DOI: 10.3886/icpsr39075.v1
title: Reducing Traffic-Related Officer Fatalities and Injuries Through Technology Enhancements and Policy, United States, 2013-2021
title: Version 1

description: Police officers rely on technology to safely arrive to scenes of emergency response. Although the technology in vehicles is becoming more sophisticated, it also presents a hazard while trying to safely operate a vehicle, often at high speeds. Increased refinement and understanding of the technologies are needed, including how they can be controlled and what is acceptable use for modern-day police officers.
The two objectives of this research were 1) to determine ways to improve police officer safety by evaluating technology enhancements that improve information delivery to officers in patrol vehicles and 2) to evaluate agency driving policies for response-to-calls service using crash and arrest data, specifically to investigate if vehicle driving speed influences a call's outcome. These objectives were achieved using parallel research investigations, including a qualitative analysis of how officers perceived and reacted to technology enhancements that were deployed in patrol vehicles. Focus groups and a follow-up survey were conducted so officers could provide feedback on the role of technology and the specific software programs implemented during the study for evaluation. Agency traffic crash data and computer-aided dispatch response-to-call data were also analyzed to determine the impact of response-to-call speed cap policies.
This collection contains data representing six police agencies across the United States: response-to-call data (DS1-DS4), vehicle crash data (DS5-DS7), post-intervention officer survey data (DS8), and pre-intervention officer focus group data (DS9). <strong>NOTE: Focus group data are not currently available.</strong>
description: The purpose of this study was to determine ways to improve officer safety by evaluating technology enhancements that improve information delivery to officers in patrol vehicles and agency driving policies for response-to-calls service.
description: This study used a subsequent mixed-methods approach. The research team partnered with six police agencies throughout the United States, which varied in size and location for geographic distribution. Two commercial software applications were procured to introduce a computer use interruption while a patrol vehicle was in motion; this software served as the study's intervention. Agencies were able to choose which program to use during the study. Use, reporting, and monitoring functionality associated with the software was not shared with the research team to maintain anonymous participation. Four agencies participated in the intervention.
<strong>Focus groups.</strong> Prior to introducing the intervention, researchers conducted focus groups at each agency (Nov 2019-Mar 2020). Groups consisted of the two principal investigators and 2-8 officers of varying experience and duties (n=31). Discussions lasted 60 to 90 minutes and were digitally recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed both manually and with NVivo.
<strong>Officer survey.</strong> The initial research design included follow-up focus groups following the technology use period, but due to restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, a Qualtrics survey was developed instead to be fielded following the intervention (2020-2021). A total of 41 surveys were completed, representing five of the six agencies. The survey was open to officers regardless of whether they had participated in the study intervention.
<strong>Administrative records.</strong> To examine response-to-call speed caps in promoting officer safety, the research team acquired three years of agency vehicle crash data from three of the participating agencies. For comparison, one agency had a speed cap policy, and two agencies had no policy. Due to the logistical effort required to export and clean raw dispatch/arrest data, each agency used a different approach to select data for response-to-call outcome analysis. Agency A exported a single calendar quarter (Oct-Dec 2019) of responses to "fights". Agency B provided all dispatch data for a calendar quarter (Oct-Dec 2019) and narrowed the query to priority 1 calls. Agency C provided dispatch and disposition data in separate files, which the research team combined, for robberies and priority 1 calls in 2019.
description: <strong>Focus groups.</strong> Questions asked to each group of participants focused on the impact of speed caps on call outcome or ability to perform their job; the role of vehicle technology when responding to calls; how equipment placement and use affects safe patrol vehicle operation; and suggestions to increase officer safety when using technology for vehicles.
<strong>Officer survey.</strong> Information about respondents was limited to law enforcement agency affiliation, whether they were in a supervisory role, a non-patrol role, and years of law enforcement experience. Participants were asked for their opinions on the safety of patrol vehicle technology, potential for distracted driving due to technology, and driving speed caps. Participants were also to rate how essential different types of technology are to their work, to note what types of vehicle technology they would like to see, and to provide any additional comments.
<strong>Response-to-call records.</strong> Main variables include case/incident number, priority number, reported problem type, response time, and call outcome (arrest vs. no arrest).
<strong>Crash records.</strong> Data are separated into event-level and vehicle-level. Both sets have variables for report number and crash date. Event variables include any contributing circumstances, crash severity, crash type, generic location descriptor (e.g., highway, intersection), road/weather conditions, damage amounts, and counts of injuries by severity. Vehicle variables also include the posted speed limit, estimated speed, and vehicle make, model, and year.
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: Agency A Response-to-Call Data
DS2: Agency B Response-to-Call Data
DS3: Agency C Priority 1 Response-to-Call Data
DS4: Agency C Robbery Response-to-Call Data
DS5: Agency 1 Crash Data
DS6: Agency 2 Crash Data
DS7: Agency 3 Crash Data
DS8: Officer Survey Data
DS9: Officer Focus Group Data
description: Law enforcement agencies located throughout the United States.
description: face-to-face interview; mixed mode; web-based surveyExcept for remediations made for disclosure risk, data (DS1-DS8) have been released as they were received by ICPSR. All formatting (e.g., color-coding) was performed by the research team and kept as-is in the released files.Focus group data are not currently available for this collection. Please refer to the ICPSR README for details about these files.