|
Field
Trial Status
|
Before
in_development
|
After
completed
|
|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
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. 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.
|
After
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. We randomly assigned quadrants to: (i) intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions; (ii) intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions, with the addition of an information campaign on procedural justice values; or (iii) 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.
Note: We updated the abstract after the intervention finished, but not as an ex-post change. The intervention evolved after we registered the PAP, and this is a more accurate description of what the intervention effectively was.
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
June 14, 2022 09:49 AM
|
After
March 13, 2024 04:20 PM
|
|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
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 three 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.
|
After
We are testing two interventions: (i) intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions; and (ii) intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions, with the addition of an information campaign on procedural justice values. 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 first treatment arm consists of increasing police presence and the 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.
The second treatment arm consists of exactly the same components as the first with the addition of an information campaign where police officers received daily reminders on the importance of procedural justice principles. These messages highlight, for instance, cordially greeting people before starting any dialogue or being empathetic with whoever they interact with.
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.
Note: We updated the intervention description after the intervention finished, but not as an ex-post change. The intervention evolved after we registered the PAP, and this is a more accurate description of what the intervention effectively was.
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
We have three main outcomes:
1. Public trust in the police
2. Demand for policing services
3. Police beliefs and appropriation of procedural justice protocols
|
After
We have three main outcomes:
1. Public trust in the police
2. Demand for policing services
3. Police beliefs
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (Explanation)
|
Before
We have three main outcomes:
1. Public trust in the police, measured through one single public trust question in the citizens survey
2. Demand for policing services, measured through a costly request (we asked residents whether they would support a new tax directed at funding the police)
3. Police beliefs and appropriation of procedural justice protocols, which is an additive index of three sub-indices, measured in the police survey: take up of instructions, perceived effectiveness of procedural justice protocols, and perceived quality of interactions with citizens
We expect the intervention will increase public trust and police beliefs and appropriation of procedural justice protocols.
|
After
We have three main outcomes:
1. Public trust in the police, measured through one single public trust question in the citizens survey
2. Demand for policing services, measured through a costly request (we asked residents whether they would support a new tax directed at funding the police)
3. Police beliefs, measured as their trust in citizens and their second-order beliefs on public trust
We expect the intervention will increase public trust and police beliefs.
Note: We updated the description of the police measures after the intervention finished, but not as an ex-post change. The instrument aimed to understand how effective procedural justice principles were by asking directly to officers how much they trust the public (a measure of reciprocity) and their second-order beliefs on public trust (the main aim of the intervention).
|