Attitudes Toward Body-Worn Cameras in a Prosecutor's Office: An Application of the Technology Acceptance Model

Abstract

In comparison with scholarship on law enforcement, much is unknown about the downstream effects of body-worn camera (BWC) footage on prosecutors, some of the most powerful actors in the criminal justice system. This study applies the technology acceptance model to 35 semistructured qualitative interviews conducted at the Coruscant County Prosecutor's Office (a pseudonym). Its purpose is to understand some of the key factors that contributed to camera footage's ease of use and prosecutors’ perceptions of its usefulness. Collaboration with local police departments on BWC implementation and the creation of convenient storage and sharing options seemed to contribute to positive impressions of its utility. The policy implications of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.

Keywords

prosecutor perceptions body-worn cameras qualitative research

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adams

D. A.

Nelson

R. R.

Todd

P. A.

(1992). Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Quarterly, 16(2), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.2307/249577

Bernard

T. J.

Ritti

R. R.

(1990). The role of research in scientific theory. In K. Kempf (Ed.), Measurement issues in criminology (pp. 1–20). Springer-Verlag.

Bureau of Justice Assistance (2015). Law enforcement implementation checklist: Body-worn camera toolkit. https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/bwc/pdfs/BWCImplementationChecklist.pdf

Chocarro

Blanco

Zuazo

Arasanz

Bocanegra

Fernández-Rubio

Morente

(2021). Understanding LAG-3 signaling. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 22(10), 5282–5302. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22105282

Christoloukas

Mitsea

(2022). The CSI effect in forensic odontology. A systematic review. The Journal of Forensic Odonto-Stomatology, 40(2), 38–43.

Chuttur

(2009). Overview of the technology acceptance model: Origins, developments and future directions. All Sprouts Content, 9(37), 1–20. https://aisel.aisnet.org/sprouts_all/290 .

Colvin

C. C.

Goh

(2005). Validation of the technology acceptance model for police. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33(1), 89–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2004.10.009

Davis

F. D.

(1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results [Doctoral dissertation]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Davis

F. D.

(1989). Technology acceptance model: TAM. In M. N. Al-Suqri & A. S. Al-Aufi (Eds.), Information seeking behavior and technology adoption (pp. 205–219). IGI Global.

10.

Davis

F. D.

(1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475–487. https://doi.org/10.1006/imms.1993.1022

11.

Ellis

Jenkins

Smith

(2015). Evaluation of the introduction of personal issue body worn video cameras (Operation Hyperion) on the Isle of Wight: Final report to Hampshire constabulary. Institute of Criminal Justice Studies, University of Portsmouth.

12.

Fan

(2017). Justice visualized: Courts and the body camera revolution. University of California-Davis Law Review, 50(3), 897–959.

13.

Fishbein

Ajzen

(1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Addison-Wesley.

14.

Gaub

J. E.

Koen

M. C.

(2021). Camera and police dataveillance: A new era in policing. In B. A. Arrigo & B. G. Sellers (Eds.), The pre-crime society: Crime, culture and control in the ultramodern age (pp. 203–226). Bristol University Press.

15.

Goodall

(2007). Guidance for the police use of body-worn video devices: Police and crime standards directorate. Home Office. https://library.college.police.uk/docs/homeoffice/guidance-body-worn-devices.pdf

16.

Groff

E. R.

Ward

J. T.

Wartell

(2018). The role of body-worn camera footage in the decision to file. Report for the Laura and John Arnold Foundation. Criminal Justice Department: Temple University.

17.

Holden

R. J.

Karsh

B. T.

(2010). The technology acceptance model: Its past and its future in health care. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 43(1), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2009.07.002

18.

Koen

M. C.

Mathna

(2019). Body-Worn cameras and internal accountability at a police agency. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 3(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/6363

19.

Koen

Willis

J. J.

(2020). Making sense of body-worn cameras in a police organization: A technological frames analysis. Police Practice and Research, 21(4), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2019.1582343

20.

Koper

C. S.

Lum

Willis

J. J.

(2014). Optimizing the use of technology in policing: Results and implications from a multi-site study of the social, organizational, and behavioral aspects of implementing police technologies. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 8(2), 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/pau015

21.

Lum

Stoltz

Koper

C. S.

Scherer

J. A.

(2019). Research on body-worn cameras: What we know, what we need to know. Criminology & Public Policy, 18(1), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12412

22.

McCluskey

J. D.

Smith

Robertson

Uchida

C. D.

Mosley

(2019). The evidentiary value of body-worn camera footage: A survey of prosecutors and public defenders. CNA.

23.

Merola

Lum

Koper

C. S.

Scherer

(2016). Body worn cameras and the courts: A national survey of state prosecutors. George Mason University.

24.

Morrow

W. J.

Katz

C. M.

Choate

D. E.

(2016). Assessing the impact of police body-worn cameras on arresting, prosecuting, and convicting suspects of intimate partner violence. Police Quarterly, 19(3), 303–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611116652850

25.

ODS Consulting. (2011). Body worn video projects in Paisley and Aberdeen, self-evaluation. https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/media/document/bwv-scottish-report.pdf

26.

Patton

M. Q.

(1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation (No. 4). Sage.

27.

Perry

Banks

(2011). Prosecutors in state courts. Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Prosecutors in State Courts, 2007-Statistical Tables (ojp.gov).

28.

Petersen

Y.-F.

(2023). The down-stream effects of body-worn cameras: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Justice Quarterly, 40(6), 765–790. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2023.2181855 .

29.

Petersen

Papy

Mouro

Ariel

(2023a). The usage and utility of body-worn camera footage in courts: A survey analysis of state prosecutors. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 20(3), 534–569. https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12358

30.

Petersen

Papy

Mouro

Castillo

Ariel

(2023b). Seeing is believing: The impact of body-worn cameras on court outcomes, a cluster-randomized controlled trial in Miami beach. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 19, 191–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-021-09479-6

31.

Pickering

(2020). Officers’ perceptions regarding the unexpected effects of body-worn cameras. Policing: An International Journal of Policy and Practice, 43(2), 390–402. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-09-2019-0153

32.

Poirier

Charbonneau

Boivin

(2024). Body-worn cameras and court proceedings: A qualitative study of police officers’ expectations. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 18(7), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paae007

33.

Robertson

O. N.

McCluskey

J. D.

Smith

S. S.

Uchida

(2024). Body cameras and adjudication: Views of prosecutors and public defenders. Criminal Justice Review, 49(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/07340168221124458

34.

Sambamurthy

Chin

W. W.

(1994). The effects of group attitudes toward alternative GDSS designs on the decision-making performance of computer-supported groups. Decision Sciences, 25(2), 215–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1994.tb01840.x

35.

Subramanian

G. H.

(1994). A replication of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use measurement. Decision Sciences, 25(5-6), 863–874. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1994.tb01873.x

36.

Todak

Gaub

J. E.

White

M. D.

(2018). The importance of external stakeholders for body-worn camera diffusion. Policing: An International Journal, 41(4), 448–464. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-08-2017-0091

37.

Todak

Gaub

J. E.

White

M. D.

(2022). Testing the evidentiary value of police body-worn cameras in misdemeanor court. Crime & Delinquency, 70(4). https://doi.org/00111287221120185.

38.

U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). U.S. Department of Commerce. Retrieved January 26, 2024, from https://data.census.gov/

39.

Westera

N. J.

Powell

M. B.

(2017). Prosecutors’ perceptions of how to improve the quality of evidence in domestic violence cases. Policing and Society: An International Journal of Research and Policy, 27(2), 157–172.

40.

White

M. D.

Gaub

J. E.

Malm

Padilla

K. E.

(2021). Implicate or exonerate? The impact of police body-worn cameras on the adjudication of drug and aCCohol cases. Policing, 15(2), 759–769. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paz043

41.

White

M. D.

Malm

(2020). Cops, cameras, and crisis: The potential and the perils of police body-worn cameras. NYU Press.

42.

White

M. D.

Todak

Gaub

J. E.

(2018). Examining body-worn camera integration and acceptance among police officers, citizens, and external stakeholders. Criminology and Public Policy, 17(3), 749–777. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12376

43.

Willis

J. J.

(2022). “Culture eats strategy for breakfast”: An in-depth examination of police officer perceptions of body-worn camera implementation and their relationship to policy, s0upervision, and training. Criminology and Public Policy, 21(3), 713–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12591

44.

Willis

J. J.

Koper

C. S.

Lum

(2018). Technology use and constituting structures: Accounting for the consequences of information technology on police organizational change. Policing and Society, 30(5), 483–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2018.1557660 .

45.

G. C.

Gaub

J. E.

Koen

M. C.

(2022). The impacts of body-worn cameras: An examination of police specialty unit perceptions through diffusion of innovations. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 47(1), 224–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-021-09624-x