RESUMEN
The effects of a carefully monitored and increased police patrol on the report of crime were examined in four patrol zones. Overall patrol movement was increased to four times normal levels and slow patrol movement (under 20 mph) to around 30 times normal levels for 10 days. The patrol was active in two zones between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. and in the other two zones between 7:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. A multiple-baseline design and time-series statistical analyses showed statistically reliable changes in reported levels of Part I crime (such as robbery, burglary, and aggravated assault) during both night patrols, but not in the day patrols. In both night-patrol zones, there were also reliable increases from saturation patrol to postsaturation patrol in report of Part I crime after the night patrol was terminated. Neither of the day patrols showed significant crime report changes on termination. Despite statistically reliable decreases in report of crime during nighttime hours, the value of saturation patrolling as a crime-prevention technique was questioned on cost/benefit grounds.
RESUMEN
The significance of a helicopter patrol procedure directed toward prevention of home burglaries was evaluated from experimental and cost-benefit perspectives. The helicopter patrolled one city zone from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. for two 12-day periods. Each 12-day period was separated by a baseline period in which only normal patrol-car levels were maintained. Significantly reduced burglary levels during the intervention periods, compared to baseline periods, documented the experimental significance of the helicopter procedure. The cash costs of implementing the patrol procedure were compared to two estimates of the resulting cash benefits. This latter cost-benefit analysis was supplemented by a discussion of the intangible costs and benefits of the helicopter procedure. Taken together, these analyses documented that the marginal costs of the helicopter intervention were exceeded by all estimates of benefits.
RESUMEN
Some nurses see peer review as a threatening experience and put up defense mechanisms to resist change. Others are recognizing it as a popular performance-appraisal strategy that will enhance their autonomy and accountability within their professional practice. But why do we need it? And what are the benefits?