Research for Pra

Satisfaction With Police—What Matters?

02 

CT. 
This and other publications and products of

the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of

Justice Programs and NIJ can be found on

the World Wide Web at the following sites:

Office of Justice Programs 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov

National Institute of Justice

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij

U.S. Department of Justice Research in Pra

Office of Justice Programs

810 Seventh Street N.W.

Washington, DC 20531

John Ashcroft

Attorney General

Deborah J. Daniels

Assistant Attorney General

Sarah V. Hart

Director, National Institute of Justice
Findings and conclusions of the research reported here are thos

the authors and do not reflect the official position or policies of t

U.S. Department of Justice.

This study was conducted using information from the Project on 

Neighborhoods, directed by Stephen D. Mastrofski, Roger B. Pa

J. Reiss, Jr., and Robert E. Worden. The project was supported 

National Institute of Justice under grant number 95–IJ–CX–0071

Support for this research was provided through a transfer of fun

from the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

OCT. 02

Satisfaction With Police—What Mat

NCJ 194077
ii

What makes people satisfied

with the police? What factors

contribute to their positive

views of police performance?

The biggest factor, according

to new research, is people’s

perceptions about the quality

of their lives—their sense of

safety, for example. Unfortunately, the police can do little to change perceptions

about one’s quality of life.

But the research also shows

that the second biggest factor in shaping opinions is

direct contact with officers—

how police behave when

they interact with residents.

The implication: Improving

the quality of daily interaction

between patrol officers and

citizens may be the best way

for a police administrator to

improve public satisfaction

with police.

What did the

researchers find? ■ A resident’s personal experience with police is nearly

as important as the resident’s impression of the

neighborhood and quality

of life in determining his or

her satisfaction with police.

■ Residents who 

great sense of s

who rate their n

hoods favorably 

higher opinion o

despite individu

teristics such as 

age.

■ Caucasians, non

minorities, and o

dents were mor

with police than 

blacks and youn

dents (ages 18 t

To increase public 

tion with police en

and general perce

performance, poli

tives should consi

the following step

■ Identify each typ

public encounte

would like to ad

■ Specify the beh

dents should rig

expect in each t

encounter with 

officer.

■ Implement the a

officer training a

supervision to m

exceed those ex

ABOUT THIS REPORT
Satisfaction With Police—

What Matters?

Law enforcement administrators have long been concerned about the level of

public satisfaction with police.

Such sensitivity is especially

appropriate in community

policing jurisdictions that

emphasize interaction with

community members, seeking their trust, cooperation,

and assistance.

How do police managers

determine the factors (such as

officer demeanor and crime

rate) underlying public opinion

of police performance? How

can they measure these factors? How do they best apply

this information toward improving public satisfaction? 

A recent study involving telephone interviews with 5,361

residents in 58 neighborhoods

in Indianapolis, Indiana, and

St. Petersburg, Florida, addressed these questions.1

The research examined

whether and to what extent

the following factors influence

an individual’s satisfaction

with police:

■ Personal experience or

encounters with police,

such as calls for 

traffic stops.

■ One’s perceptio

borhood quality 

cluding the leve

physical decay, 

disorder.

■ Neighborhood c

defined by econ

and homicide ra

The study found t

ceived quality of li

the greatest influe

person’s level of s

with police. Howe

results also sugge

dents’ direct expe

encounters with o

key element of sa

The policy implica

good-faith efforts 

exceed public exp

of police behavior 

to succeed even i

hood conditions re

same. Conducting 

collect resident fe

their encounters w

is recommended.

This report in NIJ’

for Practice series 

the results of the 

About the Authors

Michael D. Reisig, Ph.D.,

is associate professor

of criminal justice at

Michigan State University.

Roger B. Parks, Ph.D., is

professor of public and

environmental affairs at

Indiana University.

This report is based on a

longer journal article.

Readers may refer to it for

details about the findings

and methods: See Michael

D. Reisig and Roger B.

Parks, “Experience, Quality of Life, and Neighborhood Context: A

Hierarchical Analysis

of Satisfaction With

Police,” Justice Quarterly

17(3)(2000): 607–629.
2

Florida telephone surveys

and places these results in

the context of other research

to help managers determine

what matters most in improving public satisfaction with

police. 

This study also examined

how satisfaction with police

varied according to the demographic characteristics of

respondents. Caucasians and

nonblack minorities expressed significantly greater satisfaction with police than did

their black neighbors. The

research did not find gender

differences in satisfaction

with police. Differences

between age groups were

evident, however; respondents ages 18 to 32 reported

significantly lower levels of

satisfaction than did older

persons. Homeowners

expressed greater satisfaction than renters. Generally,

the higher a respondent’s

education, the greater his or

her satisfaction with police.

Impact of encounters

with police

Over the past few decades,

many researchers have tried

to identify factors that influence the public’s evaluations

of police. Early studies on

police-public encounters discovered that people who

judged their enco

police favorably w

likely to report gre

al satisfaction with 

Thus, researchers 

that enhancing se

ery could improve 

lic’s overall evalua

police.

Prior research into 

effects of encoun

police also sheds 

what determines 

satisfaction with p

example, in one s

sons reported mo

attitudes when of

respectful and me

ceeded service ex

such as by explain

course of action.2

Another early stud

that crime victims 

sons stopped for 

tions expressed s

less satisfaction w

than did those wh

called the police f

This study’s findin

that improving the 

of services during 

encounters enhan

satisfaction. Indivi

were satisfied wit

service or a traffic 

more satisfied wit

than those who h

tact with police. C

those who were d

with the response 

Individuals’

feelings about

the state of the

neighborhood

are associated

with their level

of satisfaction

with police.
THE PROJECT ON POLICING NEIGHBORHOODS

NIJ is committed to providing relevant research that helps practitioners in the field. 

for Practice is one in a series of reports from the Project on Policing Neighborhoods 

conducted in 1996–1997. POPN researchers examined police and citizen interaction

and behaviors in 12 neighborhoods in Indianapolis, Indiana, and 12 similar neighborh

Petersburg, Florida. They directly observed patrol officers on duty, interviewed patro

their supervisors, and conducted telephone surveys of individuals randomly selecte

neighborhood.

NIJ is publishing several reports that summarize scholarly reports and articles writte

researchers. The summaries present key information police managers need to know 

solving and community policing. Additional topics include encounters with juvenile s

police supervisory styles, gender differences in officer attitudes and behavior, police 

toward the public and the public’s attitudes toward police, how officers spend their t

community, and race and everyday policing.

Knowledge about how officers interact with neighborhood residents and other offic

law enforcement administrators improve policies and practices and lead to better c

tions. With this goal in mind, NIJ invites comments and suggestions concerning this 

comment, write to Steve Edwards, National Institute of Justice, 810 Seventh Street N

ton, DC 20531; e-mail edwardss@ojp.usdoj.gov; or call 202–307–0500.

for service or a traffic stop

were significantly less satisfied with police than those

who had not experienced

such encounters.

Influence of perceived

quality of life

Quality-of-life measures

reflect both positive and negative aspects of residents’

immediate surroundings.

The study included four such

measures: residents’ perceptions of crime, incivilities (i.e.,

physical decay and social disorder), safety, and general

rating of the neighborhood. 

For perceptions of crime, residents were asked whether

“neighborhood crime is getting worse.” “Incivilities”

measures the extent to

which respondents reported

the following as problematic

in their neighborhood: litter/

trash, loitering, vandalism,

gangs, abandoned buildings,

and drug dealing. Perceived

safety was measured by asking citizens how safe they

would feel walking alone in

their neighborhood after dark.

Finally, the neighborhood 

rating reflected answers to

the question, “In general,

how do you rate your 
4

neighborhood as a place to

live?”

The research found that individuals’ feelings about the

state of the neighborhood are

associated with their level of

satisfaction with police. Residents who believe that crime

and disorder are problems in

their neighborhood reported

less satisfaction with the

police than those who did

not perceive such problems.

Respondents who reported

a greater sense of safety

and rated their neighborhood

more favorably hold the

police in higher regard, even

after considering neighborhood characteristics and such

individual characteristics as

race and age.

Effect of neighborhood

context

Neighborhood context pertains to the characteristics of

a neighborhood as revealed

by such objective measures

as census data and crime

rates, in contrast with individual perceptions of neighborhood conditions.

A previous study noted that

ethnicity and socioeconomic

status combine to help produce neighborhood climates

or cultures that shape attitudes toward policing practices.4 Armed with data from

8,782 residents of 

go neighborhoods

study found that c

ed disadvantage (

of economic disad

in racially segrega

borhoods) is asso

versely with satisf

with police.5 Spec

this Chicago study 

dissatisfaction wit

was more depend

neighborhood con

such factors as ra

The current study 

neighborhood cont

terms of the neigh

homicide rate and 

ed disadvantage. A

cide rate increased

satisfaction with p

creased. Much of 

between neighbor

the levels of satisf

police was explain

centrated disadvan

all, results of the re

demonstrate that n

hood context matt

What matters 

The findings sugg

public’s perceptio

borhood quality of 

account for levels 

tion with police. A

cognitive and emo

based, these resp

neighborhood con

appear to have the 

Public perceptions of

neighborhood

quality of life

best account

for levels of

satisfaction

with police.
influence on individual attitudes toward police.

Residents of the same neighborhood, however, often disagree about the extent of

neighborhood problems and

may perceive neighborhood

conditions quite differently.

Different individuals respond

differently to quality-of-life

survey questions even

though they are exposed

to similar neighborhood 

conditions. 

Moreover, persons from the

same neighborhood report

different levels of satisfaction

with police. This inconsistency seems to limit the relevance of the quality-of-life

measure for development

of policies to improve satisfaction with police.

The study also found that residents’ evaluations of their

encounters with police are

important factors in determining satisfaction, although to a

lesser degree than perceived

neighborhood conditions. 

The significance of this 

second finding to police managers is its practical translation into policy: It is easier for

a police officer to influence

an individual’s impression of

him or her than to influence

that individual’s impression

of the neighborhood.

So what matters most in

public satisfaction with

police? The short answer

suggested by this study is

individuals’ perceptions of or

satisfaction with their neighborhood (quality of life). But

policing policy cannot be

founded solely on such an

intangible factor. Improving

the quality of public encounters with police may provide

a more practical approach.

Conclusions and 

policy implications

Three factors—encounters

with police, perceived neighborhood quality of life, and

neighborhood context—

influence public satisfaction

with police, according to this

research. Although the study

found quality-of-life perceptions best indicate satisfaction with police, this finding

offers the police manager 

little practical application.

Moreover, one individual’s

perception of quality of life

is often inconsistent with

another’s, even though both

persons live in the same

neighborhood.

If individual perceptions of

quality of life do not consistently reflect actual neighborhood conditions, it follows

that more community policing activities, such as neighborhood cleanup programs

P

ti

o

a

d

o

e

a
6

and aggressive maintenance

of order, may have only a

modest effect on residents’

satisfaction with police. Such

efforts may have other positive outcomes, including

increased citizen-police communication and cooperation. 

However, police may want

to seek additional means of

increasing public satisfaction

with their performance. For

example, individual encounters with police are a more

fruitful area on which to

focus efforts to improve satisfaction. After all, through

departmental policies and

training, police can more easily influence what occurs during a police-citizen encounter

than they can affect residents’ feelings about the

neighborhood.

Research from the field of

consumer psychology is relevant to the link between

expectations of police services and citizen satisfaction.6

Residents respond positively

when police exceed expectations. Research further 

indicates that individuals’

expectations regarding officer

demeanor and task performance exert a tremendous

influence on their subsequent

level of satisfaction after

encounters with police.

7

In light of these re

ings, it is recomm

police executives 

idents’ expectatio

ing to police deme

behavior.

8 Most re

expect police to b

professional mann

sarcasm, and act c

and respectfully. 

However, expecta

task-oriented polic

behavior are likely 

from one type of e

to another. For exa

research shows th

expect police offic

them why they w

during traffic enco

how to handle the 

glary victims expe

arrive on the scen

manner and keep 

formed on case st

Police executives 

start by identifying 

common types of 

public encounters 

cer behavior can b

or improved. Proto

be developed that 

behavior the office

adopt, e.g., take t

time to keep a vic

formed of the stat

her case, remain c

despite an egregio

violation, and so f

ing and supervisio
the loop by ensuring the 

officer on patrol has the 

necessary experience and

knows that management

cares about public satisfaction.

To monitor results of such

efforts, departments can conduct encounter-level surveys,

which should solicit respondents’ assessments of their

experiences or encounters

with officers.

Notes

1. Telephone interviews were conducted in 1996 and 1997. Homicide

data from 1995 and census data

from 1990 were also used. “Satisfaction with police” reflects citizens’

evaluations of local police in general

terms. Respondents were asked,

“How satisfied are you with the

quality of police service in your

neighborhood?” “Do the police provide services that citizens want?”

and “How would you rate the job

the police are doing in terms of

working with people in your neighborhood to solve local problems?”

2. See, for example, Furstenberg,

F.F., and C.F. Wellford, “Calling the

Police: The Evaluation of Police Service,” Law and Society Review

7(1973): 402.

3. Dean, D., “Citizen Ratings of

the Police: The Difference Contact

Makes,” Law and Policy Quarterly

2(1980): 462.

4. Dunham, R.G., and G.P. Alpert,

“Neighborhood Differences in Attitudes Toward Policing: Evidence for

a Mixed-Strategy Model of Policing

in a Multi-Ethnic Setting,” Journal

of Criminal Law and Criminology

79(1988): 504–523. See also, Reisig,

M.D., and A.L. Giacomazzi, “Citizen

Perceptions of Community Policing:

Are Attitudes Toward Police Important?” Policing 21(3)(1998): 547–561.

5. Sampson, R.J., and D. JeglumBartusch, “Legal Cynicism and (Subcultural?) Tolerance of Deviance: The

Neighborhood Context of Racial Differences,” Law and Society Review

32(4)(1998): 777–804.

6. For an example of research on the

link between consumer expectations

and satisfaction, see Oliver, R.L., “A

Cognitive Model of the Antecedents

and Consequences of Satisfaction

Decisions,” Journal of Marketing

Research 17(1980): 460–469.

7. See Reisig, M.D., and M.S.

Chandek, “The Effects of Expectancy Disconfirmation on Outcome

Satisfaction in Police-Citizen Encounters,” Policing 24(1)(2001):

88–99.

8. For a more detailed discussion,

see Reisig, M.D., “Citizen Input and

Police Service: Moving Beyond the

‘Feel Good’ Community Survey,” in

The Move Toward Community Policing: Making Change Happen, ed. M.

Morash and J.K. Ford, Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2002.

Recommended reading

Alpert, G.P., and M.H. Moore,

“Measuring Police Performance in the New Paradigm

of Policing,” Performance

Measures for the Criminal

Justice System, Washington,
8

DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1993, NCJ 143505:

109–142.

Brady, T., Measuring What

Matters, Part One: Measures

of Crime, Fear, and Disorder,

Research in Action, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Justice, National Institute of

Justice, December 1996,

NCJ 162205.

Langworthy, R., Measuring

What Matters, Proceedings

From the Policing Research

Institute Meetings, Research

Report, Washington, DC:

U.S. Department of Justice,

National Institute of Justice,

July 1999, NCJ 170610.

Parks, R.B., and M.D. Reisig,

“Community Policing and

Perceived Safety: Psychological and Ecological Effects,”

presented at the 50th annual

meeting of the American

Society of Criminology, Washington, DC, 1998.

Sampson, R., and D. Bartusch, Attitudes Toward

Crime, the Police, and the

Law: Individual and Neighborhood Differences, Research

Preview, Washington, DC:

U.S. Department of Justice,

National Institute of Justice,

June 1999, NCJ 184200.

Sampson, R., and 

bush, Disorder in 

Neighborhoods—

Lead to Crime? Re

Brief, Washington

Department of Ju

National Institute 

February 2001, NC

Skogan, W.G., and 

nett, Community 

Chicago Style, Ne

Oxford University 

1997. Taylor, R.B., “The 

Thesis: Theory, M

ment, and Policy,” 

Measuring What M

Washington, DC: 

partment of Justic

Institute of Justice

NCJ 170610. Travis, J., and J. B

suring What Matt

Two: Developing M

of What the Police 

search in Action, W

ton, DC: U.S. Dep

Justice, National I

Justice, Novembe

NCJ 167255. Weitzer, R., “Citiz

ceptions of Police 

duct: Race and Ne

Context,” Justice 

16 (1999): 819–84
The National Institute of Justice is the

research, development, and evaluation

agency of the U.S. Department of Justice

and is solely dedicated to researching 

crime control and justice issues. NIJ 

provides objective, independent, nonpartisan,

evidence-based knowledge and tools to 

meet the challenges of crime and justice, 

particularly at the State and local levels.

NIJ is a component of the Office of Justice

Programs, which also includes the Bureau of

Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice

Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice

and Delinquency Prevention, and the

Office for Victims of Crime.
NCJ 194077