Publications

  • Publications

    Monroe, Courtenay, Sophia Hatz, and Kristine Eck. “Judicial Decisions on Electronic Control Devices and Police Escalation of Force.” Journal of Politics 87(4): 1628-1633.

    Abstract: Jurisprudence regarding whether police use of Electronic Control Devices (ECDs) constitutes excessive use of force varies substantially across U.S. states and over time. In this letter, we investigate the extent to which year-to-year switches in U.S. Courts of Appeals decisions lead to escalations in police use of force. Using a generalized difference-in-difference (DID) design, we show that switches in judicial restrictiveness regarding the legal use of ECDs are associated with an increase in the use of lethal force as measured by the number of civilians shot and killed by police officers.

    Lanigan, Amanda and Ilker Kalin. “Constrained but not Transformed: Civilian-led Certification Reform and Officer Misconduct.” Political Research Quarterly, forthcoming.

    Abstract: In the wake of nationwide protests against police violence, Massachusetts established its first centralized, civilian-led recertification regime—the Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Commission—to institutionalize external oversight. Using a mixed-methods approach that combines a natural experiment with semi-structured interviews, this article investigates whether participation in this procedurally binding, externally adjudicated review process alters patterns of police behavior and perceptions of oversight. It exploits the phased, alphabetically assigned rollout of recertification to identify causal effects of exposure to POST scrutiny, applying a difference-in-differences design to a panel of officers with sustained misconduct allegations. The findings suggest that recertification can produce modest, time-bounded shifts in behavior, particularly among officers already inclined to comply. Persistent offenders, however, often remain unaffected.

    Eck, Kristine. 2025. “Bad Lieutenants: Off-Duty Police Misconduct and Accountability.” International Journal of Police Science and Management, forthcoming.

    Abstract: This article examines one type of variation in how states limit and oversee police powers: the distinction between on-duty versus off-duty misconduct. While there is a growing literature on police accountability mechanisms, there is no research which addresses whether off-duty abuses of power are covered by these mechanisms. This article addresses this gap by mapping the scope of oversight bodies in 14 economically developed democracies. The data show that approximately 35% of the countries restrict oversight to on-duty activities while 65% of the countries apply a universal approach to oversight by also receiving complaints about off-duty behavior. An in-depth look at Sweden shows that off-duty misconduct complaints are more likely to lead to charges being filed against the officer, suggesting that Swedish prosecutors find greater evidentiary support for off-duty complaints than for on-duty complaints.