Consistency of Supervisory Interpretations of Stop-Search Justification in London: A Vignette Assessment Analysis

Abstract

Abstract Research Question Do police supervisors reach different conclusions about the legality of a decision to stop and search in survey vignettes using similar facts with the ethnicity of subjects described as either black or white? Data We utilize a vignette survey design, presenting fifteen real-world stop and search examples from within the South Basic Command Unit policing area to 118 frontline uniformed supervisors (Sergeants and Inspectors) in the Metropolitan Police Service of London. Methods We introduce a randomised characteristic assignment of the ethnicity of the subject featured in the vignette to compare officer decision-making when the suspect is black or white. Using both Likert scale and free text responses, a combination of descriptive statistics, inferential methods, and text mining is applied to the survey data. Findings We found no substantive difference in the justification of stop and search powers by officers between white suspects and black suspects. We did find substantial variability in supervisor assessments of whether vignettes provided sufficient legal grounds for conducting a stop and search. Conclusions Within the limits of the methodology, we conclude that there is no racial disparity in perceptions of legal thresholds for conducting searches across a range of circumstances. We must also conclude that there is a substantial range of opinion regarding different specific circumstances that are understood to provide a threshold of sufficient evidence to search. Key Words Stop & Search / Police Supervision / Racial Disparity in Policing/ Police Legal Powers