![NIJ Journal Home](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/web/20080923163430im_/http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/journals/images/sidenav/home_new.gif)
Director’s
Message
DNA
Analysis for “Minor” Crimes: A Major Benefit for Law
Enforcement
Tracking
Prisoners in Jail With Biometrics: An Experiment in a Navy Brig
Predicting
a Criminal’s Journey to Crime
Victim
Satisfaction With the Criminal Justice System
Police Responses to Officer-Involved Shootings
Automated Information Sharing: Does It Help Law Enforcement Officers
Work Better?
NIJ
and Harvard University Host Webcasts on Less Lethal Force and DNA
in “Minor” Crimes
Books in Brief
Publications of Interest From NIJ
![Subscribe](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/web/20080923163430im_/http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/journals/images/sidenav/subscribe_off.gif)
![Search Journal Articles](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/web/20080923163430im_/http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/journals/images/sidenav/search_off.gif)
![Previous Issues](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/web/20080923163430im_/http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/journals/images/sidenav/previous.gif)
|
![](images/rule2.gif) |
![](images/rule2.gif) |
NIJ
Journal No. 253 January 2006
Police Responses to Officer-Involved Shootings
Final report submitted to NIJ, Police Responses
to Officer-Involved Shootings, David Klinger, grant number
97–IC–CX–0029, available from NCJRS (NCJ
192286).
What goes through police officers’ minds when they
are involved in shootings? How does facing deadly force
affect what they see, hear, and feel? Prior research has
found that many officers involved in shootings suffer from
“postshooting trauma”—a form of posttraumatic
stress disorder that may include guilt, depression, and
even suicidal thoughts.[1]
However, it may be that officers are more resilient than
previously thought. One study has found that most suffer
few long-term negative emotional or physical effects after
shooting a suspect.
The study explored the emotional, psychological, and physical
reactions of 80 officers and sheriff’s deputies during
and after 113 incidents in which they shot someone, using
a combination of questionnaires and personal interviews.
Among the findings:
- Most officers reported that just before and as they pulled
the trigger on the suspect, they experienced a range of
psychological, emotional, and physiological reactions that
distorted time, distance, sight, and sound.
(See table 1.) Many officers found their recollection
of the events of the shooting to be imperfect. In extreme
cases, officers could not recall firing their guns. In the
days, weeks, and months that follow a shooting, officers
may suffer adverse reactions such as sleep interruption,
anxiety, and depression.
- Although some officers did not feel fear during a shooting,
they still sensed imminent danger to themselves or others
that met the standard for using deadly force.
- Contrary to earlier research findings, few officers in
the study suffered long-lasting negative effects following
a shooting. Officers’ postshooting responses were
influenced by the attitudes and actions of investigators,
colleagues, family members, and friends; these reactions
diminished markedly as attention and activity around the
incident lessened. (See
table 2.)
Table
1. Officers’ perceptual distortions during shooting
incidents (n = 113)
|
Distortion
|
At any time
|
Prior to firing
|
Upon firing
|
Tunnel vision
|
51%
|
31%
|
27%
|
Heightened visual detail
|
56%
|
37%
|
35%
|
Both visual distortions
|
15%
|
10%
|
11%
|
Auditory blunting
|
82%
|
42%
|
70%
|
Auditory acuity
|
20%
|
10%
|
5%
|
Both aural distortions
|
9%
|
0%
|
9%
|
Slow motion
|
56%
|
43%
|
40%
|
Fast motion
|
23%
|
12%
|
17%
|
Both time distortions
|
2%
|
0%
|
2%
|
Other
|
13%
|
6%
|
9%
|
Total
|
95%
|
88%
|
94%
|
Table
2. Officers’ responses following a shooting
|
Physical response
|
At any time
(n = 113)
|
First 24 hours
(n = 112)
|
First week
(n = 113)
|
Within 3 months
(n = 111)
|
After 3 months
(n = 105)
|
Trouble
sleeping
|
48%
|
46%
|
36%
|
16%
|
11%
|
Fatigue
|
46%
|
39%
|
26%
|
7%
|
5%
|
Crying
|
24%
|
17%
|
7%
|
2%
|
2%
|
Appetite loss
|
17%
|
16%
|
8%
|
2%
|
1%
|
Headache
|
7%
|
6%
|
4%
|
1%
|
1%
|
Nausea
|
4%
|
4%
|
4%
|
0%
|
0%
|
Other physical response
|
19%
|
18%
|
11%
|
12%
|
6%
|
Thoughts and feelings
|
Recurrent thoughts
|
83%
|
82%
|
74%
|
52%
|
37%
|
Anxiety
|
40%
|
37%
|
28%
|
13%
|
10%
|
Fear of legal or administrative problems
|
34%
|
31%
|
25%
|
19%
|
11%
|
Elation
|
29%
|
26%
|
19%
|
11%
|
5%
|
Sadness
|
26%
|
18%
|
17%
|
5%
|
5%
|
Numbness
|
20%
|
18%
|
7%
|
4%
|
3%
|
Nightmares
|
18%
|
13%
|
13%
|
10%
|
6%
|
Fear for safety
|
18%
|
9%
|
10%
|
9%
|
8%
|
Guilt
|
12%
|
10%
|
5%
|
6%
|
2%
|
Other thoughts
or feelings
|
42%
|
33%
|
23%
|
20%
|
14%
|
Note: The different n values
reflect the timing of the 113 shootings. For example, two
of the shootings occurred within 3 weeks before the interview
and another six occurred between 2 and 3 months before the
interviews. One officer was critically injured and unconscious
for 48 hours following her shooting, so questions regarding
the first 24 hours after her shooting did not apply to her.
What Happens in the Months Following a Shooting?
Most officers reported experiencing no negative reactions
3 months after the shooting, and fewer than one in five
reported “severe” reactions (two or more negative
emotional or physical reactions) 3 months after the shooting.
Even in the short term, many officers experienced no or
only one negative reaction during the first day and week
following a shooting (38 and 52 percent, respectively).
Only one specific reaction—recurrent thoughts—persisted
past the 3-month mark in more than one-third of the cases,
and only two other reactions exceeded 10 percent—fear
of legal problems and trouble sleeping, both of which were
reported in 11 percent of the cases.
The emotions that officers experienced were not all negative.
Following about one-third of the shootings, officers reported
feelings of elation that included joy at being alive, residual
excitement after a life-threatening situation, and satisfaction
or pride in proving their ability to use deadly force appropriately.
Expressions of support from fellow officers, detailed discussions
about the incident with officers who had previously shot
a suspect, and taking department-mandated time off following
the shooting were associated with slight or moderate reductions
in officers’ negative reactions. Conversely, officers
who felt a lack of support from their colleagues and supervisors
or that aspects of the investigation into the shooting were
unfair or unprofessional reported more severe and longer-lasting
negative reactions following the shooting, particularly
after 3 months. Less predictably, support from intimate
partners or family members and attendance at mandatory mental
health counseling sessions were not associated with officers’
postshooting reactions.
What Does This Mean for Police Agencies?
Training. The finding that most officers
in this study experienced little long-term disruption as
a result of shooting a suspect calls into question the appropriateness
of training that stresses the severe guilt and depression
felt by some officers who shoot. Focusing on severe responses
that occur infrequently may be misleading and counterproductive.
Several officers indicated in interviews that they thought
something might be wrong with them because they did not
experience the symptoms that training taught them to expect;
others felt that, through the power of suggestion, their
reactions were more severe than they would have been otherwise.
Mental health counseling. Many officers
who underwent mandatory postshooting counseling reported
that the experience was not positive (although three officers
who reported long-term depression found counseling to be
helpful). Most officers who held this opinion said they
believed their department required counseling to shield
itself from legal liability, not to help the officers themselves.
They stated that they did not talk frankly to the counselors
because they did not trust them to keep the sessions confidential;
in some cases, they thought the counselors were incompetent.
Several officers admitted that they lied to counselors
about their reactions because they did not want to divulge
their thoughts, feelings, and experiences to a stranger
with ties to the department. This contrasts with officers’
willingness to discuss the shooting with fellow officers
who had also been involved in shootings and suggests that
peer counseling may be more helpful to these officers than
mandatory critical incident debriefings.
Officers may honestly say they cannot recall some aspect
of the incident or report information that conflicts with
other evidence. Investigators faced with problematic statements
from officers can try to fill in the gaps or reconcile conflicting
evidence through further investigation.
In addition, because officers may fire at a suspect without
realizing it, investigators may want to check the weapons
of all officers who were immediately present at a shooting
for evidence of firing, even if the officers report that
they did not fire.
NCJ 212266
July
17–19, 2006
JW Marriott Hotel, Washington, DC |
Plan Now to Attend
The NIJ Conference 2006
Showcasing NIJ’s research, development, and evaluation activities in both the physical and social sciences.
For more details, watch for an announcement on the NIJ Web site.
Sponsored by the National Institute of Justice
|
Note
- See, for example, Stratton, John G., David Parker, and
John R. Snibbe, “Posttraumatic Stress: Study of Police
Officers Involved in Shootings,” Psychological
Reports, 55 (August 1984): 127–131; Solomon,
Roger M., and James H. Horn, “Postshooting Traumatic
Reactions: A Pilot Study,” Psychological Services
for Law Enforcement Officers, ed. James T. Reese and
Harvey A. Goldstein, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1986; Campbell, John Henry, “A Comparative
Analysis of the Effects of Postshooting Trauma on the Special
Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,” unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Educational Administration,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 1992; Nielson,
Eric, “Salt Lake City Police Department Deadly Force
Policy Shooting and Postshooting Reactions,” unpublished
paper, Salt Lake City, UT: Salt Lake City Police Department,
1981.
|
|