Reforming the police through procedural justice training: A multicity randomized trial at crime hot spots.

SignificanceOur study is a randomized trial in policing confirming that intensive training in procedural justice (PJ) can lead to more procedurally just behavior and less disrespectful treatment of people at high-crime places. The fact that the PJ intervention reduced arrests by police officers, positively influenced residents' perceptions of police harassment and violence, and also reduced crime provides important guidance for police reform in a period of strong criticism of policing. This randomized trial points to the potential for PJ training not simply to encourage fair and respectful policing but also to improve evaluations of the police and crime prevention effectiveness.

Enhancing Informal Social Controls to Reduce Crime: Evidence from a Study of Crime Hot Spots.

There is growing evidence that crime is strongly concentrated in micro-geographic hot spots, a fact that has led to the wide-scale use of hot spots policing programs. Such programs are ordinarily focused on deterrence due to police presence, or other law enforcement interventions at hot spots. However, preliminary basic research studies suggest that informal social controls may also be an important mechanism for crime reduction on high crime streets. Such research has been hindered by a lack of data on social and attitudinal characteristics of residents, and the fact that census information is not available at the micro-geographic level. Our study, conducted in Baltimore, MD, on a sample of 449 residential street segments, overcame these limitations by collecting an average of eight surveys (N = 3738), as well as physical observations, on segments studied. This unique primary data collection allowed us to develop the first direct indicators of collective efficacy at the micro-geographic level, as well as a wide array of indicators of other possible risk and protective factors for crime. Using multilevel negative binomial regression models, we also take into account community-level influences, and oversample crime hot spots to allow for robust comparisons across streets. Our study confirms the importance of opportunity features of streets such as population size and business activity in understanding crime, but also shows that informal social controls, as reflected by collective efficacy, are key for understanding crime on high crime streets. We argue that it is time for police, other city agencies, and NGOs to begin to work together to consider how informal social controls can be used to reduce crime at residential crime hot spots.

Perspectives of people with mental health problems at hot spots: Attitudes and perceptions of safety, crime, and the police.

People who live in places with high levels of crime and disorder are more likely to experience mental illness compared with those who do not live in these types of place (Weisburd et al., 2018; Weisburd & White, 2019). The increased police presence on high crime streets may also increase the likelihood that these individuals will encounter law enforcement. There is a strong body of literature focused on the relationship between neighborhoods and the physical and mental health of residents (e.g. Arcaya et al., 2016; Duncan & Kawachi, 2018; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2003), but there are very few studies that look at the perceptions of people with mental illness directly, particularly as they relate to the environment of the street on which they live and attitudes toward the police. In turn, existing studies generally look at the most serious mental health problems (e.g. schizophrenia), ignoring more common mental health concerns such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression. This paper uses self-report data from a large in-person survey of people who live on crime hot spot and non-hot spot streets in order to assess attitudes among a broader group of persons with mental health problems. Furthermore, we examine the interaction between living in crime hot spots and non-hot spots and perceptions of these residents. Our findings in this broader sample confirm earlier studies that identify greater fear and less trust of the police among persons with mental illnesses. At the same time, our findings suggest that fear of crime and perceptions of police are moderated by living in a crime hot spot.

Understanding the role of service providers, land use, and resident characteristics on the occurrence of mental health crisis calls to the police.

Similar to concentrations of crime, mental health calls have been found to concentrate at a small number of places, but few have considered the context of places where mental health calls occur. The current study examines the influence of the physical and social context of street segments, particularly the role of service providers, land use features of the street and nearby area, and characteristics of residents on the likelihood of a mental health crisis call to the police occurring on the street. The findings demonstrate that the social context, such as offending and drug use among residents, levels of social cohesion and community involvement, and drug and violent crime influenced the occurrence of mental health crisis calls. Findings from this study make theoretical and practical contributions to a number of disciplines by improving our understanding of where mental health crisis calls occur and why they are found at specific places.

Hot Spots of Crime are Not Just Hot Spots of Crime: Examining Health Outcomes at Street Segments.

In this paper we seek to identify whether the relationship between health disparities and crime occurs at a micro geographic level. Do hot spot streets evidence much higher levels of mental and physical illness than streets with little crime? Are residents of crime hot spots more likely to have health problems that interfere with their normal daily activities? To answer these questions, we draw upon a large National Institutes of Health study of a sample of hot spots and non-hot spots in Baltimore, Maryland. This is the first study we know of to report on this relationship, and accordingly we present unique descriptive data. Our findings show that both physical and mental health problems are much more likely to be found on hot spot streets than streets with little crime. This suggests that crime hot spots are not simply places with high levels of crime, but also places that evidence more general disadvantage. We argue that these findings have important policy implications for the targeting of health services and for developing proactive prevention programs.

Mean Streets and Mental Health: Depression and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder at Crime Hot Spots.

This study explores the relationship between mental health and place at microgeographic units of analysis. We examine self-reported symptomology for depression and PTSD for 2,724 survey respondents interviewed in three types of randomly selected street segments: violent crime hot spots, cool spots, and cold spots. We find that the mean symptomology score is 61% higher for depression in violent crime hot spots than cold spots, and 85% higher for PTSD. Overall, we estimate that 14.8% of residents of violent crime hot spots meet thresholds for moderate depression or a diagnosis of PTSD. This can be compared to only 6.5% of residents at the cold spots. Using PSM and weighted negative binomial regression approaches we show that observable selection factors are not responsible for the relationships identified. Examining geographic influences, we find an important area effect of violent crime for both mental health measures, and an additional impact of the specific street of residence for PTSD.

Focused deterrence and the prevention of violent gun injuries: practice, theoretical principles, and scientific evidence.

Focused deterrence strategies are a relatively new addition to a growing portfolio of evidence-based violent gun injury prevention practices available to policy makers and practitioners. These strategies seek to change offender behavior by understanding the underlying violence-producing dynamics and conditions that sustain recurring violent gun injury problems and by implementing a blended strategy of law enforcement, community mobilization, and social service actions. Consistent with documented public health practice, the focused deterrence approach identifies underlying risk factors and causes of recurring violent gun injury problems, develops tailored responses to these underlying conditions, and measures the impact of implemented interventions. This article reviews the practice, theoretical principles, and evaluation evidence on focused deterrence strategies. Although more rigorous randomized studies are needed, the available empirical evidence suggests that these strategies generate noteworthy gun violence reduction impacts and should be part of a broader portfolio of violence prevention strategies available to policy makers and practitioners.

Understanding and controlling hot spots of crime: the importance of formal and informal social controls.

Primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention programs that address opportunity or structural factors related to crime are usually delivered to entire cities, sections of cities or to specific neighborhoods, but our results indicate geographically targeting these programs to specific street segments may increase their efficacy. We link crime incidents to over 24,000 street segments (the two block faces on a street between two intersections) over a 16-year period, and identify distinct developmental patterns of crime at street segments using group-based trajectory analysis. One of these patterns, which we term chronic crime hot spots, includes just 1 % of street segments but is associated with 23 % of crime in the city during the study period. We then employ multinomial regression to identify the specific risk and protective factors that are associated with these crime hot spots. We find that both situational opportunities and social characteristics of places strongly distinguish chronic crime hot spots from areas with little crime. Our findings support recent efforts to decrease crime opportunities at crime hot spots through programs like hot spots policing, but they also suggest that social interventions directed at crime hot spots will be important if we are to do something about crime problems in the long run. We argue in concluding that micro level programs which focus crime prevention efforts on specific street segments have the potential to be less costly and more effective than those targeted at larger areas such as communities or neighborhoods.

Police stops to reduce crime: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Police-initiated pedestrian stops have been one of the most widely used crime prevention tactics in modern policing. Proponents have long considered police stops to be an indispensable component of crime prevention efforts, with many holding them responsible for the significant reductions in violent crime observed across major US cities in recent decades. Critics, however, have taken issue with the overuse of pedestrian stops, linking them to worsening mental and physical health, attitudes toward the police, and elevated delinquent behavior for individuals directly subject to them. To date, there has been no systematic review or meta-analysis on the effects of these interventions on crime and individual-level outcomes. Objectives: To synthesize the existing evaluation research regarding the impact of police-initiated pedestrian stops on crime and disorder, mental and physical health, individual attitudes toward the police, self-reported crime/delinquency, violence in police-citizen encounters, and police misbehavior. Search Methods: We used the Global Policing Database, a repository of all experimental and quasi-experimental evaluations of policing interventions conducted since 1950, to search for published and unpublished evaluations of pedestrian stop interventions through December of 2019. This overarching search was supplemented by additional searches of academic databases, gray literature sources, and correspondence with subject-matter experts to capture eligible studies through December 2021. Selection Criteria: Eligibility was limited to studies that included a treatment group of people or places experiencing pedestrian stops and a control group of people or places not experiencing pedestrian stops (or experiencing a lower dosage of pedestrian stops). Studies were required to use an experimental or quasi-experimental design and evaluate the intervention using an outcome of area-level crime and disorder, mental or physical health, individual or community-level attitudes toward the police, or self-reported crime/delinquency. Data Collection and Analysis: We adopted standard methodological procedures expected by the Campbell Collaboration. Eligible studies were grouped by conceptually similar outcomes and then analyzed separately using random effects models with restricted maximum likelihood estimation. Treatment effects were represented using relative incident rate ratios, odds ratios, and Hedges' g effect sizes, depending on the unit of analysis and outcome measure. We also conducted sensitivity analyses for several outcome measures using robust variance estimation, with standard errors clustered by each unique study/sample. Risk of bias was assessed using items adapted from the Cochrane randomized and non-randomized risk of bias tools. Results: Our systematic search strategies identified 40 eligible studies corresponding to 58 effect sizes across six outcome groupings, representing 90,904 people and 20,876 places. Police-initiated pedestrian stop interventions were associated with a statistically significant 13% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -16%, -9%, p < 0.001) reduction in crime for treatment areas relative to control areas. These interventions also led to a diffusion of crime control benefits, with a statistically significant 7% (95% CI: -9%, -4%, p < 0.001) reduction in crime for treatment displacement areas relative to control areas. However, pedestrian stops were also associated with a broad range of negative individual-level effects. Individuals experiencing police stops were associated with a statistically significant 46% (95% CI: 24%, 72%, p < 0.001) increase in the odds of a mental health issue and a 36% (95% CI: 14%, 62%, p < 0.001) increase in the odds of a physical health issue, relative to control. Individuals experiencing police stops also reported significantly more negative attitudes toward the police (g = -0.38, 95% CI: -0.59, -0.17, p < 0.001) and significantly higher levels of self-reported crime/delinquency (g = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.48, p < 0.001), equating to changes of 18.6% and 15%, respectively. No eligible studies were identified measuring violence in police-citizen encounters or officer misbehavior. While eligible studies were often considered to be at moderate to high risk of bias toward control groups, no significant differences based on methodological rigor were observed. Moderator analyses also indicated that the negative individual-level effects of pedestrian stops may be more pronounced for youth, and that significant differences in effect sizes may exist between US and European studies. However, these moderator analyses were limited by a small number of studies in each comparison, and we were unable to compare the effects of police stops across racial groupings. Authors' Conclusions: While our findings point to favorable effects of pedestrian stop interventions on place-based crime and displacement outcomes, evidence of negative individual-level effects makes it difficult to recommend the use of these tactics over alternative policing interventions. Recent systematic reviews of hot spots policing and problem-oriented policing approaches indicate a more robust evidence-base and generally larger crime reduction effects than those presented here, often without the associated backfire effects on individual health, attitudes, and behavior. Future research should examine whether police agencies can mitigate the negative effects of pedestrian stops through a focus on officer behavior during these encounters.

Effects of second responder programs on repeat incidents of family abuse: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Family abuse is a recurrent phenomenon within a select population of households. This form of abuse can include any physical or psychological harassment that occurs between family or household members, and often involves complex mental and emotional issues that are resistant to intervention. Traditional criminal justice strategies for combating this issue have evolved over time but have frequently demonstrated limited success. Within the past few decades, multiagency programs to address repeat family abuse have gained popularity. One such program, termed "second responders," teams police officers with social service workers, victim advocates, or counselors to conduct follow-up visits with victims of family abuse following a complaint. Second responders seek to educate victims about the cyclical nature of family abuse, engage in safety planning, and/or provide service referrals. These interventions are based on the premise that victims are more likely to be receptive to crime prevention opportunities immediately following victimization. Second responder interventions have received support from the US Department of Justice and their adoption has spread in both the United States and internationally, however, there remains little conclusive evidence on their effects. Objectives: To update and extend the findings of the prior second responders systematic review and meta-analysis by synthesizing the results of published and unpublished second responder evaluations through October of 2021. This review also examines the use of victim services as a secondary outcome and incorporates a number of additional moderator analyses. Search Methods: The Global Policing Database (GPD), a repository of all experimental and quasi-experimental evaluations of policing interventions conducted since 1950, was searched using keywords related to second responder interventions and repeat family violence from 2004 to December 2019 (https://gpd.uq.edu.au/s/gpd/page/about). This search was also supplemented with additional strategies, such as reference harvesting of prior reviews, searching 2020 and 2021 volumes of leading academic journals, reviewing the reference lists of eligible studies, searching additional gray literature repositories focused on domestic violence, and consulting with eligible study authors. Selection Criteria: Eligible studies were required to include a treatment group that received the second responder intervention and a comparison group that did not. Assignment to these conditions could be either experimental or quasi-experimental, but quasi-experimental studies were required to use either matched comparison groups or multivariate analysis methods to control for confounding factors. Eligibility was limited to studies reporting on at least one measure of repeat family abuse, such as intimate partner violence, elder abuse, or general family abuse. Measures of repeat abuse could be based on either official (i.e., police data) or unofficial (i.e., victim survey data) data sources. Data Collection and Analysis: Five new studies were identified between 2004 and 2019, all of which contained sufficient data for the calculation of at least one effect size. Along with the 10 studies included in the prior review, a total of 15 studies and 29 distinct effect sizes were analyzed across three outcome constructs. Effect sizes were calculated as logged odds ratios and results were synthesized using random effects models with restricted maximum likelihood estimation. Final results were exponentiated to represent the percentage point difference in the odds of a given outcome for treatment groups relative to control groups. Risk of bias was assessed using items adapted from the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools for experimental and quasi-experimental studies. Eligible studies were generally considered to be of low risk of bias, however, issues with survey success/contact rates and the analytical approaches to these problems led to concern in several studies. Results: These analyses suggest that second responder interventions produced no significant effects on either police or victim-reported measures of repeat family abuse, in aggregate. However, findings from the more rigorous experimental studies indicated that second responder interventions were associated with a statistically significant 22% (95% confidence interval [CI] [1.04, 1.43]) increase in the odds of a police-reported repeat family abuse incident, with no significant variability in individual study results. Additionally, studies that measured the use of victim services as a secondary outcome were associated with a statistically significant 9% (95% CI [1.02, 1.16]) increase in the odds of service use for treatment groups relative to control groups. Several study characteristics also proved to be important moderators of treatment effects. Increases in the speed of the second response were associated with significant decreases in the odds of a victim-reported repeat incident, and studies that measured repeat family abuse using households were associated with significantly higher odds of a police-reported repeat incident, compared to studies that used the same victim or victim/offender pairing more generally. Authors' Conclusions: Second responder interventions are undoubtedly appealing based on their logic and intentions. Yet, well-intentioned programs with sound logic can still backfire, and the results of this updated review provide evidence that may be suggestive of a backfire effect. Even so, any firm conclusions from this review are limited by a lack of knowledge on the mechanisms operating in between the implementation of the second response intervention and the observed effects, as well as the small sample sizes involved in many analyses. While it seems clear that these programs are not producing any broad reductions in self-reported victimization, the increase in police-reported violence seen in experimental studies could indicate either a true increase in abuse or an increased willingness to call the police. The lack of observed impact on victim-reported violence would suggest the latter, but without more specific measures, such conclusions should be avoided. If these results are indicative of increased reporting, however, many may consider this a desirable outcome, particularly given the often-underreported nature of family abuse and the potential for increased reporting to lead to long-term reductions in abuse. Furthermore, these results provide an indication that second responder programs can produce other intended effects, such as increasing the retention of victim services, and that the specific characteristics of these interventions may moderate their effects. It is unclear why elements such as the immediacy of the second response or the unit of analysis being evaluated would impact study results, but these observations are consistent with the theory that domestic violence interventions must capitalize on short windows of opportunity and create separation between victims and offenders to reduce exposure and subsequent victimization. This potential indicates a need for more research on second responder programs, but specifically research that examines these moderating characteristics and mechanisms. Even in light of this potential, second responder programs do not, on average, appear to reduce the prevalence of repeat family abuse. Given the presence of alternative (and possibly more effective) domestic violence interventions that now exist (e.g., Safe Dates, Shifting Boundaries, Green Dot, etc.), it seems that policymakers may wish to look elsewhere for efforts to reduce family abuse.

What are the effects of different elements of media on radicalization outcomes? A systematic review.

Background: Most national counter-radicalization strategies identify the media, and particularly the Internet as key sources of risk for radicalization. However, the magnitude of the relationships between different types of media usage and radicalization remains unknown. Additionally, whether Internet-related risk factors do indeed have greater impacts than other forms of media remain another unknown. Overall, despite extensive research of media effects in criminology, the relationship between media and radicalization has not been systematically investigated. Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to (1) identify and synthesize the effects of different media-related risk factors at the individual level, (2) identify the relative magnitudes of the effect sizes for the different risk factors, and (3) compare the effects between outcomes of cognitive and behavioral radicalization. The review also sought to examine sources of heterogeneity between different radicalizing ideologies. Search Methods: Electronic searches were carried out in several relevant databases and inclusion decisions were guided by a published review protocol. In addition to these searches, leading researchers were contacted to try and identify unpublished or unidentified research. Hand searches of previously published reviews and research were also used to supplement the database searches. Searches were carried out until August 2020. Selection Criteria: The review included quantitative studies that examined at least one media-related risk factor (such as exposure to, or usage of a particular medium or mediated content) and its relationship to either cognitive or behavioral radicalization at the individual level. Data Collection and Analysis: Random-effects meta-analysis was used for each risk factor individually and risk factors were arranged in rank-order. Heterogeneity was explored using a combination of moderator analysis, meta-regression, and sub-group analysis. Results: The review included 4 experimental and 49 observational studies. Most of the studies were judged to be of low quality and suffer from multiple, potential sources of bias. From the included studies, effect sizes pertaining to 23 media-related risk factors were identified and analyzed for the outcome of cognitive radicalization, and two risk factors for the outcome of behavioral radicalization. Experimental evidence demonstrated that mere exposure to media theorized to increase cognitive radicalization was associated with a small increase in risk (g = 0.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-0.03, 19]). A slightly larger estimate was observed for those high in trait aggression (g = 0.13, 95% CI [0.01, 0.25]). Evidence from observational studies shows that for cognitive radicalization, risk factors such as television usage have no effect (r = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.06, 0.09]). However, passive (r = 0.24, 95% CI [0.18, 0.31]) and active (r = 0.22, 95% CI [0.15, 0.29]) forms of exposure to radical content online demonstrate small but potentially meaningful relationships. Similar sized estimates for passive (r = 0.23, 95% CI [0.12, 0.33]) and active (r = 0.28, 95% CI [0.21, 0.36]) forms of exposure to radical content online were found for the outcome of behavioral radicalization. Authors' Conclusions: Relative to other known risk factors for cognitive radicalization, even the most salient of the media-related risk factors have comparatively small estimates. However, compared to other known risk factors for behavioral radicalization, passive and active forms of exposure to radical content online have relatively large and robust estimates. Overall, exposure to radical content online appears to have a larger relationship with radicalization than other media-related risk factors, and the impact of this relationship is most pronounced for behavioral outcomes of radicalization. While these results may support policy-makers' focus on the Internet in the context of combatting radicalization, the quality of the evidence is low and more robust study designs are needed to enable the drawing of firmer conclusions.

Communities, Streets, and People: A Multi-level Study of the Correlates of Victimization.

The current study adds the context of the immediate microgeographic environment (measured as the street segment) to the study of individual victimization. Using residential survey and physical observation data collected on 449 street segments nested within 53 communities in Baltimore, MD, we employ multilevel logistic regression models to examine how individual risky lifestyles, the microgeographic context of the street, and community level measures influence self-reported property and violent crime victimization. Results confirm prior studies that show that risky lifestyles play a key role in understanding both property and violent crime victimization, and community indicators of disadvantage play a role in explaining violent crime victimization. At the same time, our models show that the street segment (micro-geographic) level adds significant explanation to our understanding of victimization, suggesting that three level models should be used in explaining individual victimization. The impact of the street segment is particularly salient for property crime.

PROTOCOL: What are the effects of different elements of media on radicalization outcomes? A systematic review.

Objectives: In this systematic review and meta analysis we will collate and synthesize the evidence on media-effects for radicalization, focusing on both cognitive and behavioral outcomes. The goal is to identify the relative magnitudes of the effects for different mediums, types of content, and elements of human-media relationships. Methodology: Random-effects meta analysis will be used and the results will be rank-ordered according to the size of the pooled estimates for the different factors. Meta-regressions, moderator analysis, and sub-group analyses will be used to investigate sources of heterogeneity. Implications: The results of this review will provide a better understanding of the relative magnitude of the effects of media-related factors. This information should help the development of more evidence-based policies.

Cognitive and behavioral radicalization: A systematic review of the putative risk and protective factors.

Background: Two of the most central questions in radicalization research are, (1) why do some individuals radicalize when most of those from the same groups or exposed to similar conditions do not? and (2) why do radicalized individuals turn to radical violence while the majority remain inert? It has been suggested that the answer to both questions lie in the cumulative and interactive effects of a range of risk factors. While risk assessment and counter-radicalization take a risk-protective factor approach, there is widespread debate as to what these factors are and which are most important. Objectives: This review has two primary objectives.1) To identify what the putative risk and protective factors for different radicalization outcomes are, without any predeterminations.2) To synthesize the evidence and identify the relative magnitude of the effects of different factors.The review's secondary objectives are to:1) Identify consistencies in the estimates of factors across different radicalization outcomes.2) Identify whether any significant heterogeneity exists within factors between (a) geographic regions, and (b) strains of radicalizing ideologies. Search Methods: Over 20 databases were searched for both published and gray literature. In order to provide a more comprehensive review, supplementary searches were conducted in two German and one Dutch database. Reference harvesting was conducted from previous reviews and contact was made with leading researchers to identify and acquire missing or unpublished studies. Selection Criteria: The review included observational studies assessing the outcomes of radical attitudes, intentions, and/or radical behaviors in OECD countries and which provided sufficient data to calculate effect sizes for individual-level risk and protective factors. Data Collection and Analysis: One-hundred and twenty-seven studies, containing 206 samples met the inclusion criteria and provided 1302 effect sizes pertaining to over 100 different factors. Random effects meta-analyses were carried out for each factor, and meta-regression and moderator analysis were used to explore differences across studies. Results: Studies were primarily cross-sectional, with samples representing 20 countries OECD countries. Most studies examined no specific radicalizing ideology, while others focussed on specific ideologies (e.g., Islamist, right-wing, and left-wing ideologies). The studies generally demonstrated low risk of bias and utilized validated or widely acceptable measures for both indicators and outcomes. With some exceptions, sociodemographic factors tend to have the smallest estimates, with larger estimates for experiential and attitudinal factors, followed by traditional criminogenic and psychological factors. Authors' Conclusions: While sociodemographic factors are the most commonly examined factors (selective availability), they also tend to have the smallest estimates. So too, attitudinal and even experiential factors, do not have effect sizes of the magnitude that could lead to significant reductions in risk through targeting by interventions. Conversely, traditional criminogenic factors, as well as psychological factors tend to display the largest estimates. These findings suggest the need to broaden the scope of factors considered in both risk assessment and intervention, and this review provides much needed evidence for guiding the selection of factors.

Updated protocol: Effects of second responder programs on repeat incidents of family abuse: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

The US Department of Justice has extensively funded second responder programs. In England and Wales, funding of follow-up with victims is largely funded by local Police and Crime Commissioners. While these programs rapidly gained popularity in the United States and are gaining popularity in other countries as well, the evidence regarding their effectiveness is mixed. Although some research has indicated that second responder programs can prevent repeat victimization, several experimental studies have suggested that these programs may actually increase the odds of abuse recurring. The purpose of the review is to compile and synthesize published and unpublished empirical studies of the effects of second responder programs on repeat incidents of family violence, including those studies completed after the original review. The Global Police Database (http://www.gpd.uq.edu.au/) provides a resource unavailable at the time of the initial review that will ensure that a comprehensive set of qualifying studies is identified. In the updated review, we will address the following questions: 1. What impact do second responder programs have on the number of subsequent calls to the police? 2. What impact do second responder programs have on abuse as measured on victim surveys? 3. Does the impact of second responder programs differ between experimental and quasi-experimental studies or studies that employ different methods of drawing samples? Building on the original review, we also aim to expand our examination of effect size heterogeneity given sufficient data to do so. For instance, given the proposition that there may be only a small window of opportunity to intervene into the lives of family violence victims after an incident, the amount of time that elapses between a family violence call and the second response may be an important moderator of programmatic effects. Additional factors that could impact the effect of the intervention include the length of the follow-up data collection period, the type of family violence complaint (e.g., intimate partner violence vs. elder abuse), and the sociodemographic characteristics of the victim and the offender (see generally Sherman, 2018). Ultimately, this review seeks not only to update the results of the prior review with additional research, but also to explore the mechanisms behind the observed effects in a way that provides utility for future policy creation.

Does Collective Efficacy Matter at the Micro Geographic Level?: Findings from a Study Of Street Segments.

Many scholars argue that collective efficacy is not relevant to understanding crime at the microgeographic level. We examine variation in collective efficacy across streets with different levels of crime in Baltimore City, MD, and, then, employ multilevel modelling to assess this relationship. We find that people who live in crime hot spots have much lower levels of collective efficacy than people who live in non-hot spot streets and that this relationship persists when controlling for a large number of potential confounders both at the street and community levels. These findings suggest the importance of collective efficacy both in understanding and controlling crime at microgeographic units.

PROTOCOL: Cognitive and behavioral radicalization: A systematic review of the putative risk and protective factors.

Objectives: This systematic review seeks to collate and synthesize putative risk and protective factors for the different outcomes of radicalization. Methodology: Drawing on an established theoretical framework, we will categorize putative risk and protective factors as they relate to the domains of radical attitudes, intentions, and behaviors. We will utilize meta-analytic techniques to develop a rank-order of factors according to effect size. Meta-regression and sub-group analyses will be used to assess sources of heterogeneity. Implications: The results of the review are intended to inform evidence-based policy in the areas of both assessment and intervention.

Poor Health and Violent Crime Hot Spots: Mitigating the Undesirable Co-Occurrence Through Focused Place-Based Interventions.

INTRODUCTION: The geographic overlap of violence and poor health is a major public health concern. To understand whether and how place-based interventions targeting micro-geographic places can reduce this undesirable co-occurrence, the study addresses 2 important questions. First, to what extent are deteriorated health conditions associated with living at violent crime hot spots? Second, through what mechanisms can focused place-based interventions break the association between living with violence and deteriorated health? METHODS: This study used survey data from 2,724 respondents living on 328 street segments that were categorized as violent crime hot spots (181 segments with 1,532 respondents) versus non-hot spots (147 segments with 1,192 respondents) in 2013-2014 in Baltimore, Maryland. Propensity score analysis assessed whether individuals living at violent crime hot spots had lower general health perceptions than people living at non-hot spots. Marginal structural models estimated the proportion of total effects mediated by 3 theoretically informed intervening mechanisms. Analyses were conducted in 2019. RESULTS: Respondents living at violent crime hot spots had a lower level of self-rated general health (b= -0.096, 95% CI= -0.176, -0.015) and higher levels of health limitations (b=0.068, 95% CI=0.027, 0.109) and problems (OR=2.026, 95% CI=1.225, 3.349) than those living at non-hot spots. Enhanced perceptions of safety, collective efficacy, and police legitimacy may break the association between living in places with extremely high levels of violence and deteriorated health. CONCLUSIONS: Indicated or selective strategies are urgently needed to target micro-geographic locations with known increased risks, supplementing universal strategies applied to a broader community.

Problem-oriented policing for reducing crime and disorder: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Herman Goldstein developed problem-oriented policing (POP) to focus police on more proactively addressing chronic problems, rather than using traditional reactive efforts. POP has been utilized to target a wide range of problems and has become commonly used in agencies across the United States and the world, although implementation is often uneven. POP interventions commonly use the SARA (scanning, analysis, response, assessment) model to identify problems, carefully analyze the conditions contributing to the problem, develop a tailored response to target these underlying factors, and evaluate outcome effectiveness. Objectives: To extend and update the findings of the original POP systematic review by synthesizing the findings of published and unpublished evaluations of POP through December 2018 to assess its overall impacts on crime and disorder. The review also examined impacts of POP on crime displacement, police financial costs, and noncrime outcomes. Search Methods: Searches using POP keywords of the Global Policing Database at the University of Queensland were conducted to identify published and unpublished evaluations between 2006 and 2018. We supplemented these searches with forward searches, hand searches of leading journals and the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, and consultation with experts. Selection Criteria: Eligible studies had to include a target area or group that received a POP intervention AND a control area/group that received standard police services. The control condition could be either experimental or quasi-experimental. Units of analysis could be places or people. We defined POP as studies that generally followed the tenets of the SARA model. Data Collection and Analysis: We identified 39 new (published between 2006 and 2018) studies that met our eligibility criteria as an evaluation of POP. Twenty-four of these studies had sufficient data available to calculate an effect size. Along with the 10 studies from our initial systematic review of POP, these 34 studies are included in our meta-analytic review of POP. Nine of these studies were randomized experiments and 25 were quasi-experiments. We calculated effect sizes for each study using Cohen's D and relative incidence risk ratios and used random effects meta-analyses to synthesize studies. Results: Our meta-analyses suggest statistically significant impacts of POP. Our relative incident risk ratio analysis of mean effects suggests a 33.8% reduction in crime/disorder in the POP treatment areas/groups relative to the controls. We find no evidence of significant crime displacement as a result of POP and some evidence for a greater likelihood of a diffusion of crime control benefits. Few studies assessed noncrime outcomes, but our narrative review suggests POP is cost-effective, but has limited impacts on fear of crime, legitimacy, and collective efficacy. Authors' Conclusions: Our review provides strong and consistent evidence that POP is an effective strategy for reducing crime and disorder. There is a great deal of heterogeneity in the magnitude of effect sizes across factors such as study type, study rigor and crime type. Despite this heterogeneity, 31 out of 34 studies (91.2%) have effect sizes in favor of a treatment effect and the overall mean effect is positive and significant in all of our models.

"The Whole Is Greater Than the Sum of the Parts": Prison Staff Perceptions of Domestic Violence Rehabilitation Programs.

This qualitative study is part of a mixed methods research project that examined the effectiveness of the primary rehabilitation program for domestic violence offenders in the Israeli Prison Services-the "House of Hope." The quantitative part of the study showed that the "House of Hope" program was effective in reducing recidivism among participating inmates. The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe the rehabilitation program according to the perspectives of the program staff. For this purpose, semistructured interviews were conducted with the department staff during the study as well as with past directors. The qualitative findings suggested that the success of the program probably stemmed from a synergistic combination of several components, for example, identifying the characteristics of domestic violence offenders and adjusting treatment programs to their needs, along with exposure to psychological treatment in varied therapies (cognitive behavioral therapy, psychoeducational, and psychodynamic) and formats (group therapy and individual therapy) during a 1-year stay in a hierarchical therapeutic community. Other components mentioned are staff professionalism, stability, and the program's location in a therapeutic-oriented prison that is architecturally designed and built to create a less stressful environment for the inmates and the staff.