Information provision, police beliefs and public trust: Experimental evidence from Colombia

Last registered on March 04, 2022

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

Information provision, police beliefs and public trust: Experimental evidence from Colombia

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0008947

Initial registration date

March 02, 2022

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published

March 04, 2022, 9:12 AM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Country

Colombia

Region

Barranquilla, Bucaramanga, Cali, Cartagena, Medellin

Primary Investigator

Name

Santiago Tobon

Affiliation

Universidad EAFIT

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Santiago Perez-Vincent

PI Affiliation

Interamerican Development Bank

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Ervyn Norza

PI Affiliation

National Police of Colombia

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

In development

Start date

2021-12-01

End date

2022-04-30

Keywords

Behavior, Crime, Violence, & Conflict, Governance, Post-conflict

Additional Keywords

Police, Public trust, State building, Police legitimacy, Colombia

JEL code(s)

K42, H11, H56, N46, C93

Secondary IDs

Prior work

This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.

Abstract

The National Police of Colombia wants to raise their public trust and legitimacy by following procedural justice protocols in citizen-police day-to-day interactions. In our context, procedural justice refers to the idea of fairness in police decisions and interactions with citizens. We partnered with the Police to test an information campaign with police patrols across five Colombian cities: Barranquilla, Bucaramanga, Cali, Cartagena and Medellín---the largest Colombian cities excluding the capital Bogotá. The experimental sample consists of 351 police quadrants---a police patrolling area akin to a police beat, roughly 75 in each city. Because following procedural justice protocols requires increased interactions, we randomly assigned quadrants to either intensified interactions with citizens, intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions, or neither. To randomize quadrants into treatment arms, we stratified by city, poverty level, and baseline public trust. We will measure impacts on police beliefs and public trust. Because patrolling areas are relatively large, we collect data on one street block within the quadrant, and ask police patrols to target it as a "pilot" block. We randomly sampled "pilot" street blocks within quadrants.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Norza, Ervyn, Santiago Perez-Vincent and Santiago Tobon. 2022. "Information provision, police beliefs and public trust: Experimental evidence from Colombia." AEA RCT Registry. March 04. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.8947-1.0

Sponsors & Partners

Partner

Name

National Police of Colombia

Type

government

URL

https://www.policia.gov.co

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

We are testing two interventions: (i) intensified interactions with citizens; and (ii) intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions. In our context, procedural justice refers to the idea of fairness in police decisions and interactions with citizens. Our units of analysis are police quadrants or patrolling areas, akin to police beats.

The intensified interactions treatment arm consists of increasing police presence and the quantity of interactions with citizens within the patrolling area. Police patrols will be instructed to intensify their presence and interactions, with broad instructions on the importance of police contact with citizens. Following the beginning of the intervention, patrols in this treatment arm will receive weekly reminders to increase the quantity of interactions.

The intensified interactions plus procedural justice instructions treatment arm consists of increasing police presence and the quantity and quality of interactions with citizens within the patrolling area. Police patrols will be instructed to intensify their presence and interactions, with specific instructions on the importance of police contact with citizens. Following the beginning of the intervention, patrols in this treatment arm will receive daily messages on procedural justice protocols, e.g., to be fair and to listen to citizens' complaints and questions.

Because patrolling areas are relatively large, we collect data on one street block within the quadrant, and ask police patrols to target it as a "pilot" block. We randomly sampled "pilot" street blocks within quadrants.

Intervention Start Date

2022-03-21

Intervention End Date

2022-04-22

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

We are mainly interested in changes in: (i) police beliefs about procedural justice protocols; and (ii) public trust in the police.

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

We will measure impacts on two primary outcomes:

(i) Police beliefs: We will survey all police patrols in the experimental sample, and will build a "procedural justice acceptance index," which is an additive index of questions on whether police patrols believe procedural justice protocols are useful for their performance and to increase public trust.

(ii) Public trust: We will survey residents from one street block in each experimental police quadrant, and build a "public trust index," which is an additive index of questions on whether citizens believe the police is fair, efficient and accountable.

We expect the intervention will increase both police beliefs about following procedural justice protocols and public trust.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Our secondary outcomes are: (i) reported crimes; (ii) reported calls for service.

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

We will measure impacts on two secondary outcomes:

(i) Reported crimes: We will use administrative data on reported crimes.

(ii) Calls for service: We will use administrative data on reported calls for service (provided we can access information from local governments when the National Police is not the "data owner".

We do not have priors on the directions of these secondary outcomes.

Experimental Design

The study focuses on five Colombian cities: Barranquilla, Bucaramanga, Cali, Cartagena and Medellín---these are the largest Colombian cities excluding the capital Bogotá.

For our experimental sample, we randomly chose 351 quadrants out of the universe of police quadrants across the five cities---we excluded from the sampling frame only exceptional cases such as quadrants in a Caribbean island nearby Cartagena. From the experimental sample, quadrants will be assigned to each treatment arm using stratified randomization. Probability of assignment to each treatment arm is 33%.

Experimental Design Details

Randomization Method

Randomization was done in an office using a computer. We assigned treatment as follows:

First, we stratified by city. Within each city, we stratified by terciles of poverty scores using census data. Within each tercile of poverty score, we ranked quadrants based on the baseline public trust measure. Within each triplet in the ranking, we randomized quadrants. Probability of treatment assignment is 33% for all treatment arms.

Randomization Unit

Our units of analysis are police quadrants or patrolling areas, akin to police beats. These are discussed above.

Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

351 police quadrants.

Sample size: planned number of observations

About 2,100 surveys, 6 from each police quadrant. We will cluster observations by quadrant in our analysis.

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

~351/3 police quadrants assigned to intensified interactions with citizens
~351/3 police quadrants assigned to intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions
~351/3 police quadrants assigned to control

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

We used our baseline measure of public trust and ran 10,000 simulations to estimate the minimum detectable effects. For each randomization, we estimated treatment effects using a regression of a z-score of the public trust measure on indicators for both treatments, and fixed effects for city, income tercile and trust triplet. Our minimum detectable effects are of roughly 0.1 standard deviations for both treatments.

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB