Criminology Hot Spots Policing
by
Tammy Kochel, Seyvan Nouri
  • LAST REVIEWED: 31 July 2019
  • LAST MODIFIED: 31 July 2019
  • DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195396607-0178

Introduction

Since the 1980s, the nature of policing has expanded beyond a person-focused approach to include a location-based approach. Recently developed proactive policing strategies that are concerned with the geographic distribution and explanation of crime include hot spots policing and community policing, and oftentimes problem-oriented policing, broken windows policing, third-party policing, and focused deterrence strategies. Hot spots policing entails focusing police efforts at crime prevention in a very small geographic area where crime concentrates. This strategy is one of only a few policing strategies grounded in both theory and research. Crime concentrates at places even more than it concentrates in people. Research in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in the 1980s demonstrated that 60 percent of the crime occurs at 6 percent of places (see Sherman, et al. 1989, cited under Theory and Basis of Hot Spots Policing). Place-based theories about routine activities and rational choice have led to deterrence-based strategies such as directed patrol, crackdowns, and other traditional approaches to hot spots policing, as well as more community-oriented, problem-solving, and situational crime prevention approaches at crime hot spots. Hot spots policing is one of few areas in criminal justice research that has been tested using randomized controlled trials, a gold standard for research. Several systematic reviews suggest that focusing police efforts in a small geographic area reduces crime. Furthermore, research on displacement and diffusion of benefits suggests that hot spots policing does not merely geographically displace crime. In fact, nearby places may experience a diffusion of crime benefits. Only a few studies have examined the noncrime impacts of hot spots policing, but these suggest that it does not harm public perceptions of police and may even promote informal social control. Cost-effectiveness analyses have been partially used to assess the relative costs and outcomes of hot spot policing interventions. Additionally, existing research has suggested the crime harm index (CHI) for assessing the crime impact of hot spot policing interventions. Several data sources are available from past National Institute of Justice–funded studies on hot spots of crime and hot spots policing.

Theory and Basis of Hot Spots Policing

Hot spots policing is built upon theories about crime at places, treating a place (e.g., address, street segment, or other small geographic area) as the unit of analysis. This is explained in Sherman, et al. 1989, which provides the first application of theory to the spatial analysis of crime at places. Andresen and Malleson 2010 shows that crime concentrates and is stable at smaller units of analysis. Sherman 1995 even shows that places have criminal careers, much like offenders do. Koper, et al. 2015 suggests investigating the histories and characteristics of specific places and maintaining case files of hot spots. Eck and Weisburd 1995 discusses the three theories associated with crime and place: routine activity theory, rational choice theory, and crime pattern theory. Attempting to explain the concentration of crime at places, routine activity theory specifies that crime occurs when motivated offenders and suitable targets converge in time and space in the absence of capable guardians. There is an assumption that offenders apply rational choice in their decision making about crime. Crime pattern theory explains how the design of the environmental backdrop and movement of people throughout space contributes to increased risk for crime. Specific characteristics of places put them at greater risk for crime to occur. Weisburd and Eck 2017 suggests the reconsideration of traditional criminological theories such as social disorganization in understanding social and physical dynamics of hot spots. Braga and Schnell 2017 suggests that police should address the latent conditions at crime hot spots that cause them to be attractive to potential offenders, and that one strategy of understanding these underlying conditions is to use place-based crime theories, like situational crime prevention applied with a problem-oriented policing approach. Clarke and Eck 2007 explains the 80/20 rule and risky places. Bowers 2014 shows that qualities of places may affect risk to specific facilities, but also nearby areas. Weisburd, et al. 1993 reviews the available literature as a basis of the specialization versus the generalization of crime at places. Technological advances in policing, coupled with theoretical advances, have been important to promoting the capacity for and adoption of hot spots policing, as Eck, et al. 2000 explains. These theories explain the crime-place association while they do not account for variation in police behavior. Recently, policing scholars have tended to use behavioral ecology models like optimal foraging theory to explain and predict police officer behavior when doing activities at hot spots; see, for example, Sorg, et al. 2017.

  • Andresen, M. A., and N. Malleson. 2010. Testing the stability of crime patterns: Implications for theory and policy. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 48.1: 58–82.

    DOI: 10.1177/0022427810384136Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Considers the impact of the choice of spatial unit. Empirical test of the stability of crime at street segments versus census tracks (proxy for neighborhood). Results from the smaller scale show that using larger units may conceal variation in crime within them.

    Find this resource:

  • Bowers, K. 2014. Risky facilities: Crime radiators or crime absorbers? A comparison of internal and external levels of theft. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 30:389–414.

    DOI: 10.1007/s10940-013-9208-zSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Discussion and empirical test (for theft) of risky facilities as crime radiators that promote crime within facilities as well as promote it in the nearby area. Data is from a metropolitan area of the United Kingdom.

    Find this resource:

  • Braga, A. A., and C. Schnell. 2017. Beyond putting “cops on dots”: Applying theory to advance police responses to crime places. In Unraveling the crime-place connection: New directions in theory and policy. Edited by D. Weisburd and J. E. Eck, 261–288. Advances in Criminological Theory 22. New York: Routledge.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Discusses the important role of theory in improving police responses to crime places whose underlying conditions attract criminals and generate crime. The use of problem-oriented policing and situational crime prevention helps identify these challenges and change them in a effective manner. Aggressive-enforcement policing interventions can undermine police-citizen relations and bring harm to residents.

    Find this resource:

  • Clarke, R. V. G., and J. E. Eck. 2007. Understanding risky facilities. Problem-Oriented Guides for Police: Problem Solving Series 6. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Practitioner-oriented toolkit that defines risky facilities, applies the 80/20 rule, and explains the relevance to hot spots. Provides a guide to applying problem-oriented policing at risky facilities.

    Find this resource:

  • Eck, J. E., J. S. Gersh, and C. Taylor. 2000. Finding crime hot spots through repeat address mapping. In Analyzing crime patterns: Frontiers of practice. Edited by V. Goldsmith, P. G. McGuire, J. H. Mollenkopf, and T. A. Ross, 49–64. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    DOI: 10.4135/9781452220369.n5Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Outlines three hypotheses about how crime hot spots relate to the cloud of crime spaces around them and can create clusters of hot spots. Demonstrates repeat address mapping.

    Find this resource:

  • Eck, J. E., and D. Weisburd. 1995. Crime places in crime theory. In Crime and place. Crime Prevention Studies 4. Edited by J. Eck and D. Weisburd, 1–33. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Applies rational choice, routine activity, and crime pattern theories to micro places. Summarizes research on crime at places, relating it back to the theories.

    Find this resource:

  • Koper, C. S., S. J. Egge, and C. Lum. 2015. Institutionalizing place-based approaches: Opening “cases” on gun crime hot spots. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice 9.3: 242–254.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Offers the investigation of “case of place” to be considered in place-based approaches to address crime at hot spots. This method demands a substantial effort from law enforcement actors to examine the characteristics of hot spots and assign tailored interventions for them.

    Find this resource:

  • Sherman, L. W. 1995. Hot spots of crime and criminal careers of places. In Crime and place. Crime Prevention Studies 4. Edited by J. Eck and D. Weisburd, 35–52. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Introduces the concentration of crime at places and ties it to routine activity theory and situational crime prevention. Describes the criminal careers of places similar to criminal careers of persons, discussing onset, desistance, continuance, specialization, and desistance.

    Find this resource:

  • Sherman, L. W., P. R. Gartin, and M. E. Buerger. 1989. Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology 27.1: 27–56.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1989.tb00862.xSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Applies routine activity theory to places and presents spatial analysis of calls for service in Minneapolis to demonstrate that crime is concentrated at relatively few address hot spots.

    Find this resource:

  • Sorg, E. T., J. D. Wood, E. R. Groff, and J. H. Ratcliffe. 2017. Explaining dosage diffusion during hot spot patrols: An application of optimal foraging theory to police officer behavior. Justice Quarterly 34.6: 1044–1068.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Capitalizes on concepts of optimal foraging theory to account for dosage diffusion during hot spot experiments. Finds that police officers tend to move to buffer zones to patrol once hot spots reach some degree of perceived crime depression. Uses the size of treatment areas and the amount of crime within and outside these areas to predict the diffusion of hot spots patrols to catchment area.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., L. Maher, L. Sherman, M. Buerger, E. Cohn, and A. Petrisino. 1993. Contrasting crime general and crime specific theory: The case of hot spots of crime. In New directions in criminological theory. Advances in Criminological Theory 4. Edited by F. Adler and W. S. Laufer, 45–70. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Outlines important literature on crime and place. Discusses specialization of crime at hot spots versus crime generalization.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., and J. E. Eck, eds. 2017. Unraveling the crime-place connection: New directions in theory and policy. Advances in Criminological Theory 22. New York: Routledge.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Discusses the fundamental role of theory in advancing the association between crime and place. The criminological theories (traditional and opportunity theories) of crime-place are discussed to broden understanding of dynamic factors that contribute to form the structual properties of places responsible for a substantial amount of crime and social problems.

    Find this resource:

Overview of Hot Spots Policing Innovation

Koper 2014 demonstrates that adoption of hot spots policing has diffused widely among police agencies. Weisburd and Lum 2005 demonstrates the link between mapping and adoption and diffusion of hot spots policing. Hot spots policing is a strategy that is conceptually easy to understand and has been touted among evidence-based policing scholars as an effective approach to reducing crime. Mastrofski, et al. 2010 describes the innovation, offers favorable evidence, and advocates for adoption. Weisburd and Braga 2006 also provides an overview of the benefits of hot spots policing and situates it within a historical context. As explained in Weisburd and Eck 2004, hot spots policing has been cast as a positive alternative to traditional policing, much like community policing and problem-oriented policing. In fact, Braga and Weisburd 2010 advocates for a problem-oriented approach to hot spots policing. Rather than distributing police resources across urban areas, hot spot policing strategies are oriented to assign resources to places generating high rates of crime. This ideology assists law enforcement agencies to manage their resources economically and organize them in a systematic manner. Gibson, et al. 2017 reports considerable reductions in costs of implementing policing interventions at crime hot spots. What is particularly helpful is that the success of this police innovation can be explained by place-based theory and environmental criminology. What remains to be learned, according to Weisburd and Telep 2014, is how this approach impacts police legitimacy and perceptions of the police by the public. Some initial attempts to do so are provided under Noncrime Impacts.

  • Braga, A. A., and D. Weisburd. 2010. Policing problem places: Crime hot spots and effective prevention. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

    DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341966.001.0001Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Thorough coverage of hot spots policing, including discussion on the relevant theories of crime and place, crime mapping adoption, empirical evidence about hot spots policing, and the crime and legitimacy impacts. Advocates adoption of problem-oriented hot spots policing.

    Find this resource:

  • Gibson, C., M. Slothower, and L. W. Sherman. 2017. Sweet spots for hot spots? A cost-effectiveness comparison of two patrol strategies. Cambridge Journal of Evidence-Based Policing 1.4: 225–243.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Aims to reduce costs of hot spots policing interventions through implementing “sweet spot.” The sweet spots refers to just the right amount of patrol presence to reduce crime but sustain legitimacy. Uses an experimental design to examine whether highly patrolled hot spots can receive less patrol time and still have less crime.

    Find this resource:

  • Koper, C. S. 2014. Assessing the practice of hot spots policing: Survey results from a national convenience sample of local police agencies. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 30.2: 123–146.

    DOI: 10.1177/1043986214525079Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Survey of large municipal police departments. Addresses the agencies’ definition of hot spots and nature of activities at hot spots.

    Find this resource:

  • Mastrofski, S. D., D. Weisburd, and A. A. Braga. 2010. Rethinking policing: The policy implications of hot spots of crime. In Contemporary issues in criminal justice policy: Policy proposals from the American Society of Criminology Conference. Edited by N. A. Frost, J. D. Freilich, and T. R. Clear, 251–264. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Reviews the evidence on hot spots policing and advocates for its implementation and further study. Recommends organizational components needed to implement hot spots policing.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., and A. A. Braga. 2006. Hot spots policing as a model of police innovation. In Police innovation: Contrasting perspectives. Edited by D. Weisburd and A. A. Braga, 225–244. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.

    DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511489334.012Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Outlines hot spots policing as an evidence-based policing strategy. Provides brief historical context and summarizes evaluations. Applauds that hot spots policing is a theoretically based practice and supported by strong empirical research.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., and J. E. Eck. 2004. What can police do to reduce crime, disorder, and fear? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 593.1: 42–65.

    DOI: 10.1177/0002716203262548Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Reviews the literature to compare the effectiveness of traditional policing to hot spots policing at reducing crime, disorder, and fear. Includes typology of policing practices, including the level of focus versus diversity of approaches within the practice (community policing, problem-oriented policing, hot spots policing, standard model). Advocates for geographically focused policing.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., and C. Lum. 2005. The diffusion of computerized crime mapping in policing: Linking research and practice. Police Practice and Research 6.5: 419–434.

    DOI: 10.1080/15614260500433004Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Presents results from a survey about computerized crime mapping among police. Examines adoption relative to diffusion of innovation theory by Everett Rogers. Finds early adoption of hot spots policing to be associated with mapping.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., and C. W. Telep. 2014. Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 30.2: 200–220.

    DOI: 10.1177/1043986214525083Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Reviews the literature on the process of hot spots policing, its effectiveness and displacement, and outlines what still should be examined about this innovation, focusing on the need to better understand the effects on police legitimacy and its implementation in smaller cities and rural areas.

    Find this resource:

Hot Spot Characteristics and Selection

Manning 2008 documents three case studies about the implementation of crime mapping, a technology credited with promoting hot spots policing in the United States. Identifying and selecting hot spots using crime and calls for service data can be challenging, raising a number of important considerations, including issues about size, boundaries, and contamination. Buerger, et al. 1995 discusses these issues as they have been dealt with in Minneapolis, while Weisburd, et al. 2009 provides examples of crime analysis approaches to identify hot spots. Most studies use analyses of crime or calls for service data to identify small geographic locations that have a large portion of calls and/or incidents over a certain period of time. Different techniques are available to do so. A number of approaches are described in Eck, et al. 2005. Weisburd, et al. 2009 compares block level to place level analyses, demonstrating the modifiable aerial unit problem. Weisburd, et al. 2004 found that crime hot spots are quite stable over time when measured at the street segment level. Bowers, et al. 2004 advocates a slightly different approach, selecting not current hot spots, but rather using crime and calls for service data in an attempt to predict future crime hot spots in an effort to guide patrol resource allocation decisions. Some scholars have advocated considering both spatial and temporal distribution of crime; see, for example, Ratcliffe 2004. Gorr, et al. 2017 suggests that integrating chronic and temporary hot spots strategies together produces the most effective and equitable programs to address crime.

  • Bowers, K. J., S. D. Johnson, and K. Pease. 2004. Prospective hot-spotting the future of crime mapping? British Journal of Criminology 44.5: 641–658.

    DOI: 10.1093/bjc/azh036Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Outlines a mapping technique to predict future hot spots, applying past crime incident data to predict risk. Provides an example and also outlines an approach to evaluate the effectiveness of the resulting map. Designed to help with beat allocation.

    Find this resource:

  • Buerger, M. E., E. G. Cohn, and A. J. Petrosino. 1995. Defining the “hot spots of crime”: Operationalizing theoretical concepts for field research. In Crime and place. Crime Prevention Studies 4. Edited by J. Eck and D. Weisburd, 237–257. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Outlines the detailed process for identifying and selection of hot spots used in Minneapolis, considering issues such as contamination, public space, intersections, size, boundaries, etc.

    Find this resource:

  • Eck, J., S. Chainey, J. Cameron, M. Leitner, and R. Wilson. 2005. Mapping crime: Understanding hot spots. NCJ 209393. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    User-friendly guide to explaining hot spots analysis that explains what a hot spot is and describes in detail many different techniques that can be used to map hot spots.

    Find this resource:

  • Gorr, W., Y. Lee, D. Weisburd, and J. Eck. 2017. Chronic and temporary crime hot spots. In Unraveling the crime-place connection: New directions in theory and policy. Edited by D. Weisburd and J. E. Eck, 41–63. Advances in Criminological Theory 22. New York: Routledge.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Divides the crime hot spots into chronic and temporary hot spots and uses two main criteria including effectiveness and equity to explain the potential consequences of this decomposition and its benefits for place-focused crime preventions.

    Find this resource:

  • Manning, P. K. 2008. The technology of policing: Crime mapping, information technology, and the rationality of crime control. New York: New York Univ. Press.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Provides case studies in three police agencies—Metropolitan Washington, Boston, and “Western City” (pseudonym for medium-sized Midwestern city)—as they attempt to adopt and implement crime analysis and/or crime mapping technology between 1996 and 2002. The book provides commentary about the application of the technology to crime management.

    Find this resource:

  • Ratcliffe, J. H. 2004. The hotspot matrix: A framework for the spatio-temporal targeting of crime reduction. Police Practice & Research 5.1: 5–23.

    DOI: 10.1080/1561426042000191305Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Describes a matrix as a way of thinking about the nature of hot spots—how crime patterns spatially and temporally at places. Uses three spatial categories and three temporal categories. Provides recommendations for how police patrols might align relative to the matrix.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., W. Bernasco, and G. J. N. Bruinsma, eds. 2009. Putting crime in its place. New York: Springer.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Discussion of place as the unit of analysis, including the modifiable aerial unit problem, demonstrating variation at the block level, and concluding smaller is better. Provides examples of crime analysis to identify hot spots.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., S. Bushway, C. Lum, and S. M. Yang. 2004. Trajectories of crime at places: A longitudinal study of street segments in the city of Seattle. Criminology 42.2: 283–322.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2004.tb00521.xSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Analyzes stability of crime at hot spots. Group-based trajectory analyses reveals that crime is fairly stable at street segments over time in their Seattle sample. Analyses also show that only a few street segments drive rising and falling trends at the city level.

    Find this resource:

Hot Spots Policing Strategies

Approaches to hot spots policing can be classified into traditional approaches such as directed patrol, crackdowns, and other enforcement activities and community-oriented approaches, such as problem-oriented policing, foot patrol, and quality-of-life policing strategies.

Traditional Strategies

Early hot spots policing strategies tended to rely on increasing police presence to deter would-be offenders from committing crimes. This is typically referred to as “directed patrol.” In the first hot spots experiment conducted in Minneapolis, Koper 1995 was able to compute the ideal time to spend in hot spots as eleven to fifteen minutes an hour in order to maximize the deterrent effect. This time frame has since been tested and supported by a study in Sacramento, California (see Telep, et al. 2014). Traditional hot spots policing approaches have attempted to address a range of crime problems in hot spots. For example, Rosenfeld, et al. 2014 examines directed patrol and enforcement behaviors such as interrogation and gun seizures on firearm violence, while Sherman and Rogan 1995 examines hot spots policing against gun crimes generally. Lum, et al. 2011 studies the use of license plate readers to address auto theft and recovery, while Sherman, et al. 1995 examines police raids in hotspots, and Weisburd and Green 1995 examines the impact of nuisance abatement to address drug-related crime. Koper, et al. 2015 examines officers’ use of mobile computing for crime prevention in hot spots. Haberman 2016 provides a causal theoretical model of how police commanders perceive that hot spots policing reduces crime.

  • Haberman, C. P. 2016. A view inside the “black box” of hot spots policing from a sample of police commanders. Police Quarterly 19.4: 488–517.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Uses observational data and interviews to measure what police commanders believe regarding why hot spot policing tactics would be effective. Data drawn from one large municipal police department are used to generate a theoretical causal model for hot spots policing that includes how officer activity would educate victims, disrupt offenders, and make places unattractive to offenders.

    Find this resource:

  • Koper, C. S. 1995. Just enough police presence: Reducing crime and disorderly behavior by optimizing patrol time in crime hot spots. Justice Quarterly 12.4: 649–672.

    DOI: 10.1080/07418829500096231Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Empirical examination of the length of police presence in hot spots in Minneapolis relative to the crime reduction benefits and their duration. Results suggest that eleven to fifteen minutes is optimal.

    Find this resource:

  • Koper, C. S., C. Lum, and J. Hibdon. 2015. The uses and impacts of mobile computing technology in hot spots policing. Evaluation review 39.6: 587–624.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Experimental design to test whether use of mobile computing technology to check license plates, examine recent incidents, and check stopped suspects using an automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS) improves the performance of police officers in nine suburban hot spots relative to nine controls. Results indicate that officers did not often use IT for crime prevention but rather use it for surveillance and enforcement activities.

    Find this resource:

  • Lum, C., J. Hibdon, B. Cave, C. S. Koper, and L. Merola. 2011. License plate reader (LPR) police patrols in crime hot spots: An experimental evaluation in two adjacent jurisdictions. Journal of Experimental Criminology 7.4: 321–345.

    DOI: 10.1007/s11292-011-9133-9Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Presents findings from a randomized controlled trial of license plate readers in hot spots. Authors examined crime effects in thirty hot spots located in two Virginia jurisdictions. This is one of few studies that did not find crime impacts in hot spots.

    Find this resource:

  • Rosenfeld, R., M. J. Deckard, and E. Blackburn. 2014. The effects of directed patrol and self-initiated enforcement on firearm violence: A randomized controlled study of hot spot policing. Criminology 52.3: 428–449.

    DOI: 10.1111/1745-9125.12043Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Findings from a randomized controlled trial of directed patrol plus enforcement activities (arrest, pedestrian and vehicle stops and checks, foot patrol) in firearm violence hot spots. The intervention reduced nondomestic firearm assaults but not robberies with a firearm.

    Find this resource:

  • Sherman, L. W., and D. P. Rogan. 1995. Effects of gun seizures on gun violence: “Hot spots” patrol in Kansas City. Justice Quarterly 12.4: 673–693.

    DOI: 10.1080/07418829500096241Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Quasi-experiment of extra patrols in two gun-crime beats. Used a number of strategies designed to increase gun seizures with extra patrols: door-to-door solicitation of tips, training police on gun-carrying cues, and field interrogation. Gun seizures increased and gun crimes declined relative to the control area.

    Find this resource:

  • Sherman, L. W., D. P. Rogan, T. Edwards, et al. 1995. Deterrent effects of police raids on crack houses: A randomized, controlled experiment. Justice Quarterly 12.4: 755–781.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Randomized controlled trial of drug raids in hot spots. Results show reduced calls for service (proxy for disorder) and incidents (proxy for serious crime). However, reductions were low and costs to officer time and lives was high. Recommends alternative police strategies.

    Find this resource:

  • Telep, C. W., R. J. Mitchell, and D. Weisburd. 2014. How much time should the police spend at crime hot spots? Answers from a police agency directed randomized field trial in Sacramento, California. Justice Quarterly 31.5: 905–933.

    DOI: 10.1080/07418825.2012.710645Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Randomized controlled trial in Sacramento, California, that tests the Koper curve, spending fifteen minutes in hot spots. Calls for service and incidents declined.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., and L. Green. 1995. Policing drug hot spots: The Jersey City drug market analysis experiment. Justice Quarterly 12.4: 711–735.

    DOI: 10.1080/07418829500096261Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Randomized controlled trial of crackdowns and nuisance abatement in drug hot spots, including surveillance and patrols. Found reduction in disorder calls for service but not property or violent calls for service or drugs.

    Find this resource:

Community-Oriented Strategies

Following the success of directed patrol and traditional policing at crime hot spots, a number of police agencies attempted to implement community-oriented approaches at hot spots. Problem-oriented policing (POP) at hot spots was found to reduce violent crime in both Braga, et al. 1999 and Taylor, et al. 2011, but showed mixed support in youth crime hot spots in Gill et al. 2018. Taylor, et al. 2011 finds POP strategies to be more successful than directed patrol, whereas Braga, et al. 1999 compares POP to standard police practice. Although foot patrol has not typically been found to prevent crime, when applied at crime hot spots in Philadelphia, a randomized controlled trial supported its effectiveness (see Ratcliffe, et al. 2011). Novak, et al. 2016 reports significant reductions in violent crime at micro-places following the implementation of foot patrol in experimental areas. Wood, et al. 2014 describes what it was like for officers to implement foot patrol in the hot spots. Weisburd, et al. 2011 studies broken windows policing in hot spots. Ariel, et al. 2016 investigates and sees benefits of soft policing by unarmed civilian patrols on crime and disorder. Haberman, et al. 2016 points to the importance of community surveys as a useful tool for selecting hot spot policing strategies that target not only crime issues but also physical and social problems as well.

  • Ariel, B., C. Weinborn, and L. W. Sherman. 2016. “Soft” policing at hot spots—do police community support officers work? A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Experimental Criminology 12.3: 277–317.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Randomly assigned uniformed civilian police community support officers (PCSO) with no arrest powers or weapons (soft patrol) in experimental areas, adding an average of thirty-seven additional minutes of PCSO patrol each day on top of police constables. Reported that soft policing approach caused reductions in crime when compared to patrols by officers with arrest powers.

    Find this resource:

  • Braga, A. A., D. L. Weisburd, E. J. Waring, L. G. Mazerolle, W. Spelman, and F. Gajewski. 1999. Problem-oriented policing in violent crime places: A randomized controlled experiment. Criminology 37.3: 541–580.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1999.tb00496.xSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Randomized block design of problem-oriented policing (POP) in twenty-four violent crime places. Concluded that POP reduced crime and disorder without displacement. Advocates implementing policing strategies that aim to modify the routine activities of places.

    Find this resource:

  • Gill, C., D. Weisburd, Z. Vitter, C. Gross Shader, T. Nelson-Zagar, and L. Spain. 2018. Collaborative problem-solving at youth crime hot spots: A pilot study. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management 41.3: 325–338.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Examines the collaborative problem-solving strategy that focuses on community partnership and de-escalation of enforcement activities at youth crime hot spots versus a policing-as-usual model. Results found mixed support for the impact of nonenforcement problem solving on crime and calls for service.

    Find this resource:

  • Haberman, C. P., E. R. Groff, J. H. Ratcliffe, and E. T. Sorg. 2016. Satisfaction with police in violent crime hot spots: Using community surveys as a guide for selecting hot spots policing tactics. Crime and Delinquency 62.4: 525–557.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Advocates that improving crime as well as citizen satisfaction is important in hot spots and should guide the choice of policing tactics. Found that perceptions of procedural justice predict satisfaction whereas perceived crime reductions do not. Emphasizes procedurally just tactics in hot spots.

    Find this resource:

  • Novak, K. J., A. M. Fox, C. M. Carr, and D. A. Spade. 2016. The efficacy of foot patrol in violent places. Journal of Experimental Criminology 12.3: 465–475.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Quasi-experimental design of foot patrol across eight violent micro-places. After ninety days, violent crimes, especially aggravated assaults and robberies, declined significantly. Although the deterrent effects were found short term and disappeared quickly, there was no sign of crime displacement in nearby areas.

    Find this resource:

  • Ratcliffe, J. H., T. Taniguchi, E. R. Groff, and J. D. Wood. 2011. The Philadelphia foot patrol experiment: A randomized controlled trial of police patrol effectiveness in violent crime hotspots. Criminology 49.3: 795–831.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2011.00240.xSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Randomized controlled trial of foot patrol (assumed to increase community interaction and promote proactive enforcement) across sixty violent crime hot spots. After twelve weeks, violent crime declined. Measures displacement and diffusion with the weighted displacement quotient.

    Find this resource:

  • Taylor, B., C. S. Koper, and D. J. Woods. 2011. A randomized controlled trial of different policing strategies at hot spots of violent crime. Journal of Experimental Criminology 7.2: 149–181.

    DOI: 10.1007/s11292-010-9120-6Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Compared problem-oriented policing (POP) to directed patrol to standard policing practices at eighty-three violent crime hot spots for ninety days. POP produced reductions in street violence, while the other strategies did not. Found evidence of displacement.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., J. C. Hinkle, C. Famega, and J. Ready. 2011. Legitimacy, fear and collective efficacy in crime hot spots: Assessing the impacts of broken windows policing strategies on citizen attitudes. Final Report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Applied broken windows policing for six months in fifty-five street segment hot spots. A post-treatment survey of residents suggested that fear did not decline, legitimacy was unchanged, and there was no impact on collective efficacy.

    Find this resource:

  • Wood, J., E. T. Sorg, E. R. Groff, J. H. Ratcliffe, and C. J. Taylor. 2014. Cops as treatment providers: Realities and ironies of police work in a foot patrol experiment. Policing and Society 24.3: 362–379.

    DOI: 10.1080/10439463.2013.784292Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Describes officers’ approaches and experiences implementing foot patrol in hot spots based on field observations. Relates the experience to Egon Bittner’s study on “skid row.” Officers got to know community expectations and implemented strategies to align with them.

    Find this resource:

Impact

Initially, scholars were strictly focused on the crime effectiveness of hot spots policing. More recently, scholarship has begun to consider noncrime impacts as well.

Crime Impacts

The first hot spots experiment to assess the crime impact was Sherman and Weisburd 1995, which found a deterrent effect. In fact, most hot spots policing studies have found crime effects. Narrative and multiple meta-analytic reviews have demonstrated the crime effectiveness of hot spots policing. This effect is evidenced in Braga 2001, a meta-analysis of nine experimental and quasi-experimental studies, as well as in Braga 2005, which includes only randomized controlled trials—of which there were five, and in Braga, et al. 2014, which updates the prior meta-analyses and compared enforcement versus community-oriented treatments. Results showed that problem-oriented policing produced twice as large of a crime and disorder impact. However, the nature of the treatment and the nature of the crime being assessed have shown some different results. For example, Lum, et al. 2011 (cited under Traditional Strategies) finds no crime effects from license plate readers. However, a study of the same technology applied differently in Koper, et al. 2013 does find a crime effect, and the auto theft prevention effects persisted for two weeks. Another slight nuance was identified in Sorg, et al. 2013, which reports that for a foot patrol intervention, a twelve-week treatment period did not experience decaying deterrence, whereas a twenty-two-week treatment period did. Also examining foot patrol, Haberman and Stiver 2018 reports that lower dosages of foot patrol could yield crime reductions. Rydberg, et al. 2018 finds mixed results depending on the crime type, with robberies decreasing and aggravated assaults increasing in response to traffic enforcement directed patrol at hot spots. Groff, et al. 2015 compares three distinct strategies of hot spot policing, but found that only the offender-focused intervention reduced violent crime, relative to problem-oriented policing and foot patrol. Also of importance is the geographic unit of impact. Andresen and Hodgkinson 2018 applies focus to a micro-place, whereas Weisburd et al. 2017 expands the impact assessment to a borough of a city.

  • Andresen, M. A., and T. K. Hodgkinson. 2018. Evaluating the impact of police foot patrol at the micro-geographic level. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management 41.3: 314–324.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Uses six years of data to test the impact of foot patrol strategy on eight violent and property crime types. Results indicate a small number of micro-places experience crime reductions. No evidence of crime displacement was found. Results indicate the importance of microscale analysis of impact.

    Find this resource:

  • Braga, A. A. 2001. The effects of hot spots policing on crime. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 578.1: 104–125.

    DOI: 10.1177/0002716201578001007Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Systematic review of nine hot spots policing experimental and quasi-experimental studies. Interventions were enforcement oriented. Reported crime reductions in seven of nine studies.

    Find this resource:

  • Braga, A. A. 2005. Hot spots policing and crime prevention: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Experimental Criminology 1.3: 317–342.

    DOI: 10.1007/s11292-005-8133-zSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Meta-analysis of five hot spots policing randomized controlled trials. Results suggest that hot spots policing can reduce crime.

    Find this resource:

  • Braga, A. A., A. V. Papachristos, and D. M. Hureau. 2014. The effects of hot spots policing on crime: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Justice Quarterly 31.4: 633–663.

    DOI: 10.1080/07418825.2012.673632Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Meta-analysis of nineteen hot spots policing studies. Includes enforcement and community-oriented interventions. Found a significant impact on crime and disorder. Looked at impact by crime type and intervention type. POP effect was twice as large as traditional policing.

    Find this resource:

  • Groff, E. R., J. H. Ratcliffe, C. P. Haberman, E. T. Sorg, N. M. Joyce, and R. B. Taylor. 2015. Does what police do at hot spots matter? The Philadelphia policing tactics experiment. Criminology 53.1: 23–53.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Randomized controlled field experiment of three policing approaches (foot patrol, problem-oriented policing, and offender-focused policing) across eighty-one violent crime hot spots in Philadelphia. Results indicate that sites receiving offender-focused approach experienced noteworthy reductions in violent crime while foot patrol and problem-oriented policing were not significantly associated with reductions in violent crime, perhaps due to dosage, implementation, or hot spot stability issues.

    Find this resource:

  • Haberman, C. P., and W. H. Stiver. 2018. The Dayton Foot Patrol Program: An evaluation of hot spots foot patrols in a central business district. Police Quarterly (December): 1–31.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Used a twenty-eight-week treatment of approximately two hours of daily foot patrol in each of six hot spots in the downtwn business district. Given resource constraints, police officers were asked to exercise their discretion to engage in foot patrol in one of six experimental sites as they judged necessary. Foot patrol approach was found promising in reducing crime in business districts—particularly for disorder crime, it was done with few patrol resources, and catchment areas experienced a diffusion of crime control benefits.

    Find this resource:

  • Koper, C. S., B. G. Taylor, and D. J. Woods. 2013. A randomized test of initial and residual deterrence from directed patrols and use of license plate readers at crime hot spots. Journal of Experimental Criminology 9.2: 213–244.

    DOI: 10.1007/s11292-012-9170-zSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Randomized controlled trial of license plate readers (LPR) in 117 road segments in Mesa, Arizona, comparing manual versus LPR checks versus standard practice in fifteen two-week intervals. Found increased auto recoveries, increased arrests for auto theft, and reduced drug crimes. Auto-theft crime prevention effects persisted for two weeks.

    Find this resource:

  • Rydberg, J., E. F. McGarrell, A. Norris, and G. Circo. 2018. A quasi-experimental synthetic control evaluation of a place-based police-directed patrol intervention on violent crime. Journal of Experimental Criminology 14.1: 83–109.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Using a retrospective quasi-experimental design, researchers applied synthetic control analysis to measure effects of traffic enforcement directed patrol policing on aggravated assaults and robberies. The findings revealed mixed results based on the outcome measured, with null effects on homicide, a decline in robbery, but increases in aggravated assaults.

    Find this resource:

  • Sherman, L. W., and D. Weisburd. 1995. General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime “hot spots”: A randomized, controlled trial. Justice Quarterly 12.4: 625–648.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Seminal article on hot spots policing. Explains why Kansas City patrol experiment was not successful. Describes the Minneapolis study and findings. Reports that police presence deterred crime.

    Find this resource:

  • Sorg, E. T., C P. Haberman, J. H. Ratcliffe, and E. R. Groff. 2013. Foot patrol in violent crime hot spots: The longitudinal impact of deterrence and posttreatment effects of displacement. Criminology 51.1: 65–101.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2012.00290.xSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Applied multilevel growth curve models to test the long-term impact of foot patrol with a twelve-week versus a twenty-two-week intervention period. The twelve-week period did not have decaying deterrence effects, while the twenty-two-week period did.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., A. A. Braga, E. R. Groff, and A. Wooditch. 2017. Can hot spots policing reduce crime in urban areas? An agent‐based simulation. Criminology 55.1: 137–173.

    DOI: 10.1111/1745-9125.12131Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Uses agent-based model approach to estimate jurisdictional impacts of hot spots policing approaches on street robbery. A borough of a city was divided into four police beats to simulate the spatial movements of agents including targets, offenders, and police officers. Beats in which constant random patrols were implemented experienced significant reductions in street robbery in comparison to control areas not patrolled by police.

    Find this resource:

Noncrime Impacts

Noncrime impacts have only recently been the topic of hot spots policing research, and, to date, little research has been published on this issue. Noncrime impacts primarily address the impact of hot spots policing on public perceptions of, support for, or satisfaction with police. Newly released studies also examine the effects on collective efficacy and offender-specific outcomes. So far, the evidence is somewhat mixed as to whether hot spots policing changes citizens’ perceptions. An early study, Braga and Bond 2009, reports that residents tended not to notice the change in policing style, although they did notice an increase in officer presence. However, Ratcliffe, et al. 2015 finds no effects on perceptions of crime and disorder, perceived safety, satisfaction with police, or perceived procedural justice. Weisburd, et al. 2011 also finds that hot spots policing did not generate any backfire effects on citizens’ views. However, Kochel and Weisburd 2017 reports directed patrol (police presence) modestly undermined residents’ perceptions toward procedural justice and police legitimacy in the short term, but backfire effects were not sustained in the long term. Weisburd, et al. 2015 and Kochel and Weisburd 2018 both investigate the effects on collective efficacy and informal social control. Santos 2018 examines the effects of an offender-based hot spots policing intervention on offenders’ and their family members’ perceptions.

  • Braga, A. A., and B. J. Bond. 2009. Community perceptions of police crime prevention efforts: Using interviews in small areas to evaluate crime reduction strategies. In Evaluating crime reduction initiatives. Crime Prevention Studies 24. Edited by J. Knutsson and N. J. Tilley, 87–119. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Reports on experiment in Lowell, Massachusetts, that tested problem-oriented policing in hot spots. Survey of fifty-two community members suggests that respondents did not notice the change in nature/style of the police strategy, demeanor, or community orientation, but experienced more contacts with police, a greater presence, and a perception of less disorder.

    Find this resource:

  • Kochel, T. R., and D. Weisburd. 2017. Assessing community consequences of implementing hot spots policing in residential areas: Findings from a randomized field trial. Journal of Experimental Criminology 13.2: 143–170.

    DOI: 10.1007/s11292-017-9283-5Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Experimental design examines the potential consequences of directed patrol and problem-solving approaches on hot spot residents’ perceptions of police relative to standard policing practices. Illustrates that hot spot policing interventions may affect community members opinion in the short term, but that these small slight consequences are not sustained in the long run when the intervention ends.

    Find this resource:

  • Kochel, T. R., and D. Weisburd. 2018. The impact of hot spots policing on collective efficacy: Findings from a randomized field trial. Justice Quarterly (May): 1–29.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Experimental design tests the differential impact of problem-solving policing and directed patrol relative to standard policing practices in seventy-one residential hot spots, across a five-month treatment period. Results suggest that police presence (directed patrol) can improve informal social control and social cohesion in both the short term and the long term compared to standard policing practices. Problem solving hot spots saw small but statistically significant long-term improvements in informal social control.

    Find this resource:

  • Ratcliffe, J. H., E. R. Groff, E. T. Sorg, and C. P. Haberman. 2015. Citizens’ reactions to hot spots policing: Impacts on perceptions of crime, disorder, safety and police. Journal of Experimental Criminology 11.3: 393–417.

    DOI: 10.1007/s11292-015-9230-2Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Uses pre- and post-surveys in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Policing Tactics Experiment in sixty hot spot areas. Found no changes in citizens’ views about crime and disorder, perceived safety, satisfaction with police, or procedural justice, regardless of treatment type.

    Find this resource:

  • Santos, R. G. 2018. Offender and family member perceptions after an offender-focused hot spots policing strategy. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management 41.3: 386–400.

    DOI: 10.1108/PIJPSM-10-2017-0120Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Qualitative study engaging thirty-two offenders and twenty-nine family members about their experiences with and perceptions of police following an offender-focused hot spots strategy. Themes suggested offenders and families felt they were treated with respect and dignity by police and felt positively about what police were trying to do, and that offenders had positive outcomes such as committing less crime and following their probation requirements more consistently, as well as better relations with family.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., M. Davis, and C. Gill. 2015. Increasing collective efficacy and social capital at crime hot spots: New crime control tools for police. Policing 9.3: 265–272.

    DOI: 10.1093/police/pav019Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Describes efforts by the Brooklyn Park, Minnesota, Police Department to increase collective efficacy in hot spots and discusses police community collaboration to promote informal social control.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., J. C. Hinkle, C. Famega, and J. Ready. 2011. The possible “backfire” effects of hot spots policing: An experimental assessment of impacts on legitimacy, fear and collective efficacy. Journal of Experimental Criminology 7.4: 297–320.

    DOI: 10.1007/s11292-011-9130-zSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Uses panel survey of 371 people living and working in crime hot spots in combination with randomized experimental design in 110 hot spot street segments. Found no impact of broken windows policing in hot spots on fear of crime, police legitimacy, collective efficacy, or perceptions of crime or disorder.

    Find this resource:

Critiques of Hot Spots Policing

Given the success of hot spots policing at reducing crime, few critiques have been offered against this strategy. The few critical considerations are listed in this section. Rosenbaum 2006 raises concerns that the approach does not address the social problems in hot spots, along with other concerns about displacement, police-community relations, corruption, stigma, race and class bias, collective efficacy, and cost. Kochel 2011 points out that the favorable media and practitioner discourse about hot spots policing during its adoption and diffusion resulted in little consideration about the potential effects on police legitimacy of targeted approaches conducted in disadvantaged communities containing minority residents. Taylor 2010 raises concerns that hot spots policing may produce a withdrawal from the coproduction of order promoted by community policing, and also raises concerns that legitimacy could be threatened if aggressive enforcement strategies are used. Weisburd 2016 states that aggressive enforcement interventions affect public perception of police legitimacy and might produce negative community responses. Eck 2015 considers a number of these issues and subsequently considers whether third-party policing in hot spots might result in fewer of these potential problems.

  • Eck, J. E. 2015. Who should prevent crime at places? The advantages of regulating place managers and challenges to police services. Policing 9.3: 223–233.

    DOI: 10.1093/police/pav020Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Discusses six propositions about crime at place. Raises a number of concerns with hot spots policing, including labor intensiveness, cost, and that it can create perceived racial injustice. Contemplates place management and third-party policing in hot spots.

    Find this resource:

  • Kochel, T. R. 2011. Constructing hot spots policing: Unexamined consequences for disadvantaged populations and for police legitimacy. Criminal Justice Policy Review 22.3: 350–374.

    DOI: 10.1177/0887403410376233Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Describes the favorable media coverage and discourse around the adoption of hot spots policing. Discusses the need to examine the impact of hot spots policing on public perceptions, especially police legitimacy.

    Find this resource:

  • Rosenbaum, D. P. 2006. The limits of hot spots policing. In Police innovation: Contrasting perspectives. Edited by D. Weisburd and A. A. Braga, 245–266. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.

    DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511489334.013Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Discusses potential unintended problems associated with hot spots policing, suggesting that the assumptions of hot spots policing are too simplistic and do not account for the many other social problems in hot spots of crime. Criticisms address displacement, police-community relations, corruption, labeling/stigma, race and class bias, collective efficacy, and cost.

    Find this resource:

  • Taylor, R. B. 2010. Hot spots do not exist, and four other fundamental concerns about hot spots policing. Paper presented at the 2009 American Society of Criminology Conference, held in Philadelphia. In Contemporary issues in criminal justice policy: Policy proposals from the American Society of Criminology Conference. Edited by N. A. Frost, J. D. Freilich, and T. R. Clear, 271–278. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Criticizes the lack of a common definition of hot spots policing, and describes it as a withdrawal from coproduction of order. Raises possible concerns about police legitimacy if aggressive enforcement is used.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D. 2016. Does hot spots policing inevitably lead to unfair and abusive police practices, or can we maximize both fairness and effectiveness in the new proactive policing? University of Chicago Legal Forum 2016: 661–690.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Explains the potential consequences of proactive policing approaches by examining the negative narratives linked to hot spot policing approaches. Aggressive policing approaches were argued to undermine citizen evaluations of police legitimacy and negative community reactions. Offers two programs (the Brooklyn Park, Minnesota, research project and an initiative with the Police Foundation in Washington, DC, focusing on procedural justice policing at crime hot spots) as guide tools for maximizing police legitimacy and crime control.

    Find this resource:

Researching Hot Spots Policing

Empirically examining the potential crime and community impacts of hot spots policing requires working through some methodological considerations and challenges. Andresen 2015 explains how using different spatial analyses can present different conclusions about the spatial patterning of crime. Weisburd 2005 introduces some basic issues, including the size of the area and ensuring fidelity of the treatment. Sorg, et al. 2014 deals with hot spot boundary adjustment by officers as a challenge to treatment integrity. Weisburd and Gill 2014 encourages the use of a block randomized design over simple randomization in the case of hot spots, to maximize power with small sample sizes. Weisburd 2018 also emphasizes the important role that social characteristics of crime hot spots play in analyzing place-based interventions. Another issue of small sample size is raised in Hinkle, et al. 2013, which is that testing the crime effects is difficult when the initial counts of crime are low, such as in smaller cities and nonurban areas. To measure crime impact or effectiveness of policing interventions, recent evaluations have used the crime harm index (CHI; see Ariel, et al. 2016, cited under Community-Oriented Strategies). Using the crime harm index and crime counts data, Mitchell 2017 evaluates the Sacramento Hot Spot Experiment and suggests that CHI needs to be used when the large data sets are used but not useful for small data sets. Another issue in assessing the crime impact is measuring displacement and diffusion of benefits. Basic methodological issues in doing so are raised in Weisburd and Green 1995, and Ratcliffe and Breen 2011 offers the weighted displacement quotient as one solution to a number of the issues raised. Wheeler and Ratcliffe 2018 extends the original weighted displacement quotient by providing standard errors of statistic. This new weighted displacement difference (WDD) not only is able to find whether an intervention has decreased crime but also provides scholars with confidence intervals around the effect estimate.

  • Andresen, M. A. 2015. Identifying changes in spatial patterns from police interventions: The importance of multiple methods of analysis. Police Practice and Research 16.2: 148–160.

    DOI: 10.1080/15614263.2014.972612Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Provides an example of the use of kernel density estimation and local Moran’s I analyses to study hot spots policing. Different spatial analysis techniques can produce different spatial patterns.

    Find this resource:

  • Hinkle, J. C., D. Weisburd, C. Famega, and J. Ready. 2013. The problem is not just sample size: The consequences of low base rates in policing experiments in smaller cities. Evaluation Review 37.3–4: 213–238.

    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X13519799Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Demonstrates the challenge of statistical power in studying hot spots policing in smaller cities or nonurban areas. These places may have lower crime counts to begin with, and thus assessing change or treatment impact can be difficult.

    Find this resource:

  • Mitchell, R. J. 2017. The usefulness of a crime harm index: Analyzing the Sacramento Hot Spot Experiment using the California Crime Harm Index (CA-CHI). Journal of Experimental Criminology 1.11.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Compares the crime harm index (CHI) versus crime counts to evaluate a hot spot experiment. Reduction in harm was driven by property crime and effects appeared smaller relative to Part 1 crime count method. Authors concluded that the CHI is not useful when a small data set is used or when studying a small municipality.

    Find this resource:

  • Ratcliffe, J. H., and C. Breen. 2011. Crime diffusion and displacement: Measuring the side effects of police operations. Professional Geographer 63.2: 230–243.

    DOI: 10.1080/00330124.2010.547154Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Applies the weighted displacement quotient (WDQ) to a study in Camden, New Jersey. Addresses criticisms about the technique as a means of measuring displacement and diffusion effects of hot spots policing.

    Find this resource:

  • Sorg, E. T., J. D. Wood, E. R. Groff, and J. H. Ratcliffe. 2014. Boundary adherence during place-based policing evaluations: A research note. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 51.3: 377–393.

    DOI: 10.1177/0022427814523789Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Demonstrates how officers participating in an experiment on hot spots policing may adjust the hot spots boundaries due to boredom or perceived displacement, thus increasing the intended size of the hot spots beyond the study design. This affects the measurement of treatment effects as well as diffusion and displacement.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D. 2005. Hot spots policing experiments and criminal justice research: Lessons from the field. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 599.1: 220–245.

    DOI: 10.1177/0002716205274597Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Discusses place as the unit of analysis and the research and ethical issues this raises. Advocates for the use of randomized experiments in crime hot spots. Addresses implementation fidelity.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D. 2018. Hot spots of crime and place‐based prevention. Criminology and Public Policy 17.1: 5–25.

    DOI: 10.1111/1745-9133.12350Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Explains that hot spot policing interventions have mainly been evaluated on opportunity mechanisms for reducing crime. Cautions that hot spots are not just areas in which crime is occurring but rather social and environmental factors that impact the effectiveness of place-based prevention efforts.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., and C. Gill. 2014. Block randomized trials at places: Rethinking the limitations of small-N experiments. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 30.1: 97–112.

    DOI: 10.1007/s10940-013-9196-zSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Advises and explains the use of block randomization and its benefits relative to “naïve” randomization in the case of hot spots studies.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., and L. Green. 1995. Measuring immediate spatial displacement: Methodological issues and problems. In Crime and place. Crime Prevention Studies 4. Edited by D. Weisburd and J. Eck, 349–359. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Using the Minneapolis hot spots study as a basis and example, outlines the issues for measuring spatial displacement in adjacent catchment areas. Urges making measurement of displacement a priority.

    Find this resource:

  • Wheeler, A. P., and J. H. Ratcliffe. 2018. A simple weighted displacement difference test to evaluate place based crime interventions. Crime Science 7.1: 11.

    DOI: 10.1186/s40163-018-0085-5Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Provides a simple metric method (weighted displacement difference) to examine the potential differences between experimental and control areas in terms of crime-reduction effects, displacement, and diffusion of crime control benefits. Includes confidence intervals and standard errors of differences between treatment and control groups.

    Find this resource:

Displacement and Diffusion

One of the strongest criticisms that has been raised against hot spots policing is the concern that crime will just move around the corner or to a different time or to a different method, but still occur. Hamilton-Smith 2002 discusses the different types of displacement. Numerous scholars have offered varied strategies for measuring displacement and diffusion of benefits, with no clear gold standard or best practice, although most have examined the geographic displacement of crime. Measuring geographic displacement, Bowers and Johnson 2003 introduces the weighted displacement quotient technique, which Ratcliffe and Breen 2011 (cited under Researching Hot Spots Policing) builds upon. Also, Guerette’s total net effects (TNE) has been used to measure displacement and diffusion effects (see Ariel, et al. 2016, cited under Community-Oriented Strategies). Andresen and Malleson 2014 applies a spatial point pattern test and offers an excellent reference list on the topic. Short, et al. 2010 applies a mathematical framework for measuring displacement that applies reaction-diffusion partial differential equations. Weisburd, et al. 2006 looks beyond crime data and uses social observations, interviews, and ethnographic observations to assess displacement and diffusion. Hesseling 1994 offers a thorough narrative review of fifty-five international studies about displacement, concluding that the evidence does not support that hot spots policing produces spatial displacement. Bowers, et al. 2011 is a meta-analysis of sixteen studies about geographically focused policing, including hot spots policing, and concludes the displacement is not a likely consequence, but that diffusion of benefits is in fact more likely. Yet, one of the first hot spots experiments outside the United States to examine displacement, Blattman, et al. 2017, does find that implementing intensive policing in Bogotá, Colombia, resulted in increases in property crime in nearby areas. This study examines displacement from multiple distance parameters.

  • Andresen, M. A., and N. Malleson. 2014. Police foot patrol and crime displacement: A local analysis. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 30.2: 186–199.

    DOI: 10.1177/1043986214525076Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Applies a spatial point pattern test to measure the patterning and distribution of crime in a foot patrol experiment in Lonsdale, North Vancouver. Provides details about how to apply their analysis methods. Bibliography includes numerous relevant methodological references.

    Find this resource:

  • Blattman, C., D. Green, D. Ortega, and S. Tobón. 2017. Pushing crime around the corner? Estimating experimental impacts of large-scale security interventions. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    One of the first hot spots experiments outside the United States. Examines crime displacement impact of intensive policing (foot and vehicle patrol) and municipal services intervention (light maintenance and clean-up activities) in 1919 hot spots in Bogotá, Colombia. Displacement effects were examined at three different distance parameters. Unlike most prior studies in the United States, the results showed spatial displacement of property crimes to nearby areas. Revised September 2018, available online.

    Find this resource:

  • Bowers, K. J., and S. D. Johnson. 2003. Measuring the geographical displacement and diffusion of benefit effects of crime prevention activity. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 19.3: 275–301.

    DOI: 10.1023/A:1024909009240Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Provides a description of the weighted displacement quotient (WDQ), a sophisticated technique to measure geographic displacement and diffusion. The method relates changes in crime in a buffer area to changes in the hot spot.

    Find this resource:

  • Bowers, K. J., S. D. Johnson, R. T. Guerette, L. Summers, and S. Poynton. 2011. Spatial displacement and diffusion of benefits among geographically focused policing initiatives: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Experimental Criminology 7.4: 347–374.

    DOI: 10.1007/s11292-011-9134-8Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Meta-analysis of displacement and diffusion effects with sixteen geographically focused policing studies, including hot spots policing. Results suggest that displacement does not occur; instead, evidence supports diffusion of benefits.

    Find this resource:

  • Hamilton-Smith, N. 2002. Anticipated consequences: Developing a strategy for the targeted measurement of displacement and diffusion of benefits. In Evaluation for crime prevention. Crime Prevention Studies 14. Edited by N. Tilly, 11–52. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Reviews the literature on diffusion and displacement, discusses six types of displacement and offender adaptation to the treatment, and offers insight into measurement. Based on a burglary project in the United Kingdom, applies a buffer zone selection model to test spatial displacement and diffusion.

    Find this resource:

  • Hesseling, R. B. P. 1994. Displacement: A review of the empirical literature. In Crime prevention studies. Vol. 3. Edited by R. V. Clarke, 197–230. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Most thorough narrative review about displacement. Based on fifty-five international studies written in English. Studies were classified according to four situational crime prevention approaches, and displacement was investigated relative to these categories. Overall, the study did not find evidence of displacement.

    Find this resource:

  • Short, M. B., P. J. Brantingham, A. L. Bertozzi, and G. E. Tita. 2010. Dissipation and displacement of hotspots in reaction-diffusion models of crime. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107.9: 3961–3965.

    DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0910921107Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Mathematical framework for studying displacement and diffusion at hot spots that is based on reaction-diffusion partial differential equations, reflecting how offenders move and interact with potential victims or targets. Explains subcritical and supercritical hot spots.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., L. A. Wyckoff, J. Ready, J. E. Eck, J. C. Hinkle, and F. Gajewski. 2006. Does crime just move around the corner? A controlled study of spatial displacement and diffusion of crime control benefits. Criminology 44.3: 549–592.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2006.00057.xSave Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Goes beyond official data to measure displacement and diffusion. Uses 6,129 social observations, arrestee interviews, and ethnographic observations of drug and prostitution hot spots in Jersey City, New Jersey, to examine diffusion and displacement.

    Find this resource:

Data Sources

Hot spots policing has been subjected to a number of methodologically rigorous evaluations, many of which were federally funded, and some of the data sets are available through the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. Most available data relates to crime impacts, but more recent data sets examine other community and perceptual impacts as well. The first nationally funded research was conducted in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Buerger 1994 provides call-level data on the original Repeat Complaint Address Policing (RECAP) study, adjusting for what the researcher calls true mirrors, migrating calls, and contemporaneous calls. Sherman, et al. 1997 provides the RECAP data in aggravated matched pair call format and does not make the adjustments Buerger 1994 does. Eck and Wilcox 2013 provides observational and crime data for bars and apartment complexes that help to assess the characteristics about places that provide risk or protection from crime. Gorr and Olligschlaeger 2015 provides output from hot spot forecasting models that used 911 call data and offense reports in Pittsburgh. Weisburd, et al. 2013 provides sixteen years of crime data in Seattle aggregated to the street segment level, along with social and physical characteristics of the segment, which can be used to examine the trajectory of crime over time as well as affiliated social and physical conditions. Weisburd, et al. 2014 provides social and physical observational data as well as interview data about two hot spots in Jersey City. These data were designed to capture displacement and diffusion of benefits. Rosenfeld 2017 provides observational data through conducted interviews with law enforcement to evaluate the effects of hot spot policing strategies on crime. Weisburd, et al. 2016 provides street-level data for three cities in the San Bernardino Valley area of California to test the impact on crime hot spots and the fear of crime in the broken windows policing approach. Kochel 2017 provides data for seventy-one residential crime hot spots in Saint Louis County, Missouri, to assess the community and crime impact of different hot spot policing tactics. Mamalian, et al. 2008 provides results from a 1997–1998 survey of police agencies about their use of crime mapping and spatial analysis of crime.

  • Buerger, M. E. 1994. Reexamining the Minneapolis Repeat Complaint Address Policing (RECAP) experiment, 1986–1987. ICPSR 6172. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Cleans the Minneapolis Repeat Complaint Address Policing (RECAP) data in ICPSR 9788 to account for what Buerger calls true mirrors, migrating calls, and contemporaneous calls. Call-level data are separated by commercial versus residential and experimental versus baseline year.

    Find this resource:

  • Eck, J., and P. Wilcox. 2013. Situational crime prevention at specific locations in community context: Place and neighborhood effects in Cincinnati, OH, 2005–2008. ICPSR 26981. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Study compared bars to apartment complexes regarding suitability for situational crime prevention and understanding the context of high and low violent crime locations. Observations at bars and apartment complexes and interviews with place managers. Cincinnati crime data and calls for service. Data is restricted; users must apply for access.

    Find this resource:

  • Gorr, W., and A. Olligschlaeger. 2015. Crime hot spot forecasting with data from the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police, 1990–1998. ICPSR 3469. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Contains 911 computer-aided dispatch calls and offense reports for Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for 1990–1998, aggregated by month and precinct. Data were used to run forecast models. Output from these models is available.

    Find this resource:

  • Kochel, T. 2017. St Louis County hot spots in residential areas (SCHIRA) 2011–2013 (ICPSR 36098). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Contains three waves of community survey data, two waves of officer survey data, automatic vehicle location (AVL) data on officer presence in the hot spots, social systematic observation of directed patrols, calls for service and crime count data, and officer self-reported activity data for directed patrols. Data were used to evaluate a crime impact of different policing approaches (collaborative problem solving, directed patrol, and standard policing approaches) in seventy-one hot spots, and assess impact on residents’ perceptions about police and their neighborhood. Data is restricted; users must apply for access.

    Find this resource:

  • Mamalian, C. A., N. G. LaVigne, and E. Groff. 2008. Use of computerized crime mapping by law enforcement in the United States, 1997–1998. ICPSR 2878. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Mailed survey of a sample of police agencies with at least fifty sworn officers in 1997–1998 regarding computerized mapping and spatial analysis of crime. Some identifiable information is restricted.

    Find this resource:

  • Rosenfeld, R. 2017. Evaluation of a hot spot policing field experiment in St. Louis, 2012–2014 (ICPSR 36129). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Experimental data on sixty-four hot spots. Files contains data on the hot spots such as treatment condition, officer activities, and crime data. Data were used to evaluate crime impact of a targeted patrol tactic and assess the role of researcher-practitioner partnership in the intervention.

    Find this resource:

  • Sherman, L. W., P. R. Gartin, and M. E. Buerger. 1997. Repeat complaint address policing: Two field experiments in Minneapolis, 1985–1987. ICPSR 9788. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university. Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Matched pair calls for service at 250 addresses in Minneapolis were drawn from a sample of 2,000 of the highest call addresses. Data were used to assess crime impact of a hot spots policing approach. Data are separated into commercial and residential data.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., E. Groff, and S. Yang. 2013. Explaining developmental crime trajectories at places: A study of “crime waves” and “crime drops” at micro units of geography in Seattle, Washington, 1989–2004. ICPSR 28161. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Sixteen years of official crime data and social and physical characteristics in Seattle at the street segment level. Data is restricted; users must apply for access.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., J. Hinkle, C. Famega, and J. Ready. 2016. Assessing the impacts of broken windows policing strategies on citizen attitudes in three California cities: Redlands, Ontario and Colton, 2008–2009 (ICPSR 34427). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Data from 108 street segments (equally divided into experimental and control areas) used to examine the extent to which a six-month broken windows policing intervention may impact residents’ perception of the targeted hot spots toward police legitimacy, collective efficacy, and amount of crime and disorder. Phone survey method was used to collect information on 371 residents and business owners in each street segment before and after the intervention as well as calls for service data, police arrest incident reports, and police activity logs.

    Find this resource:

  • Weisburd, D., L. Wyckoff, J. Ready, J. Eck, J. Hinkle, and F. Gajewski. 2014. Indirect impacts of community policing, Jersey City, NJ, 1997–1999. ICPSR 29430. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »

    Data from two hot spots used to study displacement and diffusion in Jersey City. Six thousand 20-minute social and physical observations as well as resident and place manager interviews, ethnographic observations, and calls for service data. Arrestee interviews were not provided to ICPSR. Data is restricted; users must apply for access.

    Find this resource:

back to top

Article

Up

Down