Presentation on

Principled PolicingPolice Commission

March 17, 2017

San Francisco Police DepartmentProfessional Development Unit

San Francisco Police DepartmentProfessional Development Unit

COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVEOctober 2016

RECOMMENDATION 27.2The SFPD should begin anti-bias and cultural competency training of department members immediately and should not await the outcome of the training needs assessment. All officers should complete implicit bias training and cultural competency training.

RECOMMENDATION 51.1The SFPD should provide procedural justice and explicit bias and implicit bias training to all department personnel including civilian staff. This should become a permanent part of the Academy’s curriculum and should be reviewed with each officer during the department's annual officer training sessions.

13519.4 California Penal Code - Section (d) – “Racial Profiling, for the purpose of this section, is the practice of detaining a suspect based on a broad set of criteria which casts suspicion on an entire class of people without any individualized suspicion of the particular person being stopped.”

• Racial profiling and bias based policing are prohibited practices for peace officers

• DGO 5.17 Policy Prohibiting Biased Policing

• California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training

• “Racial Profiling: Issues and Impact” beginning December 2003 – Recruits

• “Bias Based Policing: Remaining Fair and Impartial” – Advanced Officers

• SFPD sworn personnel trained in the 2015 & 2016 AO/CPT cycle

Total = 1847

San Francisco Police DepartmentProfessional Development Unit

COMMAND STAFF 11

COMMUNITY MEMBERS 11

LIEUTENANTS 1

SERGEANTS 15

OFFICERS 10

TOTAL 48

San Francisco Police DepartmentProfessional Development Unit

FAIR & IMPARTIAL POLICING, LLC March-July 2016

COMMAND STAFF 5

CAPTAINS 23

DIRECTORS 15

LIEUTENANTS 85

RECRUITS 88

POLICE SERVICE AIDES 246

TOTAL 462

San Francisco Police DepartmentProfessional Development Unit

MANAGING IMPLICIT BIASSF Department of Human Resources, September 2016-March 2017

COMMAND STAFF 7

CAPTAINS 23

LIEUTENANTS 80

SERGEANTS 12

OFFICERS 1

TOTAL 123

San Francisco Police DepartmentProfessional Development Unit

PROCEDURAL JUSTICEJanuary 2016-December 2016

COMMAND STAFF 2

CAPTAINS 1

SERGEANTS 43

OFFICERS 113

CHAPLAINS 4

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL 39

TOTAL 202

San Francisco Police DepartmentProfessional Development Unit

PRINCIPLED POLICING PROCEDURAL JUSTICE, POLICE LEGITIMACY & IMPLICIT BIAS

November 2015, Adopted to current AO cycle January 2017

• Objective of Principled Policing: to foster and strengthen trust between the police and the communities they serve• Principles of Procedural Justice: Voice, Neutrality, Trust and Respect

• Provide officers with a roadmap

• Allow people the opportunity to tell their side of the story

• Remain neutral in decision-making and behavior

• Treat people with respect

• Explain actions in a way that communicates care for people’s concerns

• Demonstrate trustworthiness

• 3-hour block of Implicit Bias

• Presented as an obstacle to Procedural Justice

• Can be overcome with awareness

San Francisco Police DepartmentProfessional Development Unit

PRINCIPLED POLICING PHILOSOPHYPROCEDURAL JUSTICE, POLICE LEGITIMACY & IMPLICIT BIAS

Module 1

The interactive nature between

Procedural Justice, Legitimacy,

and goals in policing

Procedural Justice

Module 1

The interactive nature between Procedural Justice, Legitimacy and goals in policing

MODULE 1: INTERACTIVE NATURE OF LEGITIMACY, PROCEDURAL JUSTICE, IMPLICIT BIAS & GOALS IN POLICING

OVERVIEW: Module 1 defines police legitimacy and procedural justice and provides video examples of procedural justice. It introduces the “Four Principles of Procedural Justice”. This module offers an opportunity to discuss how procedural justice benefits staff and supports the Department’s goals for policing.

Principles of Procedural Justice

Procedural Justice

The Four Principles:

1. Voice (Listen)

2. Neutrality (Be fair)

3. Respectful treatment (Be respectful)

4. Trustworthiness (Fair and transparent process)

What’s in it for me?

When utilizing Procedural Justice and gaining legitimacy, police officers benefit. How?

Safety increases (officer safety)

Stress levels decrease

Fewer complaints

Greater cooperation from citizens

Voluntary compliance gained

Crime is reduced

Module 2

Expectations and Legitimacy

Procedural Justice

Module 2

Expectations and Legitimacy

MODULE 2: EXPECTATIONS & LEGITIMACY

OVERVIEW: Module 2 presents a more in-depth look at “legitimacy” and its relationship with cynicism. It offers an opportunity to discuss police and community expectations of each other and examine actions that build trust.

Cynicism

• Modern cynicism, as a product of mass society, is a distrust toward professed ethical and social values, especially when there are high expectations concerning society, institutions and authorities which are unfulfilled.

• Cynicism can manifest itself as a result of frustration, disillusionment, and distrust. It is perceived as due to organizations, authorities, and other aspects of society.

• Cynicism is the antithesis of idealism, truth, and justice - which are the virtues that police officers swear to uphold.

Procedural Justice - Video“Teachable Moment”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGSrG

mHsT8s

Procedural Justice - Video“Teachable Moment”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GgWrV8TcUc

Procedural Justice - Video“Teachable Moment”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7rYLwtVB3o

Module 3

Procedural Justice

Module 3

MODULE 3: PROCEDURAL JUSTICE

OVERVIEW: Module 3 is an in-depth look at Procedural. It examines each of the four Principles and the effect they have on decision-making, the policing process, and how treatment affects outcomes. This module also offers an opportunity for students to discuss personal experiences with procedural justice.

Citizen’s Assessment of an Experience with the Police

Assessment Outcome Process

Procedural Justice

+ -

Why Procedural Justice?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Bad outcome Good outcome

Unfair Treatment Fair Treatment

Voluntarily

accepting

police

decisions

3%

87%

73%

13%

(Taken from Tyler (2012) concerning street stops in California)

Procedural Justice

Module 4

Historical and Generational Effects

of Policing

MODULE 4: HISTORICAL & GENERATIONAL EFFECTS OF POLICING

OVERVIEW: Module 4 examines the historical & generational effects of policing. It provides an opportunity to better understand the impact of the racialized legacy of policing on present day policing practice and policy. By the end of this module, students are expected to understand the concepts of “deposits” and “withdrawals” from the community bank account and relate them to procedural justice.

Historical Effects

Law Enforcement

Understanding the generational effects of police distrust.

Historical Effects

Civil Rights

BIRMINGHAMSAN FRANCISCO

SELMA

3RD & NEWCOMB

TRY TO UNDERSTAND OUR

PROFESSION’S HISTORY

Historical Effects Scandals

Scandals from around the country will affect all law enforcement agencies!!!

The San Francisco Police Department will be equally judged. We have to find a way to connect with our community to a safer path for all of us.

Procedural Justice

Module 5

Implicit Biases and Stereotypes

MODULE 5: IMPLICIT BIAS

OVERVIEW: Module 5 introduces the concept of implicit bias and describes the science and research behind it. This module offers an opportunity to learn about how implicit bias is the product of an interaction between normal psychological functioning in the world we live in, but can have a profound impact on decision-making and outcomes for line staff and law-enforcement. How it can be an obstacle to fostering good community relations.

Implicit Bias Research

Research has documented implicit biases (“blink responses”) linked to

• Ethnicity and race (e.g., Nosek, Banaji and Greenwald, 2002)

• Gender (e.g., Banaji and Hardin, 1996)

• Sexual orientation (e.g., Dasgupta and Rivera, 2008)

• Body shape (e.g., Bessenoff and Sherman, 2000)

• Age (e.g., Perdue and Gurtman, 1990)

Implicit Bias Research

Relevant to Humans in all professions

• Current studies focusing on

• Doctors, nurses (e.g., Van Ryn & Saha, 2011)

• Biases on the basis of race, class, weight

• Lawyers, prosecutors and judges

• Gender (e.g., Levinson & Young, 2010)

• Race/ethnicity (e.g., Smith & Levinson, 2012)

• School teachers (e.g., Van den Bergh et al, 2010)

• Law enforcement (e.g., Correll et al., 2007; Peruche & Plant, 2005)

Implicit Bias Defined

Unlike explicit bias (which reflects the attitudes or beliefs that one endorses at a conscious level), implicit bias is the bias in judgment and/or behavior that results from subtle cognitive processes (e.g., implicit attitudes and implicit stereotypes) that often operate at a level below conscious awareness and without intentional control. The underlying implicit attitudes and stereotypes responsible for implicit bias are those beliefs or simple associations that a person makes between an object and its evaluation that “...are automatically activated by the mere presence (actual or symbolic) of the attitude object”

(Dovidio, Gaertner, Kawakami, & Hudson, 2002, p. 94; also Banaji & Heiphetz, 2010)

Although automatic, implicit biases are not completely inflexible: They are malleable to some degree and manifest in ways that are responsive to the perceiver’s motives and environment

(Blair, 2002)

Implicit BiasFair and Impartial Policing

• Need to recognize our unconscious biases —called “IMPLICIT BIASES” — so we can implement bias-free behavior

• Implicit biases are not EXPLICIT BIASES.A person with explicit biases (e.g., racist) has conscious animus towards groups, is unconcerned, and will talk to you about it.

Implicit BiasRace Crime Association Research

Dr. Jennifer EberhardtStanford University

Dr. Laura FridellUniversity of South Florida

Black Crime Association

How implicit biases affect us:

• It affects what we see.

• The mere presence of a Black face can cause

people to see weapons faster.

• The association is so strong that it can cause

people to determine which objects we see as

weapons.

The Visual Perception Study

• Subjects were “primed” with Black male faces,

White male faces, or no faces

• Completed object recognition task

(Eberhardt, Goff, Purdie, & Davies, 2004)

Correll Results: Race Made a Difference

Speed: Participants shot a White armed man slower than a Black armed man.

Errors: Participants were more likely to

shoot an unarmed Black man than an

unarmed White man.

(Correll, 2002)

The Muslim-Headwear Effect Results

• People were much more likely to shoot “Muslim-looking” people even if they were carrying an “innocent item” instead of a weapon.

• The study found “a significant bias for participants to shoot more at Muslim targets (comparing turban-clad vs. bareheaded targets),” implying that fast, spontaneous responses were influenced by “underlying stereotypes rather than explicit reasoning.”

(Unkelbach, Forgas & Denson, 2008)

Gender and Crime Implicit Bias

• In this same study, they also varied the “targets” by gender

• They found the expected gender effect: Subjects were more likely to shoot men than women even when the men were harmless

Blink Responses Linked to Crime

• Studies show that people link Blacks, Muslims and men to crime

• The science shows that mere knowledge of a stereotype produces an implicit bias

We All Have a Responsibilityto Intervene

Supervisors Have a Responsibilityto Intervene

Effective First Line Supervisors Are:

• Role Models

• Mentors

• Representatives of the Department

• Authorities on Policy and Practice

• Professional Coaches

• Disciplinarians

(c) 2013 FIP, LLC

SUPERVISORS ENCOURAGEYOUR OFFICERS TO BE AWARE!

SEEK OUT TRAINING & INVEST IN YOURSELF, SO THAT YOU MAY LEAD THE FUTURE, SO THAT YOU MAY HAVE GREATER AWARENESS!

Result? Win-Win

• Increased community trust

• Increased community cooperation

• Increased community support

• Decreased complaints

• Decreased officer stress

• Decreased crime

Procedural Justice in Action