, and community-based activities as part of the day-to-day business of the police organization. The primary goal is to systematize implementation and sustain proactive crime reduction practices by providing a framework for processes similar to the institutionalized process of answering calls for service. For more information see, Santos and Santos (2020).

  2. More detail on this process is provided in the treatment fidelity section.

  3. The study was conducted pro bono by the researchers as well as the police department in that no one or entity received external funding for time or resources spent to carry out the research.

  4. The department serves the city of Port St. Lucie, Florida which is located along the southeast coast. The city’s population in 2015 was around 175,000 with over 120 square miles. As of July 2015, there were 224 authorized sworn and 65 civilian positions and the property crime rate in 2014 and 2015 was 1449 and 1364 per 100,000, respectively.

  5. Some examples of these other methods include the near repeat calculator (Ratcliffe 2009), the Near Repeat Crime Prevention Potential Calculator (NR-CPPC) (Groff and Taniguchi 2019), and the early warning system (EWS) for temporary hot spots (Gorr and Lee 2015).

  6. Similar to Sherman and Rogan’s (1995) experiment on drug houses.

  7. No one else but the analysts and researchers saw the control bulletins.

  8. Interestingly, over the two years of the study, there were only three times in which someone identified a micro-time hot spot on their own. In these cases, the crime analyst released the bulletin for response and the micro-time hot spot was not included in the experiment.

  9. Note that the time spent by detectives investigating each micro-time hot spot and linking them through evidence, arrests, or property is not included here, because that is difficult to measure and is more reactive to the nature of the information and evidence available for each micro-time hot spot.

References

  • Ariel B, Vila J, Sherman L (2012) Random assignment without tears: how to stop worrying and love the Cambridge randomizer. J Exp Criminol 8:193–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ariel B, Sherman LW, Newton M (2020) Testing hot-spots police patrols against no-treatment controls: temporal and spatial deterrence effects in the London underground experiment. Criminology 58:101–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin R, Cooper G, Gagnon D, Hodges J, Martensen K, O’Neal M (1973) Police crime analysis unit handbook. U S Department of Justice National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernasco W (2008) Them again? Same-offender involvement in repeat and near repeat burglaries. Eur J Criminol 5:411–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernasco W (2010) A sentimental journey to crime: effects of residential history on crime location choice. Criminology 48:389–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernasco W, Nieuwbeerta P (2005) How do residential burglars select target areas? A new approach to the analysis of criminal location choice. Br J Criminol 44:296–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers KJ, Johnson SD (2005) Domestic burglary repeats and space–time clusters: the dimensions of risk. Eur J Criminol 2:67–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braga AA, Turchan B, Papachristos AV, Hureau DM (2019) Hot spots policing of small geographic areas effects on crime. Campbell Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Eck J, Chainey S, Cameron J, Leitner M, Wilson R (2005) Mapping crime: understanding hot spots. National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallager K, Wartell J, Gwinn S, Jones G, Stewart G (2017) Exploring crime analysis. International Association of Crime Analysts, Overland Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorr WL, Lee YJ (2015) Early warning system for temporary crime hot spots. J Quant Criminol 31:25–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson DC, Cook TD, Gardner FE, Gorman-Smith D, Howe GW, Sandler IN, Zafft KM (2015) Standards of evidence for efficacy, effectiveness, and scale-up research in prevention science: next generation. Prev Sci 16:893–926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groff E, Taniguchi T (2019) Quantifying crime prevention potential of near-repeat burglary. Police Q. https://doi.org/10.1177/10986111198280521-30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groff ER, Ratcliffe JH, Haberman CP, Sorg ET, Joyce NM, Taylor RB (2015) Does what police do at hot spots matter? The Philadelphia policing tactics experiment. Criminology 53:23–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haberman CP (2016) A view inside the ‘‘Black Box’’ of hot spots policing from a sample of police commanders. Police Q 19:488–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoover L, Wells W, Zhang Y, Ren L, Zhao J (2016) Houston enhanced action patrol: examining the effects of differential deployment lengths with a switched replication design. Justice Q 33:538–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson D (2013) The space/time behaviour of dwelling burglars: finding near repeat patterns in serial offender data. Appl Geogr 4:139–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson SD, Summers L, Pease K (2007) Vehicle crime: communicating spatial and temporal patterns. Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson SD, Lab S, Bowers KJ (2008) Stable and fluid hot spots of crime: differentiation and identification. Built Environ 34:32–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson SD, Summers L, Pease K (2009) Offenders as forager: a direct test of the boost account of victimization. J Quant Criminol 25:181–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson SD, Tilley N, Bowers KJ (2015) Introducing EMMIE: an evidence rating scale to encourage mixed-method crime prevention synthesis reviews. J Exp Criminol 11:459–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin LM, Johnson SD, Bowers KJ, Birks DJ, Pease K (2007) Police perceptions of the long- and shortterm spatial distribution of residential burglary. Int J Police Sci Manag 9:99–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Institute of Justice (2018) Program profile: tactical police responses to micro-time hot spots for thefts from vehicles and residential burglaries (Port St. Lucie, Florida). Profile posted on November 13, 2018 to https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=626

  • O’Shea TC, Nicholls K (2003) Police crime analysis: a survey of U.S. police departments with 100 or more sworn personnel. Police Pract Res 4:233–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe JH (2009) Near repeat calculator (version 1.3). Temple University, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagovsky A, Johnson SD (2007) When does repeat burglary victimisation occur? Aust N Z J Criminol 40:1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos RG (2013) A quasi-experimental test and examination of police effectiveness in residential burglary and theft from vehicle micro-time hot spots. Dissertation. Nova Southeastern University

  • Santos RB (2017) Crime analysis with crime mapping. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos RB, Santos RG (2015a) Examination of police dosage in residential burglary and theft from vehicle micro-time hots spots. Crime Sci 4:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos RG, Santos RB (2015b) An ex post facto evaluation of tactical police response in residential theft from vehicle micro-time hot spots. J Quant Criminol 31:679–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos RG, Santos RB (2015c) Practice-based research: ex post facto evaluation of evidence-based police practices implemented in residential burglary micro-time hot spots. Eval Rev 39:451–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos RG, Santos RB (2020) Stratified policing: an organizational model for proactive crime reduction. Rowman & Littlefield, Landham

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos RB, Taylor B (2014) The integration of crime analysis into police patrol work: results from a national survey of law enforcement. Policing 37:501–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman LW (1990) Police crackdowns: initial and residual deterrence. Crime Justice 12:1–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman LW, Rogan D (1995) Deterrent effects of police raids on crack houses: a randomized controlled experiment. Justice Q 12:755–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan GM, Feinn R (2012) Using effect size—or why the P value is not enough. J Grad Med Educ 4:279–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Telep CW, Mitchell RJ, Weisburd DL (2014a) How much time should the police spend at crime hot spots? Answers from a police agency directed randomized field trial in Sacramento. Calif Justice Q 31:905–933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Telep CW, Weisburd D, Gill CE, Vitter Z, Teichman D (2014b) Displacement of crime and diffusion of crime control benefits in large-scale geographic areas: a systematic review. J Exp Criminol 10:515–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wain N, Ariel B (2014) Tracking of police patrol. Policing 8:274–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd D, Gill C (2014) Block randomized trials at places: rethinking the limitations of small N experiments. J Quant Criminol 30:97–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd D, Majmundaar MK (eds) (2018) Proactive policing: effects on crime and communities. The National Academies Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd D, Groff ER, Yang S-M (2012) The criminology of place: street segments and our understanding of the crime problem. Oxford University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Police Practice, Policy and Research, Department of Criminal Justice, Radford University, PO Box 6934, Radford, VA, 24142, USA

    Rachel B. Santos & Roberto G. Santos

Authors
  1. Rachel B. Santos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roberto G. Santos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rachel B. Santos.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Santos, R.B., Santos, R.G. Proactive Police Response in Property Crime Micro-time Hot Spots: Results from a Partially-Blocked Blind Random Controlled Trial. J Quant Criminol 37, 247–265 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-020-09456-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-020-09456-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation