Mobile computing & law enforcement: An Examination of its application in the field and its consequences

RIT Scholar Works

Theses

Thesis/Dissertation Collections

2002

Mobile computing & law enforcement: An

Examination of its application in the field and its

consequences

Lanny Lockhart Jr

Follow this and additional works at:

http://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please [email protected].

Recommended Citation

Examination of Its Application in the Field and Its

Consequences

By

Lanny Lockhart, Jr.

Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Master of Science in Information Technology

Rochester Institute of Technology

B. Thomas Golisano College

Of

Computing and Information Sciences

Thesis

Reproduction

Permission

Form

Rochester Institute of Technology

B. Thomas Golisano College

Of

Computing

and

Information Sciences

Mobile Computing & law Enforcement:

An

Examination of Its Application in the Field and

Its

Consequences

I. lanny

Lockhart, Jr., hereby grant permission to the

Wallace

Library of the

Rochester Institute of Technology to reproduce my thesis in whole or in part.

Any reproduction must not be for commercial use or profit.

Capstone Thesis Approval Form

Student Name:

Student Number:

Thesis Title:

Lanny Lockhart, Jr.

Mobile Computing

&

Law Enforcement:

An

Examination of Its

Application

in

the Field and Its Consequences

Thesis Committee:

Name

Prof. Steve Jacobs

Chair

Signature

Date

7

Dr. John Klofas

Committee Member

,"-P",-,ro=f,,-,.L=a="V",-,e=m=e.=..:M=c"""O"u=i=ll=er,--W"""-,-,,,i=lh='a=m=s'--

...:v/;_(_0~~

2-Committee Member

The

following

_study

has been

conductedinthepursuit_ofa_{Masters Degree ofScience in}

Information

Technology.

The functionalpurpose

_ofthis_studywasto examinethree basic

concepts (officerefficiency, safety, and arrest_rates)within

law

enforcementandto

attemptto

determine

if

aspecifictype_ofinformation

technology

(wireless

data

computers)

has had

anypositive impactonthoseconcepts. To_{that end, the} author

has

reviewedthe

history

_oftechnologyinlawenforcementand surveyed a_groupofpatrol

officersinthe Wilmington Police Department. Difficultiesassociatedwith_gathering

researchdatafrom lawenforcementagencies

has

also beennotedanddescribed. The

Anumberof people

have

_contributed,

directly

and

indirectly,

_{to this project,} andIthank

allofthem.

Firstof all

is

the

late Dick

Lewis.

He

set me onthispathoh so_manyyears ago,andI

miss

him dearly.

Specialthanks toDr. John Klofaswhopicked_{up Dick's}mantleand

has been burdened

with me ever since. Hehasplaced_manyopportunities

before

me,andIamthankful

for

eachofthem.

Steve

_{Jacobs is gratefully}acknowledged

for

dutiesaccepted and_graciouslycarried out as

thisproject

has

stumbledonmorethanone occasion.

Arespectfulnod

is

givento the Criminal Justice

faculty

ofRIT

for

_providingme withthe

academictoolsneededto succeed_{in my}chosenprofession. WithouttheireffortsIwould

not

be

whereIamtoday.

Anothernod

is

presentedtoProf. Elizabeth L.

Lawley

for

her Defense

input

whichhas

strengthenedthisdocumentandthisresearcher.

Tothe

late

Gene

Roddenberry

for

_creatingauniversethatstarted_my

love

affair with

technology.

Mostof allto_{my beloved}

bride

Joy,

whose

love,

support,and good

humor

werethe

APPROVAL

PAGE

ii

ABSTRACT

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

iv

DEDICATION

v

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS

vi

LIST

OF TABLES

viii

LIST

OF

DIAGRAMS

ix

INTRODUCTION 1

LITERATURE REVIEW 3

Historical Overview 4

INITIAL RESEARCH DESIGN 11

TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 15

Cellular Digital Packet Data

(CDPD)

15

Wilmington Police Department

&

Wireless Data

Technology

21

METHODS

23

Population

23

Sampling

Method

24

Survey

Designand

Scale

24

Methods of

Statistical Analysis

25

RESULTS

26

Reliability

26

CONCLUSIONS

36

Findings

36

Impact

of

Research

37

Project

Weaknesses

38

Discussion

39

Areas

ofFuture Research 43

REFERENCES 46

APPENDTX A: The

Survey

Instrument 49

APPENDIX B: The Revised

Survey

Instrument 58

APPENDIX C: DAT File 66

APPENDIX D:

COMMAND

File 67

APPENDLX E:

Codebook

72

1

Technology

Adoption

in

the Political

Era

5

2

Technology

Adoption

in

the Reform

Era

6

3

Technology

Adoption

in

the

Community

Era 10

4 Technological and Departmental Selection Criteria 12

5 Disadvantages of _{using CDPD} 19

6

Benefits of _{using CDPD} 20

7 Wilmington Police Department Hardware and

Operating

System Details.... 22

8

RELIABILITY Output for Quesl - Ques21 26

9

Race of Respondent 27

10 Education of Respondent 28

11 QUES8 'MDT's ease of

operation...'

30

12 QUES21

'Overall,

the adoption ofMDT's

has

made you feel

safer...'

31

Introduction

The

United States

criminal

justice

_{system,particularly}thatofthe

1990s,

has

easily

been

one ofthemost

technologically

advanced such systems

in

theworld.

Examples include:

Police

helicopters

are_using

infrared

sensors_{to track suspects;}

Patrolcarsare _carryingvideo camerastomonitor

both

officersand_suspects, and

therecorded

imagery

is

being

usedtogood effectincourts acrossthe_country

(Seaskate, Inc.,

p.

60);

Officersnow wearthe

latest

body

armor and_carryanumberofdifferent

less-than-lethalandlethal_weapons;

Thetime-honored_{crime-fighting}method of

fingerprinting

hasevolvedinto

highly

effectiveAutomated Fingerprint Identification Systems

(AFIS)

_allowing

police officers greater

flexibility

and speedin

identifying

_suspects1;and

DNA

testing

has

aided

in

countless cases where

little

otherphysical evidence was

available.

The

mostrecenthigh-techaddition

for

policeofficershas beenwireless notebook

computers. These

devices

arenow

being

installed

inpatrol cars acrosstheUnited

States,

and officers are_connectingto criminal

justice databases

withouttheassistance of

dispatchers.

For manyyears,

fingerprinting

was a_solitaryart_requiringa significant amount oftimeandexpertisefor

politicians often citethemarvels of wireless

data

technology

to thecriminaljustice

community in

press ads and at_marketing

demonstrations

(Capitol

Connections,

2000).

Police

officials acrossthe_countryoftenhearofincreases

in

officerefficiency, arrest

rates,and_safetyasaresult oftheuse ofthis

technology,

but

few

facts

arepresentedto

supporttheseclaims. Onthe surface,itwould make sensetoexpect an

increase in

_anyof

these threeareasthroughtheadvent of modern_computing

technology,

_particularly

in

a

paperwork-driven environment such as policework. Since

few

scientific studies

have

beenconductedtoexaminetheimpactof

information

technology

rollouts

in

the

field

of

law

enforcement, it

is

of vitalimportancetothecriminaljustice

field for

theactual

efficiency

increases

tobe

determined.

Most,

if

not_all,modernpoliceagencies are

facing

shrinking

budgets,

andcan

ill

affordtospend allottedtaxdollarson

flashy,

but

ineffective

technology. Policeofficials

have

tobewellinformed before

they

decide

to

purchase expensive computer systemsthatwill

be

more of ahindrancethana

benefit

and

thatcannot

be

_easilyreplaced.

To_{that end, this}researcher

has begun

investigating

thecurrent state of affairs

in

the

field

oflawenforcementwithregardto theusageof mobile_computingtechnology.

Whereappropriate, the

technology

ofpreference

has

beenexamined and

discussed. Six

policedepartmentshave

been identified

and contacted

for

relevant

information.

The

resultsofthosecontactattempts

have been

documented.

One department in

_particular,

theWilmington Police

Department,

was quite_willingto

be

of assistance and allowedthis

2

Theseresultsbearconsiderationinandofthemselvesdueto theconclusions

they

haveproduced regardingthecurrent attitude oflawenforcementadministrators andtheir_technologychoices. Itis hoped that thisfirstinvestigationintothenewarenaoflawenforcementandInformation

Technology

willopen

department. Those

_surveyresults

have been

_analyzed,and conclusions generated

from

thegathered

data. Though

specificto thatorganization and

limited in

scope, the

data

retrieved should also

be

of value as an

initial

examination oftheuse ofwirelessdata

technology

in

the

field

by

patrol_officers, and when examined

for its

relevanceto the

greaterlawenforcement community.

Literature

Review

Despitetheapparent ease of adoptioninferred fromthe_openingparagraph,most

oftheadvancements

in

police_methodologyand

technology

in

the

last

_century

have

neither

been

_quickly,nor_easilyadopted

(Pursley, 1994,

p. 214).

Institutional,

_political,

and sociological

dynamics

exist withinthelawenforcement_community, asinalmost_any

largeadministrative_{system, that}

hinder

theacceptance of'newideas.' Administratorsare

hesitant

to

institute

changes

in

_processes,politiciansare ever reluctanttorelease new

funds

tocertain publicagencies,and police officers work within a machoistic sub-culture

that

has its

own affect on change acceptance. Asa_result,changes withinthelaw

enforcement_communitycome_{slowlyand, generally,}asa result of outward

influence,

the

most notable of which

being

thecourtsystems

(Pursley, 1994,

p. 214).

Interestingly

enough, oncethose

forces,

eitherinternal or external

in

_nature, are

applied, theresultantchanges

typically

occurina_{rapid,sweeping}

fashion,

over a short

period oftime. Thecycle_{then repeats,}thereluctancetoadoptnewmethods returns until

thenext wave ofexternalpressure

is

applied.

Additionally,

themorethanseventeen

thousandpolice departments intheUnited Statestend toadopt new

technology

in

_wildly

the

formation

oftheLaw

Enforcement

Assistance Administration

(LEAA)

andtheLaw

Enforcement Education Program

(LEEP),

butthateffort produced mixed results

(Wrobleski

&

Hess, 1993,

p.48). Theeducational assistance component oftheLEEP

enabled numerous officerstoadvance

in

theirown educations and was quite successfulin

advancingtheprofessionalism ofAmerican lawenforcement

(Brule,

1997). Atthesame

time,

as

described

_{shortly, the technological}

implementations fostered

by

theLEAA often

foundered.

Before

looking

_specificallyat

laptop

_computers,

it

will

be

beneficialto

reviewthebasic

history

of

technology

transfer

in

American lawenforcementinorderto

better

understandtheprinciple .

Historical Overview

The

history

of modern_{American policing is broken up}

into

threephases:the

political_{era, the}reform_era,andthe_communityera(Wrobleski &

Hess, 1993,

pp.43-51).

The

first

ofthese threeeras was a period oftimemarked

by

both

widespreadpolice

corruption and variedtechnological adoptions.

Covering

theyearsbetween 1 840and

1930,

thepolitical era sawtherapidadoption of newequipmentand

ideas despite

corruptive

influences.

As Table 1

demonstrates,

thevarioustechnologiesofthat time

wereadopted_{relatively quickly (upon}the

discovery/creation

ofthe

technology)

by

differentpolice

departments.

Forexample,callboxesmade a rapid_entry

into

the

field

of

lawenforcement.

Created

anddeployed

in Chicago

inthe_{early 1}

880s,

thecall

box

was

later hailedasahallmarkof police

innovation

by

Chief

Francis

O'Neill in

a

1903

speech

before

theInternational AssociationofChiefsof

Police

(Seaskate,

1998,

p.

96).

The

then

lawenforcement3. Inthe

Political

Era,

thisachievementwould_only

be

eclipsed

by

Sir

Francis

Galton's

introduction

of

fingerprinting

in 1892

(Johnson, 1988,

p.253).

1850s

The firstmulti-shot_pistol,introduced

by

Samuel

Colt,

goesintomass production.Theweaponis

adopted

by

theTexasRangersand,thereafter,

by

policeagenciesnationwide.

1901

Scotland Yardadopts afingerprintclassification

systemdevised

by

Sir Edward Richard Henry.

1854-59

SanFrancisco is thesite of one oftheearliest uses

of systematic_{photography for}criminal

identification.

1923

The Los Angeles Police Departmentestablishes

thefirstpolice crime

laboratory

in the United States.

1877

Theuse ofthetelegraph

by

police andfire departments begins in_Albany,New York in 1877.

1923

Theuse oftheteletypeisinaugurated

by

the PennsylvaniaStatePolice.

1878

The telephonecomesintouseinpolice precinct

houses in_Washington,D.C.

1928

Detroitpolice_{begin using the one-way}radio.

1880's

Call_{boxes begin appearing in}cities acrossthe

country.

1930

[image:16.511.46.472.147.397.2]

Theprototype ofthe_present-daypolygraphis developed.

Table 1:

Technology

Adoption in the Political Era (Derived from Seaskate's "Police

Technology

Timeline", 1998,pp.22 &

64)

The Reform

Era,

_encompassingtheyears

between

1930and

1980,

began

as a

responseto thepolitically-driven corruption oftheprior age and concluded attheend of

thecivil rights

discord

ofthe 1960sand 1970s

(Wrobleski, 1993,

p.47). Thistime

frame

saw considerablechangesinthe

field

of

technology

andtheworldat

large.

Law

enforcement,

however,

onlysaw major changes

in its

useof

technology

attheopposite

ends ofthatfifty-yearperiod. Table 2

displays

some ofthoseadditions

between

1930

and _{1980. Police departments quickly}wentto

two-way

radio systems

in

the

1930s

and

1940s

for both foot

andcar patrols.

They

were_equallyprompt

in

incorporating

Priorto thispoint,officers on patrol were"ontheirown"

andhadtodealwitheventswithoutthe_abilityto

faded,

though,

by

theend ofthe

1940s,

and most policedepartmentswould not altertheir

overalltechnicalofferings

for decades

tocome.

1930s

Americanpolicebeginthewidespread use of theautomobile.

1960s

Thefirstcomputer-assisted

dispatching

systemis installed intheSt. Louispolicedepartment.

1932

The Federal BureauofInvestigation

(FBI)

inaugurates itscrime

laboratory,

_which,over theyears,comestobeworld-renowned.

1967

TheFBIinauguratestheNational Crime Information Center_QMCIC),thefirstnationallawenforcement computingcenter. NCICisa computerized national

filing

system on wanted persons and stolenvehicles, weapons,and otheritemsof value.

1934

Boston Policebegin_{using thetwo-way}radio.

1968

AT&Tannouncesitwill establish a special number

-91 1

-for emergencycallsto_police,fire,and other emergencyservices. Withinseveralyears,911 systems areinwidespread usein largeurbanareas. 1948

Radaris introducedto trafficlawenforcement.

1970s

Thelarge-scalecomputerization ofU.S.police departmentsbegins. Majorcomputer-based applicationsinthe 1970s includecomputer-assisted dispatch_(CAD),managementinformationsystems, centralized call collection_usingthree-digitphone numbers(911),and centralizedintegrated

dispatching

of_police,

fire,

and medical servicesfor large

metropolitanareas.

1955

TheNew Orleans Police Departmentinstallsan electronicdata_processingmachine,possiblythe first department inthecountrytodoso. The machineisnotacomputer, buta vacuum-tube operated calculator with a punch-card sorter and

collator. Itsummarizesarrests and warrants.

1975

Rockwell Internationalinstallsthefirst fingerprint readerattheFBI. In_1979,theRoyal Canadian Mounted Policeimplementsthefirstactual automatic fingerprintidentificationsystem(AFIS).

Table2:

Technology

Adoption intheReform Era (Derived from Seaskate's "Police

Technology

Timeline", 1998,pp.

22-23)

Itwasn'tuntilthecivil unrest ofthe 1960sthatsteps weretaken tomodernizethe

technology

used

in

lawenforcement. Theassassinations of

President

John F.

Kennedy

andMartin Luther

King,

Jr.,

alongwiththeclass riots_ragingacrossthe

United

States,

broughtabouttherealizationthatAmerican

law

enforcement

had

some

fundamental

[image:17.511.44.474.147.507.2]

standards.

Coupled

with_risingcrime_{rates, the}performance of

law

enforcementbecame

a political

issue

inthe 1960s

(Seaskate, 1998,

p. 2). President Lyndon B. Johnson

"appointed

thePresident'sCommissiononLaw EnforcementandAdministrationof

Justicetoexaminetheproblem"

(Seaskate, 1998,

p.2). Thatcommission's

findings,

releasedin

1967,

indicated

that_manypolice

departments

could

have

been usingthe_very

same

technology

as much as

30

years_prior,but

for

various_reasons,

had

notdoneso.

Most

departments

were still_{using 1940s}

technology,

likeradios, weapons,and out-dated

operatingprocedures,

in

the

late

1960's. Thepolitical and socialpressuresofthatera

wouldforcethe

federal

governmenttoreact andresultedinthecreation oftheLaw

Enforcement

Assistance Administration

(LEAA)

(Northrop, 1995,

p.259).

Thatagency's_primarygoal wastoprovide"grantstogovernmentagencies,

educational

institutions,

and private organizationstoimprove lawenforcement"

(National

ArchivesandRecords

Administration,

2000). Especialattention wasgivento

increasing

theoveralltechnical sophistication ofAmericanpolicedepartments. Fundswere made

availabletoagencies

for

theprocurement ofalltypesoftechnology:

including

crime

labs,

computer

hardware,

and computer software

(Seaskate, 1998,

p.34). Inthisregardthe

LEAAwasquite successful.

Countless

policedepartmentswereabletoacquire new

equipment,particularlycomputer

hardware

& _software,at

little

or no costto theparent

department. As

Kraemer, King,

and

Northrop

_{note, the}"LEAAcontributed_nearly

$50

milliontostate andlocalgovernment criminal

justice

andlawenforcement agenciesto

fight

crime. This

funding

was overmatched

by

other

federal

agencies such asthe

Federal

(Northrop,

et_al,

1995,

p.

259).

Unfortunately,

as often

happens in

_any

industry

where

large infusions

of cash

lead

to

technology

buying

_sprees,most ofthisexpensive

equipment was either_{under-utilized,}or_simplysat

in

original_shippingcontainers. As

G.

Thomas

Steele

recalls,"Alotof computerswereboughtwithLEAAmoney.

Many

were

stillintheir_{packingcrates,}not even

installed,

whenI sawthem"

(Seaskate, 1998,

p. 34).

These

failings

were caused

by

a combination of

factors,

the twolargest

being

lackof

funds for

adequate

training

anda

fundamental lack

of_{understanding}astothe

intracies

of

information

technology

deployments.

The formerremains an

issue

today

and

is just

as

unforgivablenowas

it

wasthen

(Seaskate, 1998,

p.4). The

latter,

asperceived

by

the

researcher,was_simplyabyproductofthe"newness"ofinformation

technology

atthat

time

in history.

Thisstateofaffairs continued well

into

the

1980s,

atleastonthelocal level. At

the

federal

level, however^

theFBI

had

been moving

forward

withtheNational Crime

InformationCenter

(NCIC)

sincethelate 1960's.

Embracing

technology

in

the

fight

against crimehad

long

beena motto

for

the

FBI,

andNCICwasto

become

the_crowning

achievementof_{that philosophy,}atleastwithregardto

information

technology.

By

1

967,

NCICwas_recordingannual

transactions,

_meaningrequests

for data

by

dispatchers,

inthe

millionsandhad

become

an unequivocal success(The

Investigator,

2000). The

growing

success ofNCICwouldhaveanother,perhaps_unexpected,

dramatic

affect on the use of

information

technology

in law

enforcement- local

law

enforcementnowhad access,

though

limited,

toanation-wide

database

of criminal records

(also limited in

size and

scope),andthoseopportunitieswouldfuelmore changes

in how

patrol officers operated

fairly

standard procedure

for

patrol_officers,upon_pullingoverasuspect_vehicle,to

perform a routine

lookup

against

NCIC

records

(Northrop

et_al.,

1995,

p.262). Through

the

1970's

and

into

the

1980's,

this taskwas accomplishedviaaradiodispatcher

operatinga remoteterminalat a centralized police

location.

Functionally,

theprocess

involved

having

a patrol officer

identify

a suspectvehicleandnotetherelevant

identification information

ofthedriverand/orthevehicle. Theofficerwouldthenradio

in

this

data

to theaforementioned

dispatcher.

Oftentheofficer's requestswouldhaveto

wait

in

a queue untilthedispatcher

had

availabletime toprocess

his

specific request.

Thisprocess couldtake_uptoseveral minutes. Thecumulative

delays

madethisatedious

processthat

begged for improvement.

The impactofthesystem's

inefficiencies

becomesmore

telling

asthe

Community

Eraof_policing

is

examined. WrobleskiandHess (1

993)

describe_{this era,starting in}

1980,

asthat timewhen

"many

policedepartmentsare

beginning

tobecome

"customer-oriented""

(pp. 50-5 1). Police departments

became

morelike businesses

in

that

they

were

far

more concernedwiththeneeds of_{communitymembers,referring}to thegeneral

publicthat

they

served and notjustthecriminal element_usuallyassociated with police

work, than

they

had

been inthepastandwere_willingtochangetomeetthoseneeds.

Thisattitudebeganto

foster

anopen atmospherethat_quicklyresultedinnew procedures

andtechnicalneeds

for

patrol officers. Evenas_{community policing}grew

beyond

mere

buzzwordstatus andpolicedepartmentsacrosstheUnited States started

reshaping

their

1980 1993

Police departments begin

implementing

"enhanced"

911,

whichallowsdispatcherstosee ontheircomputerscreenstheaddressesand

telephonenumbersfromwhichthe91 1

emergencycalls originated.

Morethan90percentofU.S.policedepartments

servingapopulationof50,000or more areusing

computers.

Many

ofthemare_{using them}for

such_relativelysophisticated applications as

criminal_{investigations, budgeting, dispatch,}and

manpower allocation.

1990sDepartments in New_{York, Chicago,}and

elsewhere

increasingly

use sophisticated

computer programsto_mapand analyze crime

patterns.

1996

The National

Academy

ofSciencesannounces

thatthereisnolonger anyreasontoquestionthe

[image:21.511.53.463.54.196.2]

reliabilityofDNAevidence.

Table 3:

Technology

Adoptions in the

Community

Era (Derivedfrom Seaskate's "Police

Technology

Timeline", 1998,pp.

23-24)

The

introduction

ofMobile Data Terminals

(MDTs)

topatrol cars markedone

suchimprovement

in

thisarena. Those officersfortunateenoughtoworkinadepartment

thatembracedthis

technology

in

the_early

1980s,

suchastheofficers intheSan Antonio

PD,

werenow abletoaccessNCICrecords

directly

from

theirpatrol_cars,

bypassing

dispatchersand_waitingqueues

(SAPD,

2000). Thoughprimitive

by

today'stechnical

standards, these

devices

gave equippedofficersthe_abilitytoacquiretheinformationthat

theyneeded more quickly. These devices

led

to theeventual adoption of notebook

computers

in

the 1990s. Wireless datanetworks,like Cellular Digital Packet Data

(CDPD)

and

ARDIS,

_{sprangup in}that

decade,

and_competingprotocols would

battle

back

and

forth in

thepolice market. Asprocessorspeeds

increased

and mobile

computersbecame_smaller,notebook computersbecamea more common sight

in

police

departments acrosstheUnited

States,

_replacingtraditionalMDTs inpatrol cars. As

laptops

becamemore_prevalent,vendorsand politicians alike would arguethatnotebook

computers were

having

apositiveaffectonthe

fight

against_crime,andthatofficers were

Isthis

true,

though?

Northrop, Kraemer,

andKing's 1995 study,"Police Use of

Computers",

wouldtend toagree withthatgeneralization(p. 262). To

be

moreaccurate,

though,

the

focus

oftheir_studywas moretowardsthe

training

of officers

in

theuse of

computers and

less

on perceptions ofefficiency, arrestrates, and_safetyasadirectuseof

information

technology

by

officers on patrol. In thecourse oftheirresearch,

they

did

notethatcertain statistical

increases in

arrestsand warrantsearcheshadoccurred

in

the

period

between 1976

and1988 as a result ofpatrol officerlookups. Theirresearch,

however,

also

included

dispatch-aided

information

_gatheringand

did

notdistinguish

between MDTand

dispatch

usage. Nor

did it

distinguish betweenthe typesofMDTs

(notebook-basedversustraditionalMDT). Inthe

following

study,it

is

theprogression

from

MDTstonotebooksthatis ofthegreatestinterest. Theresearcher'shypothesis

is

thatpatrolofficers, as a result of_usingwirelessdata

technology,

willperceive an

increase

inarrest_rates,overall_efficiency,and"safety".

Initial

Research Design

The

initial

design

ofthis _studywastoattempttoanswerthesequestions

by

gatheringand_analyzingpertinentdata

from

selected policedepartments. Thatselection

processwasto

include

identifying

policedepartments usingspecifictechnologiesand

having

certaindepartmentalcharacteristics(see Table 4). Once

identified,

those

departmentswould

be

contacted

directly

witha request

for

available

data,

_preferably

in

raw

format,

astoofficer_efficiency,arrestrates,and_safety

reports.4

This data

would

be

broken

down

into

Pre-adoptionandPost-adoptioncategories. Thosecategories would

then

be statistically

analyzed

for

patternsandtrends. Appropriateconclusions would

be

drawn from

thatanalysis and

be

publishedaccordingly.

Technological Specifications

CDPDnetwork_topology

Notebookcomputers_usingwirelessCDPDmodems

Directly

access criminaljustice databasessuch asNCICfroma_properlyoutfitted patrol vehicle.

DepartmentalCharacteristics

Statepoliceagency,sheriffs_department,orlocal

(metropolitan)

police

department.5

Varioustechnologicalcomponentsfora period oftime_exceedingone year.

Technologiesdeployed_{beyond any}'pilot'

projects(priorto that12-monthperiod).6

[image:23.511.47.453.112.284.2]

[Notethatnot alldepartmentscontacted met all_criteria.]

Table 4: TechnologicalandDepartmentalSelection Criteria

Using

the

factors

from Table

4,

various policedepartmentswereidentified as

likely

candidates and contacted

for

available

data.

Thelist7

is

asfollows:

Astate policedepartment

Aregional sheriffsdepartment

Ametropolitan policedepartment

A

federally-sponsored

police department

A federalagency'

suniformed police

department

Wilmington Police Department

(Delaware)

Thisportionoftheresearch effort produced resultsthatresulted

in difficulties

thatwere

not_entirelyunexpected,

but

were nonetheless undesirable.

5

Thenature ofthis study,withitscore examination ofpatrol-orientedlawenforcement,obviates

examiningfederalagencieslikethe DEAandFBI. 6

Like manyorganizations,policedepartmentsoften usesmallpilotprojectsto testnewtechnologies. 7

This

researcher's

first

_{candidate, the}regional sheriffs

department, did,

atthe

deputy-level,

express aninterest

in

_assistingwiththis_studyandwere quitehelpful

in

the

initial

stages oftheresearch.

Unfortunately,

when events

began

torequiretop-level

approval

from

thatcounty's _sheriff,all

interactions

withthatdepartmentceased, and

further

contact attempts were

ignored.

Thesecondcandidate

department,

a statepolice

force,

was also

initially

_veryopento

discussions,

and a

first

_meetingprovideda

substantive amount of

information

abouttheuseof mobile

technology

inthatagency. At

theconclusion of_{that meeting9,}

however,

thisresearcherwasinformedthat

he

would not

beabletoaccess_anyrawdata

from

thatagency. Theirrepresentative expressedconcern

thatother_recentlyadopted programs might_adverselyaffecttheoutcome of_anyanalysis

of what

little data

that

they

_possessed,and_similarly^ that

they

didnot

keep

accurate

recordsofthenature requiredintheoriginal_{study design.}

Follow-up

contact_attempts,

made whenthe_study

design

wasmodifiedto

its

current

form,

wentunanswered as well.

Afterthefailurewiththatstate police

force,

thisresearcherpostedto theNational

InstituteofJustice's

technology

website,

"JustNet",

(at

http://www.nlectc.org)

inpublic

forums dedicatedtolawenforcement

technology,

knowntobe frequented

by

law

enforcement

officers.10

Atthesame

time,

an_opportunitytomeet withthe_primary

communication/technologyofficerintheWilmington Police

Department

arose and was

takenonDecember

20,

2001. This meetingwithMaster

Sergeant

John S. Martin

produced a considerable amount of

data

andaffirmed

his department's

willingnessto

assist

in

thisresearcheffort. Heprovided a number oftechnical

details

abouttheir

8

Contactmethodsincludedphone calls/voicemail and emailmessages. 9

This meetingoccurred on 10 Oct00andlasted_{approximately}2.5 hours. 10

technicalconfigurations

(current

as ofthat

date),

including

dataon

how

and_whycertain

purchasing

decisions

were made.

Additionally,

he

wentonto confirmthisresearcher's

experiencethat_many

departments

are not_{properly (or}notat_all)

tracking

certain

data

associated withtheirnewtechnologies.

Accordingly,

he

admittedthat

his

department

would not abletoprovide_anyraw

data

with regardto theoriginal_{study design}concept.

He

did,

though,

expressthat

his department

might

be

_willingtoundergoa_{study survey}

orientedtowardspatrol officers andtheiruseof mobiletechnology.

Uponconsultationwiththesiscommittee

faculty

_members,a modified

design

approach was agreed upon. Fromthatpoint_{on, the}

design

model wastogeneratea

survey

instrument for

delivery

topatrol officers _{actively using}the

technology

under

study. Additionaldecisionsmade

by

Committee Chair Stephen Jacobsweretoallowthe

participatingpolice

departments

the_opportunitytoreviewthe

finished

thesispriorto

publication andtoallowthem theoptionto

have

the

document

'classified'.11

A survey

instrumentspecificto theWilmington PDwasgenerated and providedforcommittee

review&advisement

in

January

2001. In

February

2001 itwas giventoWPD

for final

approval uponreview, andtheactual

delivery

tookplace

in

March 2001. The

delivery

processwillbeoutlinedlater inthisdocument.

Whilethisprocess was

being

_{undertaken, the}original state police

force

was

approacheda secondtime

for inclusion in

this_surveyprocess.

Again,

email and

voicemailwere

left

unanswered.

Simultaneously,

twoseparate

federal

police

forces

were

approachedand given organization-specific_survey

instruments for

_{examination, but}

declined

toparticipate. Contactattempts with athirduniformed

federal

police_agency

11

were also

unsuccessful.12

By

June

2001,

it

wasapparentthatotherdepartmentswere not

willingto

be

included

in

this study,at

least

not at_{this stage,} andthesiscompletion

requirements/timetables restrictedthisresearcher's_abilitytocontinue_searching

for

willingparticipants.

As

a_result,adecisionwas madetomove

forward

withtheavailable

data from

theWilmington Police Departmentandtobegin

final

analysisoftheavailable

data.13

Technology

Assessment

Cellular Digital Packet

Data (CDPD)

Thoughother networktopologies

have

vied

for

the_{law enforcement/emergency}

services_market,most_{noticeably ARDIS}and

RAM/Mobitex,

Cellular Digital Packet

Data

(CDPD)

appearsto

have

emerged asthe_primarywirelessdatanetwork of choicefor

mostAmerican lawenforcement agencies. Acasual search oftheInternet

for

"police &

CDPD"

will

literally

find

thousandsof referencestopolicedepartments convertingto

CDPDnetworks. Atthe time that this_studywas initiated

in

1999,

thatnumber was

far

less. DelawareadoptedCDPD

in

a statewide

initiative

as

its

public_{safety data}network

inl998(Wartell,2001,p.

1).

CDPDwasdesignedtobean

industry

standard

for digital

_{data communications,}

developed

by

aconsortium_consistingof six

(out

of_{seven) Regional Bell}

Operating

Companies

(RBOCs), IBM,

andothertelecommunicationcompanies

(Dayem,

1997,

p.

47).

In

essence, the CDPDwireless network operates withintheconfines of_existing

cellular networksalongside_ordinarycell phones. The

data

technology

functions

inside

12

Andthisdespite

having

a

'friendly

ear'

connectedtoeach ofthosedepartments. Asconcluded

later,

having

adirectcontactina policedepartmentcanoften open

formerly

'sealed'doors. 13

Theweaknessthatthispresentstoward theoverall_studyisreviewedinthe"ProjectWeakness" section

ofthat

infrastructure

_{throughthesame radio}

frequencies

_(Wireless

Forum, 1998,

[image:27.511.45.405.109.327.2]

radiotec.html).

Diagram

1.0,

as seen

below,

representsthe

basic

concept:

Figure 1: CDPD Basic Network Design (Sochanand_{Chen, tpdmobile.html)}

Thewireless notebook representsthemobile_worker,inthiscase a sheriffs

deputy,

andthewireless

data

signal

is

senttothenearest cellulartower. Atthe

tower,

the

signal

is

processed

by

theMobile Data Base Station

(MDBS)

andtransmittedviadigital

landline

to theMobile Data Intermediate Systems

(MDIS)

(Dayem, 1997,

pp.97-100).

This_{component, simplyput,} providesthe

functionality

upon whichthemobileuser

communicates withtherelevantend-userservices. In_{this example, the}sheriffs

deputy

is

directly interacting

witha state-runserverthatprocessNCICchecks.

Naturally

the

process

is far

more complexthan

described

here,

butthis

level

of_complexity

is

sufficient

for

thepurposesofthis study.

Withthe_ongoinggrowthofthecellular

infrastructure in North

America,

coverage

for

CDPD continuestoexpandrapidly.

Installing

a

CDPD-based

wireless network would

(Wireless

Forum, 1998,

netreuse.html).

Otherwise,

thephysical infrastructureofthe

network

is

not changed.

Estimated

cellular usage

is

around55million users

in

theUnited

States,

andthatadds_uptoa

lot

of cellulartowers

(Parker, 1998,

p. 106). That existing

physical

infrastructure

allows cash-strapped police

departments

tomakethemostoftheir

capital

funds

while

gaining

a capable wireless

data

networkthatmeetstheirgeographic

requirements.

Froma software_perspective,

CDPD is

similartoRAM/Mobitex

in its

design.

CDPD

is

adigital

technology

thatrelies ondatapackets sent

in

short

bursts.

CDPD uses

forward

errorcorrectiontominimize

data

transmissionsand re-transmissions(Wireless

Forum, 1998,

mobiledn.html). Asthepackets aresent,

they

are encodedwitherror

correction

bits

thatallowthe_receivingequipmenttousesophisticated

decoding

algorithmstorecoverlost datawithout_{asking for fresh}transmissions(Wireless

Forum,

1998,

fec.html).

Thisprocess of

data

_recoveryatthe

handheld

unitlevel greatly increases

the_efficiencyofthenetworkwhile_{simultaneously minimizing}thecosts of use

by

decreasing

thepackets sent. Anotherexample ofthe_efficiencyoftheCDPDnetworkis

thatmultiple units can usethesame radio channel. This

is

accomplishedinthesame

fashion

aslocalareaEthernetnetworks:whenadevice

doesn't

needto

"speak",

it is

silent. If

it

has somethingto"say"(transmita

file

or_message,

for

_{example), then the}

mobileunitwill_accordinglytransmit

its data.

In

fact,

CDPDuses an open specificationthatallows

it

to

interface

withthe

Internet Protocolstandardsothatapplications and mobile units

have

thegreatest

versatilitywithother network protocols

(Dayem, 1997,

p.

99).

Specifically, by

for

theuse ofthemost commonInternet

Protocols;

such asSimple Mail Transfer

Protocol, Telnet,

File Transfer

Protocol,

andHypertext Transfer Protocol. Thismeans

thatthemobile units

in

the

field

are abletousethesame_operatingsystemsthatcan

be

found in

offices and at police

departments.

Having

thesame_operating systems onboth

mobile and_stationaryunits can cutdownon

training

costs andminimizeuserdifficulties

inthe

field.

Similarly,

asthe_operatingsystems evolve onthe

desktops,

themobileunits

running CDPDcan

be

_easilyupgradedto thenewer_operatingsystems with aminimumof

software changes. Suchunitscanalso accesstheInternetwithouttheadditionof custom

software applications: softwarethat_usuallycomeswitha

hefty

pricetag.

Of_course,usingmobile computers withInternetcapabilities requiresthatpolice

departments

make architecturaldecisionswiththeir

data

networkstoprecludeofficers

from

indulging

inunacceptablebehaviors

(surfing

inappropriate_{websites,playing}

network computergames,readingpersonalemail, etc). The Wilmington Police

Departmentisan exampleof an_agencythathastakensuchsteps. Master Sergeant

Martindescribed his

department's

procedures toreducethese unacceptable

behaviors,

whichinclude removingmedia

bays

(floppy

drives

and

CD-ROM

drives)

from field

units.

Table 5: Disadvantagesof_{using CDPD}

Speed

Providesrawdatarate atthespeed of19.2kbps.

May

notbesufficientfortransmissionof

digital images (ina_timely

fashion)

Coverage

One

area ofcontention

in

theadvancement ofCDPD has been

in

thearena of

information

security. CDPD

does

use abuilt-in securitysystemdesignthatinvolves

threecomponents:Airlink_{encryption, authentication,}andauthorization

(Dayem, 1997,

p.

100).

However,

components withinthatdesign

have

beencriticizeddueto the_possibility

of exploitationattacks againsttheencryption schemeusedintheprotocol. Yair

Frankel,

a noted researcher

in

the

field

of_{cryptography,} and associates are_amongthecriticsof

CDPD's

_securitymodel.

They

have

often

been

citedwith regardto thefaultsofCDPD

data

security,particularlytheopportunity

for

"maninthe

middle"

attacks. Theirwork,

Security

Issues inaCDPD Wireless

Network,

describesthisfault

in

detailandtheir

recommended replacement protocol

(Frankel,

etal, 1995). Inparticular, theirconcern

is

withtheDiffie-Hellman

key

exchangebetweentheMobile EndUserandtheMobile

Serving

Function.

Thecounter-argumentto thisconcernis described

here,

in

thewordsof some

CDPD's

founders:

Thespecificationteamrecognizedthatsuchauthenticationcredentialshave a

finite lifetime.

If

a mobileunit's authentication credentialswerestatic over_time,

thesecretcouldbecopied andusedtomimicthevalidunit. Toprevent_this, the

CDPDspecificationteamdefinedthe_abilityforthe CDPDnetworktoeither

periodicallyor attheserviceprovider's

discretion,

update a mobile unit's

authenticationcredentials. Inthis way, anyparticular authentication credential

only

has

value

during

theperiod_oftime

deemed

useful

by

thenetwork operator.

Taylor

et al.

(1996)

were well aware ofthe

intended

usesoftheirprotocolandattempted

toprovide a

functional

'real

world'

solutionto the taskof wirelessdata

communications.14

To

their credit,

CDPD has

stoodthe testoftimeand

is

_widelyutilized

across

North

America,

without_anysignificant acknowledged penetrations ofthose

existingnetworks.

Speed

Providesrawdatarate atthespeed of1 9.2kbps Connectionlessandinstantnetwork access

Protocols

Open-standardnetworkbasedonInternet Protocol

(IP)

andOSI Connectionless Network Protocol

(CLNP)

Compatiblewith_{existing TCP/IP}andUDP/TPapplications

Standards-based designallowsforcompetitivebids insoftware andhardwarepurchases,

therebyreducingsome costsinacquisitions_{(and/or upgrades)}

Reliability

and

Security

Userauthentication

Lesschance ofdataerror(comparedtovoice_{transmissions)}

Air-linkencryptiontoprevent_{eavesdropping}

Availability

Uses existingcellular networks

ProvideswirelessInternetaccess

Cost Effectiveness

Transmitsdata insmall packets

Fully digital,

lowerrorrates,higherspeed(19.2

Kbps)

Lowercost_{than analog}wireless connections

Connection-basedsystem

Table6:Benefitsof_{using CDPD}

14

Naturally

both issuescanbeexaminedforgreatertechnical

detail,

but thisexaminationisat asufficient technicallevelforthepurposesofthisstudy. Readersinterested inadeeperanalysis ofeitherissueare [image:31.511.47.461.198.525.2]

Wilmington Police Department

& Wireless Data

Technology

Lawenforcement

has

_certainly

demonstrated its

willingnesstoadoptthisnetwork

topology

over other offerings. The

State

ofDelawareand

its

variouspolicedepartments

have been

_{among the many American}

law

enforcement agencies

in

thelast decadeto

migratetowardswireless

data

communications. The Wilmington Police Department

(WPD),

one of

Delaware's

43

law

enforcement_agencies,

has

been using CDPD-enabled

notebook computers since_{approximately}mid-₁₉₉₉

(Martin,

2000).15WPD isauthorized

to

field 289

sworn_officers,

but

_{presently only has 280}officersontheforce. The

force

has

56marked cars

in

useddaily.16 Of that

280,

_{roughly 160} are

designated

asPatrol

Officerand performthe

duties

associated withthatstatus. Theseofficerspatrola metropolitan area of_{approximately 73,000}residents. Atthesame

time,

Wilmington

is

also

known

asthe"corporatecapital oftheworld". As a_result,downtown Wilmington

is

ahubof

business

activitieswithalargenumberof

daily

commuters_{coming in}and out of the_cityenvirons.

Through the benefitof state_grants,WPDwas able_{to purchase,}

install,

and

operatePanasonic Toughbooks. Theorganization

is

capable of

fielding

80

mobile_units,

but is

_only

fielding

48activeunitsat present. The intendedgoal

is

to

have

75 active units,with

five

availableas 'hotstandbys'

(formaintenance purposes). The

department

usesacombinationof models and_{operatingsystems,}as

detailed in

Table

8.

Their

intention

is

to _solidifytoone_operatingsystem astimeand resources allow. The

individualunits are

'assigned'

to specificpatrolunits(asopposedto

assigning

themto

15

Notethat the

following

detailsare accurate as of20December

2000,

thedateoftheinitial interviewwith

Master Sgt. JohnS.Martin. Some detailsmayhavechanged

during

the_writingofthisstudy.

16

Certaindetailsabouttheoperations andinfrastructureoftheWilmingtonPDwereconsideredtoo 'sensitive'

individual

_officers),

but

are not

hardwired

tothepatrol units.

A

docking

station allows

for relatively easy swapping

of

faulty

units.

During

thecourse oftheinterviewwith

Master

Sergeant

Martin,

thisresearcher's attentionwas

directed

towardsone such unit

in

his

office

awaiting

repairs. He

did

not,

however,

have

details regardingoverall

operational performance oftheunits

from

a maintenance

perspective.17

Lastly,

the

Input/Outputcomponents

(floppy

andCD-ROM

drives)

of each unit

have

beenremoved

toprevent unauthorized

tampering

by

officers. The

department

preferstoblockaccessto

sites

like

AOL and

MSN,

and_removingtheI/Ohardware

from

theunits

helps

to

limit

such_{activity (but}

does

not_completelyeliminate

it).

Table 7 Wilmington Police Department Hardwareand

Operating

System Details

Model (40of_each)

Operating

System CDPD Modem

CF-27 233MHz Windows 95B Spyder

(internal)

CF-27 300MHz Windows 98 Sierra SB300

(internal)

Theactual CDPDnetworkaccess

is

provided

by

Bell

Atlantic,

paid

for

through

Delawarestate contracts. This CDPD network coversthe_entiretyof

Delaware,

withthe

expectedareas ofpoor/non-existentconnectivity. The department didconsider

purchasinga separateradio-based

infrastructure,

but

theanticipated cost of such a

dedicatedsystemwastooexpensive. WPDhas

its

ownInternet Protocol

(IP)

Address

block,

also provided

by

Bell Atlantic. The specificsastoallotment of addressesto

individual

devices

were notprovided, forobvious reasons.

17

Thatissue isaddressedinthesurveysection ofthisdocument. 18

Forthosereaders without anInformation

Security background,

_{maintainingstrong}control of one's networkdesign isa good_steptoward

keeping

thatnetwork moresecure. Itisalwaysbesttoallow_only

'trusted'

The

department

uses

four

software applications as a matter of course. E-mail

has

astraightforward_purpose, and

is

provided atthestatelevel. Delawarestate

law

requires

thatall

law

enforcementreports

be

of a standard

format.

A

3270

emulatorallows

for

accessto the

Delaware Criminal Justice

Information System (DELJIS). Thethird

application used

by

WPD is

theEnhanced Police

Complaint

system

(EPC),

astate-run

central

database

criticaltotheDelaware Real-Time Crime

Reporting

System

(RTCR)

(Wartell, 2001,

p. 3).

This

application allows officerstocomplete_anyreport,short of

accident reports.

The

final

_application,

known

_simplyastheEnforcer_software,

is for

accessing National

Crime

Information Center

(NCIC)

databases.

Thisdirectaccessto

state and

federal databases

is,

asdiscussedpreviously,an

integral

driving

factor

behind

providingpatrol officerswithwirelessdatacommunications. Hasthis access,

though,

had

_any

discernable

impactontheWilmingtonpatrol officer? Have

they

seen_any

increases inefficiency, arrest_rates, ortheirown'safety' while onpatrol as a result of

usingthis technology? The Wilmington Police Department'spatrolofficers

have been

given a_survey

designed

touncovertheanswerstothosequestions. It

is

thisresearcher's

hypothesisthatinallthreecasesthe_respondingofficers wouldhaveseen

increases in

their efficiency,arrest_rates,and

level

of_safetyas aresultof_usingthiswirelessdata

technology.

Methods

Population

The

population examinedconsisted ofWilmington

Police Department

police

officers. The onlyrequirements

for

membersofthe

force

werethat

they

be

on active

patrol officer. Itwas

hoped

that

by following

the_samplingmethod

listed

belowthat

theserequirementswould

be

_properlymet.

Sampling

Method

The sampling

method used withtheWPDwas non-random andconsistedoftwo

separate

deliveries.

The

first

delivery

wasto the

Second

Shiftpatrol group,andthe

secondto theThird

Shift

patrol group. Both

deliveries

tookplaceinthesame24-hour

periodand

in

thesame

fashion.

Inbothcircumstances, thesurveytoolwaspresentedto

the_oncomingpatrol shift

during

theirpre-shift

briefing,

and completed_survey

forms

were gathered priorto theend ofthosebriefings.19_{This sampling}methodyielded32

completed surveys.

Survey

Design and Scale

Anextensive search of prior related efforts was performedtoprovidethis_study

withanapplicable scale

from

_anypreviousstudy. Thatsearchwasconductedfromand at

various

locations,

including

RIT's electronicdatabases (viatheWallace Memorial

Library'sonline

interface).

Additionally,

keyword

searches oftheWorld

Wide

Web,

usingphrases

like law

enforcement,

CDPD,

police, results, etc, were carried outwith

few

results of anacademic

nature.20

Nearly

allofthematerial generatedas a result ofthese

searcheswas of a popular orbusinessnature. The few_exceptions,thoughnot

directly

applicableto this _survey

design,

arelisted

in

thecitationsection ofthis

document.

Asa

result, theresearcherwas

forced

to

build

questionsbasedon prior undergraduate work

anddirectexperienceinthe

field

ofInformationTechnology.

19

Thepatrolshifts werethosemade available

by

Wilmington PD administration,hencethenon-random

samplingmethod. Theother shift was not available. 20

Notethat thesesearches alsoincludeda_varietyofBooleanexpressionstominimize straight-linelogic

The design

ofthe

survey

instrument

was straightforward andgeneral

in

form.

Of

the thirty-onequestions

in

the _survey

tool,

sixweredemographic innature. Those

questionscontained referencesto therespondent's_{sex, race, education,} and age. The

othertwo

demographic

_{questions, RANK}and

length

ofSERVICEas aPatrol

Officer,

wereadded. Withtheexception ofAGEand

RANK,

thequestions wereprepared

for

analysis as

interval-level

data.

_RANKwas modified

during

the

data

analysisphaseand

became

interval-level

data.21

AGEwas modified viathe

RECODE

command

found in

SPSS.

Twenty-one

ofthe_remainingquestions were gathered as ordinaldataand provide

the_primary

focal

points

for

the

data

to

be

acquired. _{The remaining}

four

questionswere

broad in design

andwere

included

toallowtherespondentstomake general statements

aboutthe

technology

in

theirdepartment.

Methods ofStatistical Analysis

Thetypes of statistical analysis available

for

use

in

this_studywereaffected

by

the

nature ofthe_survey

instrument,

andeachtestwaschosen with an eyeto themaximum

benefit

possible

from its

use. Statistical analysiswasconducted_using

SPSS,

versions

10.1 and 1

1.22

Asseen

in

theCommand File (Appendix

D),

the

first

statistical tool to

be

run againstthe QUES1throughQUES21 variableswastheRELIABILITYcommand.

Thistest

is

usedto test the_{internal validity}oftheassociatedvariables. Allofthe

variables werethentested

for

frequency-related informationviathe

FREQUENCIES

command. Somevariables weretested_only

for

mode,whileothers weretested

for

all

measurementsof

frequency,

including

mean, median, etc. The

final

statistical analysis

21"Patrolman"

becamea"1","Corporal"becamea_"2",and so_on,asthe_{survey data}was_manuallyplaced intotheDAT file.

22

performedagainsttheacquired

data

wasthecrosstabulationofcertain variables

in

specificsequences.

The SPSS

commandused

for

thispurpose wasCROSSTABS. Each

ofthese tests

included

options

for

_chisq and counts.

Results

Reliability

Asnoted_previously,the

first

statisticaltestperformed wasforreliability. The

QUES1 through

QUES21

variables

have

a_{reliability ALPHA}of.7715-thecloserto 1.0

that the_{reliability ALPHA}

is,

themore reliablethedata isconsideredto

be.

Inthis_case,

with a score of.7715,thedatagathered can

be

considered

fairly

reliableforthepurposes

of_{this study,considering}thesample size. Table 8

displays

theoutputfromthe

RELIABILITY

command.

Table 8: RELIABILITY Output for Quest- Ques21

RELIABILITY ANALYSIS - SCALE

(ALL)

Reliability

Coefficients

NofCases= _{27.0 NofItems}==₂₁

Alpha =

.7715

FrequenciesVariables

The second series of analyses

involved

the

following

variables:

SEX, SERVICE,

RACE, RANK,

andEDUC. Thesevariables,becauseoftheirnominal

level

of

measurement,could_only

be

tested

for

mode. Asa_{result, this testonly}gives a measure

ofthemost_{commonly occurring}value

in

each variable. For

SEX,

the

breakdown

consisted ofthreefemaleofficers andtwenty-ninemale officers.

SERVICE

provided a

in

patrol

duty.

Similarly,

the RACEvariable

had

a

fairly

uniformspread ofraces, as seen

in Table 9.

Frequency

Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Black 7 21.9 21.9 21.9

Hispanic/Latino 2 6.3 6.3 28.1

White 23 71.9 71.9 100.0

Total 32 100.0 100.0

Table9: RaceofRespondent

RANK

displayed

another expectedreturnof25

Patrolmen,

6

Corporals,

and 1

MasterSergeant.23

Of

these

five

variables,EDUCprovedthemost

interesting

in its

results.

According

to the

data

acquired,roughly 56.4percent ofrespondentshadeither

an

Associates, Bachelors,

orMasters degree (orsome combination

thereof),

and another

31.3percent

indicated

that

they

had

some

level

of college work. As

described

_previously

in

this

document,

theeducationallevel oflawenforcement officershad beena concern

in

the 1960-

1980s.

This_appearstobe

less

_{of an}

issue

now,atleast for the Wilmington

Police Department.

Follow-up

studies should

be

abletomore_accuratelyanswerthis

issue.

23

Aminorflaw inthesurvey instrumentsurfacedhere. 'Patrolman'

[image:38.511.44.421.119.248.2]

Table10EducationofRespondent

The remainingvariables,QUES1 through

QUES21,

were also processedfor

frequency

statistical results. Thesevariables_were,of_{course, the}main questions

in

the

survey

instrument,

anditwas expectedthat thedatagleaned

from

thesequestions would

either confirm or

deny

thisresearcher'shypothesis. Thequestions were

broken down

into

thebasiccategories of comfort

level

(withregardto

home,

work,and mobile

computeruse),

hours

of useper_week,MDToperational_aspects, softwaretype

(ECP,

DELJIS,

andEnforcer- their

impact

with regardto the threeresearch

issues),

andthree [image:39.511.44.463.72.392.2]

arrest_rates,andsafety).24

Theresults ofthatanalysis were

in

_manyrespects quite

surprising.

Those

questions andtheirresults are noted

below.

QUES5

reads as

follows:

"Please

indicate how

comfortableoruncomfortableyou

are withthemobile computerthatyour

department is

_currentlyusing". 93.8percent of

therespondents

indicate

that_theyare comfortable or somewhat comfortablewiththe

technology.

This

result

is

somewhat_surprising,evenforsuch asmallsample _size,as

it is

generallyaccepted withintheInformation

Technology

field

thatmostusers are

uncomfortable, tosome

degree,

withthe

daily

operation of suchtechnology. Atthe same

time,

the_{relatively young}ages ofthepatrol officers_{may be}

influencing

thisquestion's

results. Theamount oftimespent each week_usingthemobilecomputer_mayalso

be

affecting thatset of_responses,as seen

by

therepliestoQUES6. Seventeenofthe32

respondents

indicated

that

they

usedthemobile computers

between

two to tenhours a

week,and 13respondents repliedthat

they

usedthedevices formorethan ten

hours

a

week. Thepatrolofficers also seemedtofeelthat themobilecomputerswere

fairly

_easy

to operate,as seen

in

Table 11.

Similarly,

93.7percentoftheofficers

found

thatthe

technology

was either_easytoadaptto ornotdifficulttoadaptto (QUES9). Theofficers

were,

though,

somewhatdividedasto_{the reliability}ofthemobile_computers;34.4

percent answeredthat theunits were notreliable (QUES7).

24

The survey instrument erroneouslyreferencesDELJISasDCJIS. Saidinstrument,inits_entirety,is

containedinAppendix A.

25

Frequency

Percent ValidCumulative Percent Percent

ValidSTRONGLY 1 3.1 3.1 3.1

DISAGREE

DISAGREE 2 6.3 6.3 9.4

AGREE 25 78.1 78.1 87.5

STRONGLY 4 12.5 12.5 100.0

AGREE

[image:41.511.40.474.60.213.2]

Total 32 100.0 100.0

Table 11:QUES8 'MDT'sease ofoperation...'

Survey

questions

QUES10

through

QUES18 focused

onthe three

different

types

of software utilized

by

Wilmington

Patrol

Officers,

andthe

data

gathered

from

those

questions

is

as

follows:

83.8%of respondents agreed or_stronglyagreedthattheEnhanced Police

Complaint

software madethemmoreefficient

(QUES10),

while87.1%saidthe

same_regardingtheDCJIS

(DELJIS)

software(QUES16). Theseas comparedto

the62.6%who respondedthattheEnforcersoftware

had

allowedthem to

be

more

efficient(QUES13).26

71.4%of respondents either

disagreed

orstrongly

disagreed

withthestatement

that theEPCsoftwarehad

increased

theirarrestrates(QUES1 1). Thisresult

closelyparalleledthatofQUES

14;

71.4%

had

thatsame

feeling

aboutthe

Enforcersoftware. The only

difference

was

in

intensity

ofdisagreement. The

differenceswere

less

obvious

for

theDCJIS

(DELJIS)

software. Forthis

question,only 5 1.6%

disagreed

orstrongly

disagreed

astoarrest rate

increases

while48.

4%

agreedthat_usingthissoftware

had

increasedtheirarrest rates.

26

With

regardtoan

increase

in

'safety'

as a result of_usingthis

technology,

the

responses

for both EPC

(QUES12)

andEnforcer

(QUES15)

were_roughlythe

same;

approximately

70%

disagreed

or_{strongly disagreed. As}withtheprevious

section,theresults

for DCJIS

(DELJIS)

were muchcloser;54.8% disagreedor

strongly disagreed

while

45.2%

of respondents

(thirty-one

ofthirty-two_officers)

agreed or_stronglyagreedthat thissoftware madethem'feelsafer'

while on

duty

(QUES18).

Frequency

Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid STRONGLY

DISAGREE

1 3.1 3.4 3.4

DISAGREE 17 53.1 58.6 62.1

AGREE 9 28.1 31.0 93.1

STRONGLY 2 6.3 6.9 100.0

AGREE

Total 29 90.6 100.0

Missing

System 3 9.4 [image:42.511.42.480.253.424.2]

Total 32 100.0

Table 12: QUES21

'Overall,

theadoption ofMDT's hasmade youfeelsafer...'

Whenasked

for

overallimpressionsofthemobile

technology

in

use intheir

department

(aspresented

in

QUES20and

QUES21),

theofficers'

responses were

somewhatdivided. Whenpresentedwith_{the statement,}

"Overall,

theadoption_ofthe

mobilecomputersinyourdepartment

has

increasedyourarrestrate

",

1

8

officers

disagreedwhile_{the remaining twelve}

did

agree. Whenthesame general questionwas

asked aboutsafety, theresponseswere even more

divided,

asTable 12shows.

There

was

little

division amongrespondents withthe statement, "Overalltheadoption_ofthemobile

job

".

Only

one oftwenty-nine

responding

patrol officers

did

not

feel

moreefficient.

The

significanceofthisstatement will

be

addressedlater

in

thisdocument.

The

complete set of

frequency

analyses results are

in

Appendix F.

Crosstabs

The

thirdand

final

set of statistical analyses

involved

_performingcrosstabulation

of variables.

Specifically,

thevariables

RACE, RANK, AGE, EDUC, SERVICE,

and

SEXweretested

individually

againstthevariables ofQUES1 - QUES21.

Additionally,

crosstabulation

testing

was performed on an ad

hoc

basisas

interesting

and/or

unexpected results occurred.

Overall,

the

breakdown

oftheindependentvariables

againstthe

dependent

variables provided variousrevelations,particularlywhencompared

againsttheresults

from

the

frequency

analysis asdescribedpreviously. The

following

items from

thecrosstabulationanalysis are_worthyof comment.

Unfortunately

thesampleset_onlycontainsthree

female

officers,and one ofthose

threeofficersdidnotanswerthe_majoritythedependentvariablequestions(QUES10

through

QUES21)

of_primary

interest,

sothe

data

gleaned

from

thevariable SEX

is

too

limited for

_anypractical usewithinthisstudy.

The RACEvariable

has

abreakdownof sevenBlackofficers, twoHispanic

officers, andtwenty-threeWhiteofficers. Anexaminationofthisvariable against

QUES1 throughQUES6shows no significantdifferences betweenthe

different

racial

typesexceptthattheBlackofficers_generallyseem morecomfortablewiththe

technology. Thesameexaminationagainst

QUES7

throughQUES9reveals a similar

generalresult,withtheexceptionof

QUES8,

"the mobile

data

terminal

(MDT)

_{is easy}to

27

operate...

"

in

which all seven

Black

respondents agreedthattheunitswere_easyto

operate.

For

the

survey

questions

QUES10

-QUES18,

theresponses providedtendedto

be

more

evenly

distributed

withinthe BlackrespondentsthanwithintheWhite

respondents.

When

presented withthequestion of overall_efficiency,as

in

QUES19,

the

races answered as seen

in

Table 13.

DISAGREEAGREE STRONGLY Total AGREE

Black Count 1 4 2 7

%within RACE 'RaceofRespondent' 14.3% 57.1% 28.6% 100.0% %withinQUES19

'Overall,

the 100.0% 17.4% 33.3% 23.3%

adoptionofMDT's hasmadeyou

more

efficient...'

%ofTotal 3.3% 13.3% 6.7% 23.3%

Hispanic Count 1 1

/Latino

%within RACE 'RaceofRespondent' 100.0% 100.0%

%within QUES19

'Overall,

the 4.3% 3.3%

adoption ofMDT's hasmade you

moreefficient...'

%ofTotal 3.3% 3.3%

White Count 18 4 22

%within RACE 'RaceofRespondent' 81.8% 18.2% 100.0% %withinQUES19'Overall,the 78.3% 66.7% 73.3% adoptionofMDT's hasmadeyou

more

efficient...'

%ofTotal 60.0% 13.3% 73.3%

Count 1 23 6 30

%within RACE 'RaceofRespondent' 3.3% 76.7% 20.0% 100.0% %within QUES19

'Overall,

the 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% adoptionofMDT'shasmadeyou

more

effici