.o'o.l-Dl v—fi 01 o . .1 I. ‘ . 3+ .uulu'ur Son «4.. a n! EQI‘H'.’ . n n 30.1 U: n I. We!” ,msgtvm i '(glfauunu mm: A a o a 3mm 31 I?! '3 3333‘ '3“ a» V —_._—————— 7 --- .._ . __‘ .-m -ww-wwuxxsx‘uuuu‘s‘ _“‘. A ‘ - -7 -I m N "’ ‘ .w~ -‘ ‘ A-v ‘Q'vmmfim ' fl..- J “1“.” v9 .‘o‘fi‘fi \‘v‘ ‘ - c k~ \ " f . . . . . . .“fi , , a . Vs . - I ' o o . ‘ o t o ' D u - . ._ . . - c o I ' O . . - - _ - . h . . - ' - - -. - o. < u . _ , , . ‘ o . -- x _ -. - , ¥ - ‘ ‘t . ’ A I ‘ - P I! I ul’ II . I’II.|{ I’ I . 1". . ..-.-- .I l . ‘ . ‘ 1 - I ~. —. I ‘ ' - — ‘4 ~ ~ A . . - . ‘ - u . .- ‘ ' ' - ‘. _ . - ’ ' I n I . - , .- . ' ‘ I . * ‘ n . . , - _ . - - , - ..- . ‘ - ‘- . ‘. .o . ‘ . . > . 7' - ' _ ‘ ' ' I ‘ - . - - o - v'- . .. - .. I ' - ¢ ‘ - o -. ‘ , - . .. .. ' - . . _ ‘ ’ . ‘ . ‘ o, . ‘ _ -. ’ ‘ , I . - - _ . ‘ I n . ' . _ » v . o . ' ' 1 ' u 0 , . u 7 ' . a 19 6 . ‘ . n . . O | I - A . . ’ o ' l. - . - . I . - .. . . 1 1 - _ .. _ _ ' - ~ 0 -. -. ‘ I i . - . a. ' o 'n _ ' ' _ _ ---- . r , - ‘ ' ' \— '-: o ' - _ . ‘ _ . ‘ -_ '. . 1“ ‘ -. " " - ‘u- a _ P. -' - ’ ‘ l - - . c - - . ¢ ' - ' -.- . ‘ '~'r .— ‘a o'-_ - ‘-—‘ _ . ' . - . , ' u . . - . - , A . .-.- .7. ' - ' ' - D . - . . - - - .. —. - . . - — c . . 7‘ . _ _ .— . * o . . . . . . V I - - . \ . - . . n t - ' I O . _ . d _ . . " -' ' - . .4. — . . . ‘ . i ‘ I. 1 u _ . ‘ . o I . __ r - - . , 0‘ . .- - - . - . ' z . ‘ - U . t ' - a - ‘ ' ' - m. .1 .-.-< _“..',, . -._ ' ' ' ‘ -"-' '-- « -,. . ., ’ o - - r . - ‘ I \ - -.-~ ’ ‘« v.7 -, . - r- < . — - .v- . - - ,.,.- . -.. , ’ I _, ' ,' -‘flr .. . . . ' . ' ‘ I' ' - ‘ " “‘- "~- - ‘ --.,on - - - .’- .. .. ._ . A o.’u. a. .- ' ' “‘- -----o-‘ ’v "‘r" u - -.- ‘..g - -._.- “,o‘..-. - .-.._. _.. ' ‘ ' “ 9 " ‘ (I r1 u ". -.<’ .——s.. . a ’1;- .I.. r .g.-'.. _'_ ._ _V."_.' ,4 ‘.‘((‘-'I'-- a * I ' . v a. I“_ o ‘7 .J . .f‘, n.. 0 Qty 1.1'.--. .,. '~'. _ ,_ , ' _- ‘- 4-0.” ‘. ‘rr‘. Z‘...’— I . .. "’ r". "" 0"' '“‘ "'.."' "" ‘ ‘ 97-,.‘...7..~- ‘ A‘f"f~.rvr-r’ . .oo‘ _ - - . _ ,.. - --- '0 ~' - av.‘o.— ‘,...p. f»- --,'—-o , , ’_ _,'., ._ O... ' . I ' - I” ' I ' O . n‘ , . r- .-- , - y c ' ‘-.‘ *v-uv'vfi' - -- f"".!'~l' v. ~ - ' ' ’ ' ' "av-w"..- I v'prnrv-g— ‘4 _ I " V ' é,-.4."—--.... w‘- l.. ‘ : ‘fl. ' ' ’.¢J”'p.rr ‘ ‘ l . n I ‘ .'Uv'r-"‘ 9",.‘0 ‘ruru 453—! 4. >9 Orr‘ov‘ - . .. ‘, - ‘D «We-Mr r.‘p"1'fl.'o-.°~o . . _ ~0r01"-'...7¢wr.‘.‘1k on.” oyl.‘.‘_ . , .50- on -'....~-"_ “”1 A . . . . . a,— I'l'O. . ’m.’.‘"."‘f"""f""fl ' ' u .n- _ ‘.'r97'~- 0’, o . , . .‘ . _, ' J. ’ > _ . . . . «ow-n! J‘v-n-Otv-ku. .. , , . ‘ _ q t ' av- ..o.,—'—. P’v"? *--_,¢‘ - . _ ’ ‘,",.'..-..\',-.o.-g,-.‘cl”.~,’-,'.p ,"¢‘., ".‘.', ‘ . ' wr'~'0.‘01flrvo-o-op—,' MN' ~p~ 'a.. . - - - 1,... _u w. "MN-0‘ -..‘Mar.v.-. fro'n-\ .Woo-rlr.' -or' ’ ‘ -> fi-r—.,‘lt ,- .9.- "-d " ' - — . O.'v~"‘lc‘VI90-¢v ' - . . -. opp-n. ,:.o ' .- ~ I\\l\\\\\\\\\\\|\MW“W““WWWWW I _ _ 3 1293 10382 9200 MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Piace in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. MY 0 .3 3%? ~n r‘dV _, 35/ ‘1’ . 0.. .5... b1 .55}, THE IMPACT OF POLICE HELICOPTER PATROL ON THE ATTITUDES OF THE INDIVIDUAL By Donald Charles Dawson A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Criminal Justice 1976 Approved by: ‘MG.M Committee Chairman Va ABSTRACT THE IMPACT OF POLICE HELICOPTER PATROL ON THE ATTITUDES OF THE INDIVIDUAL By Donald Charles Dawson THE PROBLEM The problem of rising crime rates hasrbecome acute in recent years. The effects of crime have become very widespread, with the quality of life being affected adversely and the fear of crime caus- ing changes in daily habits and life styles. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of helic0pter patrol on the attitudes of the individual as it relates to perceived effectiveness of police programs (utilizing twentieth-century technology) as well as percep- tions of personal security. The hypotheses selected for the study were as follows: Hypothesis A: The introduction of routine helicopter patrol in an urban area will increase the citizen's perceived feeling of its efficacy. Hypothesis B: Citizens who receive the most information related to the police use of helic0pters for patrol will feel more secure and protected than those who receive the least. Hypothesis C: Citizens who have sensed the poTice helicopter on patrol most frequently will feel more secure and protected than those who sensed the patrols the least. . Donald Charles Dawson METHOD A before-after experimental design was utilized with random telephone interviewing conducted to collect the data. The before data collection was made just prior to the beginning of helic0pter patrol in a medium-size city (Lansing, Michigan). The post data collection was begun after approximately eleven months of daily heli- copter patrol. The difference noted between the before and after measurements was used to calculate the changes in "feelings of security." MAJOR FINDINGS The major findings based on an analysis of the data collected are as follows: l. The introduction of helic0pter patrol increased the "feeling of efficacy" for the patrol with the largest increase among citizens with the lowest crime-related anxiety levels (Hypothesis A). 2. Stronger "feelings of security" from helicopter patrol were experienced by those persons who received the most "information" on the use of the police helic0pter (Hypothesis B). 3. Stronger "feelings of security" were experienced by those persons who "sensed" the helic0pter on patrol most fre- quently (Hypothesis C). Donald Charles Dawson IMPLICATIONS The utilization of publicized, visible, daily police heli- copter patrol can be a positive influence on the quality of life in an urban community, whereby the fear of crime and criminal attack can be lessened through a renewed faith in government's ability to prevent crime and protect pr0perty with the use of twentieth-century technology and programs such as helicopter patrol. THE IMPACT OF POLICE HELICOPTER PATROL ON THE ATTITUDES OF THE INDIVIDUAL By Donald Charles Dawson A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Criminal Justice 1976 Dedicated to my father, who couldn't see this project completed. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to Dr. Robert Lorinskas, whose guidance and understanding were invaluable to the completion of this study. Other persons who contributed much to this project included Dr. Ralph Lewis, Mr. Tom Austin, as well as members of the Lansing Police Department including Chief of Police Thomas N. O'Toole, Captain William Cavanaugh, Captain William Ryan, Lieutenant William Cochran, and Sergeant Jerry Mills. In addition, a special acknowledgment is given to my wife, Linda, who assisted above and beyond the call of duty over the past two,years. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................ LIST OF FIGURES ....................... Chapter I. THE PROBLEM ..................... The Police Application of Aviation Technology Impact of Helic0pter Patrol on Public Opinion THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ............... The Traditional Role of Society ......... Government and the Human Needs in Society The Police Duty ................. THE HYPOTHESES ................... Identification of Variables ........... II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............... PREVIOUS RESEARCH INTO THE EFFECT OF HELICOPTER PATROL ON SECURITY FEELINGS ........... Richmond, California ............... Riverside, California .............. Lakewood, California ............... SUMMARY ...................... iv Page vii ix —J—l OOQNO‘O‘IU‘l-b-b _l—l —l 12 12 12 13 13 Chapter Page III. STUDY DESIGN AND PROCEDURES .......... ' . . . . 15 RELEVANT POPULATION ................. 16 Description of Lansing, Michigan .......... 16 SAMPLING ....................... 16 Sample Selection .................. 16 Sample Size .................... 17 PRETEST DATA COLLECTION METHODS ........... l8 Pretest Questionnaire ............... l8 HELICOPTER PATROL ACTIVITIES BETWEEN PRE- AND POSTTESTS ..................... 22 Media Coverage ................... 22 Lansing Police Publicity Programs ......... 23 POSTTEST DATA COLLECTION METHOD ........... 25 Posttest Questionnaire ............... 25 INTERVIEW PROCEDURES ................. 27 Interviewers .................... 27 Training ...................... 28 Other Precautions ................. 28 IV. .PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS .......... 29 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA COLLECTED ...... 29 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS ON HYPOTHESIS A ......... 30 Additional Support ................. 33 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS 0N HYPOTHESIS B ......... 35 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS ON HYPOTHESIS C ......... 38 Additional Support ................. 40 vi Chapter Page PRESENTATION OF RELATIONSHIPS WITH DEMOGRAPHIC AND OTHER VARIABLES ................ 41 Sex ........................ 41 Age ........................ 43 Race ........................ 44 Educational Level ................. 45 Victimization ................... 45 Opinion on Change in Incidence of Crime ...... 46 SUMMARY OF RESULTS .................. 47 Hypothesis A .................... 48 Hypothesis B .................... 49 Hypothesis C .................... 50 Demographic and Other Variables .......... 50 V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . .' ............. 52 SUMMARY ....................... 52 CONCLUSIONS ..................... 54 Hypothesis A .................... 55 Hypothesis B/Hypothesis C ............. 56 Other Observations, ................. 56 IMPLICATIONS ..................... 58 APPENDICES ........................... 60 A. LIST OF 167 LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES UTILIZING HELICOPTERS IN THE UNITED STATES ........... 61 B. DEFINITIONS OF CONCEPTS USED IN THE HYPOTHESES ..... 66 C. PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE ................. 68 D. POSTTEST QUESTIONNAIRE ................. 75 BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................... 83 Table 1. 10. 11. 12. 13. LIST OF TABLES Cumulative Media Contacts Relating to Helic0pter Patrol in Lansing, Michigan, From June, 1974, Through May, 1975 ....................... Personal Contacts With Citizens by Lansing Police Personnel Relating to the Helicopter Patrol From June, 1974, Through May, 1975 ............. Comparison of Respondent Characteristics in the Pre- and Posttest Samples .................. Change in the Variable "Feeling the Police Helicopter Prevents Crime" From Pretest to Posttest ........ Cross-Tabulation of "Feeling the Police Helicopter Prevents Crime" by "Crime Anxiety Index" (Pretest) . . . Cross-Tabulation of "Feeling the Police Helicopter Prevents Crime" by "Crime Anxiety Index" (Posttest) Frequency of "Information Receptions" (Contacts) Concerning Helicopter Patrol (Posttest) ........ Knowledge of the Type of Use for the Police Helic0pter (Posttest) ....................... Cross-Tabulation of "Information Receptions" (Contacts) by "Feeling of Security" (Posttest) .......... Frequency the Police Helic0pter Is "Sensed" on Patrol Cross-Tabulation of "Sensing the Patrol" by "Feeling of Security" (Posttest) ................ Cross-Tabulation of the Frequency of "Sensing Ground Patrol" by "Sensing Helic0pter Patrol" (Posttest) Cross-Tabulation of Sex by "Feeling of Security" (Posttest) ....................... vii Page 24 31 32 34 35 36 37 38 39 4O 42 43 viii Table Page 14. Cross-Tabulation of Age by "Feeling of Security" (Posttest) ....................... 44 15. Cross-Tabulation of Race by "Feeling of Security" (Posttest) ....................... 45 16. Cross-Tabulation of Educational Level by "Feeling of Security" (Posttest) .................. 46 17. Cross-Tabulation of Victimization by "Feeling of Security" (Posttest) .................. 47 18. Cross-Tabulation of Opinion on Crime Change in the City by "Feeling of Security" (Posttest) ........ 48 19- Cross-Tabulation of Opinion on Crime Change in Neighborhood by "Feeling of Security" (Posttest) . . . . 49 Figure 1. Crime and Papulation LIST OF FIGURES ix CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Crime has been present in American society ever since its early beginnings.1 However, in recent times a crime wave of stag- gering proportions has been sweeping the nation. Since 1961, Uniform Crime Reports have indicated that the rate for all serious crimes has more than doubled. In the last five years it has risen 38 percent, while the p0pu1ation increased only 5 percent (see Figure 1). Further, from 1973 to 1974, serious crime jumped 18 per- cent, which was the largest increase for one year in the forty-four years that national statistics have been collected.2 THE IMPACT OF CRIME At the same time that crime rates have been going up, so has the associated economic burden of crime. In 1967, the cost of crime was estimated at $21 billion.3 Five years later (1973) it 1wiiiiam J. Bopp and Donald 0. Schultz, A Short History of American Law Enforcement (Springfield: Charles C. Thomas, 1972), p. 15. 2 "The Crime Wave," Time, 105 (June 30, 1975), 10. 3"Crime Expense," U.S. News and World Report, October 26, 1970, p. 30. had risen to an estimated $51 billion, which amounted to more than 5 percent of the gross national product. CRIME AND POPULATION 1969-1974 PERCENT CHANGE OVER 1969 CRIME: CRIME INDEX OFFENSES CRIME RATE =NUMBER OF OFFENSES PER 100.000 INHABITANTS 4H60 +50 —' --~ . A count UP 38% ; CRIME RATE +30 1' x ' UP 32% I... ’,o' “G "'""~T“'"~7F3'"“ <|[ POPULAno" 1 cocooooooooooooooirooooooo0001 up 5% o ALIQQOOOOVOOOOOOOO-O N 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 Figure 1 Crime and P0pulation4 4 Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports of §he ited States: 1974 (Washington: Government Printing Office, Un 9751, p. 12. However, to gain a true appreciation of the wide impact of crime it is necessary to look beyond raw statistics citing crime rates and costs. The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice cited in its 1967 report the multitude of ways in which crime has affected the quality of life in America: The existence of crime, the talk about crime, the reports of crime, and the fear of crime, have eroded the basic quality of life of many Americans. A commission study conducted in high- crime areas of two large cities found that: 43% of the respon- dents say they stay off the streets at night because of their fear of crime; 35% say they do not speak to strangers anymore because of their fear of crime; 33% say they keep firearms in the house for protection against criminals. . . People have been impelled to uproot themselves and find new homes. . . Some have become distrustful gf the government' 5 ability, or even desire, to protect them. Similarly, in 1973, the Gallup Poll found that 42 percent of the American public expressed fear of walking in their own neighborhood at night. In addition, the survey revealed that one of every five persons in the nation had been victimized by crime in the preceding year. Figures for central cities were even more discouraging, with one out of every three persons having been victimized by criminal means during 1972.6 In summary, it can be seen from above that the effects of crime do indeed far exceed the individual's victimization as it influences and molds the life styles, daily habits, and general quality 5The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administra- tion of Justice, The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 5. 6"Specia1 Report on Crime in the United States," The Gallup_ Index, January, 1973, pp. 3-17. of life for a very large portion of American society. It is this widespread anxiety concerning crime and criminal attack that has prompted the many reports, investigations, surveys, researches, and in particular the prestigious study begun in 1965 by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS As part of the President's Commission report, many recommen- dations were made to halt this erosion in the quality of life. One of the major recommendations of the report was the experimental use of twentieth century technology (with federal financial support) in order to increase the effectiveness of police Operations.7 The Congress responded in the mid-sixties with such legislation as the Law Enforcement Assistance Act of 1965 and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, which provided billions of dollars for research in police use of modern technology. One of these technical advantages to gain prominence was the introduction of a new type of patrol vehicle-—the helicopter. The Police Application of Aviation TeChnology The helicopter as a patrol vehicle was found by many police agencies to be a useful tool because it tended to (1) decrease police response time to crime scenes, (2) increase arrests by containing fleeing criminals, and (3) reduce crime rates through preventative 7President's Commission, Op. cit., p. 300. patrol.8 Yet it should be noted that the use of helicopters in police work had been in practice on a limited daylight basis since 1948 for special missions such as rescues, traffic enforcement, sur- veillance, conservation patrol, and the like. In any event, after the President's Commission report, scores9 of police agencies large and small, urban and rural had taken steps to initiate routine day and night helic0pter patrols in every part of the nation. Impact of Helicopter Patrol on Public Opinion As indicated above, the increase in crime in recent times has caused a widespread anxiety about crime and criminal attack. Further, many of the demonstration projects funded by the Government, including the helicopter patrols, were found to affect public Opinion and attitudes. Yet public opinion with respect to other inno- vative programs had often been difficult to predict. In the case of police dogs, chemical mace, and riot control teams public opinion had been generally unfavorable. But in the first urban area to receive regular helic0pter patrol under Project Sky Knight at Lakewood, 8National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, Utilization of Helicopters for Police Air Mobility, U.S. Justice Department, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1971), pp. 25-30. 9See Appendix A for a listing of 167 law enforcement agencies utilizing helicopters in the United States. California, it was fbund through a public opinion survey that the patrol was "overwhelmingly favorable."10 In conclusion, it is this public anxiety toward crime and the effect of police helicopter patrol on attitudes of the citizen that this research will explore. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK The Traditional Role of Society Throughout time man has relied upon "organized" society to provide a safe, orderly, and predictable world.11 In earliest times these needs were provided for by the tribe or "kin police," whereby the responsibility for obtaining justice rested with a victim's family. As time passed and societies developed and became more sophisticated, this role was assumed by the military; by nonmilitary vigiles; and in feudal times by the king's family or his paid repre- sentative, the sheriff (chief law enforcement officer).12 In the development of colonial America the maintenance of law and order continued to be a function of the government through the office of the sheriff and/or constable. What had been in earliest 10Project Sky Knight: Demonstration in Aerial Surveillance and Crime Control, L.E.A.A. Project Report 198 (Washington: Govern- ment Printing Office, 1968), p. 183. 1]Bow and Schultz, op. cit., p. 5. 12A. c. Germann, Frank D. Day, and Robert R. J. Gallati, Introduction to Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice (Springfield: Charles C. Thomas, 1970), pp. 46-49. times everybody's business had become nobody's duty as paid govern- mental law enforcement became the way of life.13 Meanwhile, America was moving forward as a center of commerce and trade. Cities were evolving and paid municipal police forces were added to assist the existing peace keepers.14 Soon to follow were statewide and national police agencies whose responsibilities often overlapped one another's. And thus, over the years, the foundation was permanently set by custom and law for reliance upon government law enforcers to keep the peace, protect life and property, and insure tranquility. Government and the Human Needs in Society Since man is a wanting animal, his organized societies have been for the most part modeled to provide for his wants (needs)., Man's needs as outlined by Maslow include most basically his physio- logical (food, water) and safety needs, as well as his need for love, eSteem, and self-actualization.15 Further, Maslow explains that the most basic needs-—the physiologica1-—are those logically first satis- fied. Once satisfied, a new set of needs emerges. They can be roughly categorized as the safety needs. 13The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Adminis- tration of Justice, Task Force Report: The Police (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967), pp. 3-4. 14 15A. H. Maslow, "A Theory of Human Motivation, Psychological Review, 50 (1943), 372-389. Bopp and Schultz, Op. cit., p. 33. The safety-seeking characteristics (needs) of the individual are demonstrated by his preference for a safe, orderly, predictable, and organized world which he can count on to protect him from danger, criminals, assault, and murder.16 Safety needs may often find spe- cific expression in a search for a protector, or a stronger person on whom he may depend. In our society this stronger person or protector that most people come to depend on is the police officer on the beat. For it is his job to keep his beat safe, orderly, and free of dangers as government's crime preventor and rule enforcer. The Police Duty The police officer's specific duties have not changed much in the last hundred years or so, although his methods and tools have. Whereas, policemen today are not only found doing their job on the ground but they are found in the air as well. However, in most cases the officer in the air and in particular those in a low-flying helicopter present a much more visible form of police protection to the citizens of the city below. This is based on the premise that in urban areas at any one time thousands_of persons can see, hear, and feel the presence of the aerial patrolman due to his unique vertical position. While at the same time, the ground officer may be known to only a few dozen persons or less due to the limited hori- zontal line of sight and sound available on the ground as a result of buildings, trees, and the like. 16Ibid.. pp. 377-78. Consequently, since the citizen looks upon the police officer as his protector (safety need) and further since the airborne police officer in most cases is the most visible law enforcer, it follows that daily helicopter patrol operations should favorably affect the security feelings (needs) of the public. Likewise, these higher security feelings tend to lower the fear and anxiety from crime and criminal attack. In short, then, the satisfaction of the individual's safety needs (security, order, peace) plays a controlling part in the relative level of his anxiety from the dangers of the criminal. THE HYPOTHESES Although helicopter patrol has been reported to have favor- ably influenced attitudes, several questions remain to be explored in more depth. First of all, is it known if this phenomenon is indeed occurring at all? Second, if it does occur how universal is it or is it just peculiar to Lakewood, California? And third, what variable(s) specifically are associated and/or contribute to it? Therefore, the hypotheses selected for test were directed toward an understanding and clarification of these questions. Hypothesis A:17 The introduction of routine police helicopter patrol in an urban area will increase the citizens' perceived feeling of its efficacy. Hypothesis 8: Citizens who receive the most information related to the police use of helicopters for patrol will feel more secure and protected than those who receive the least. 17Those concepts and terms used in the three hypotheses have been listed and defined in Appendix B if needed by the reader. 10 Hypothesis C: Citizens who have sensed the police helicopter on patrol most frequently will feel more secure and protected than those who sensed the patrols the least. Identification of Variables In the hypotheses selected for test the individual variables are related as follows. Hypothesis A. The independent variable (X) is the "introduc- tion of routine helicopter patrol," whereas the dependent variable (Y) is the "feeling of its efficacy" or ability to prevent crime. Hypothesis 8. The independent variable in this hypothesis is "the reception of information related to police use of helicop- ters," while the dependent variable is the "feeling of personal security and protection." Hypothesis C. For this hypothesis the independent variable is "the sensing of routine helicopter patrol," and the dependent variable is "the feeling of personal security and protection." Chapter III will deal with a complete description of the data collection instrument and scales used to measure the variables cited. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Since the advent of urban helicopter patrol about ten years ago there have been three published projects that have measured the effect of daily helicopter crime prevention patrol on community attitudes and security feelings. All three of these studies were 'conducted in the state of California in cities of varying sizes and characteristics as follows: (1) Richmond, California, an industrial city of 79,000 residents covering 52 square miles which is policed by the Richmond Police Department. (2) Riverside, California, EH1 industrial, commercial, and educational center of 154,500 residents covering approximately 71.5 square miles which is policed by the Riverside Police Department. (3) Lakewood, California (Project Sky Knight), a residen- tial city of 86,000 residents covering 9.2 square miles policed by the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department. Further, each of these studies was conducted by professional researchers hiconjunction with Federal Law Enforcement Assistance_ Administration grant projects. The findings in each of the studies were also very similar, in that helicopter patrol in each city was reported to provide a significant "feeling of security and protec- tion." An abstract of each project's methods and findings follows. 11 12 PREVIOUS RESEARCH INTO THE EFFECT OF HELICOPTER PATROL ON SECURITY FEELINGS Richmond, California] Evaluator(s) -— Michael A. Scott, University of California, Berkeley, California; and a citizens com- mittee. Method —- Written questionnaires were distributed on a nonrandom basis. Sample size - 693 Question - Citizens were asked their Opinion on the follow- ing statement: "The HP (Helicopter Patrol) gives me a sense of security and the feeling that I am being protected." Results - The citizens responded positively to the ques- tion as follows: Percent Number Agree with statement 88% 608 Disagree with statement 11% 79 Undecided 1% 6 Riverside, California2 Evaluators - Paul M. Whisenand, Ph.D.; and others; Institute for Police Studies, California State University, Long Beach. Method - Written questionnaires were twice distributed to all utility customers in their monthly billing, the first before the patrol was begun and the second distribution eight to ten months later. 1Michael A. Scott, Richmond Police Department Helicopter Eyaluation (Richmond, California: Richmond Police Department,‘l972), pp. 26-28. 2Paul M. Whisenand and others, Project ACE (Aerial Crime Epforcement) Riverside Police Department-—Final Report (Long Beach, California: *Institute for Police Studies, California State Univer- sity, 1972), pp. 3.59-3.77. 13 Sample size -— 19,331 in the pretest and 18,825 in the post- test. Question - Citizens were asked if they "feel more secure as a result of the project" (helicopter patrol). Results —- The citizens polled reSponded positively to the question as follows: Pretest Posttest % Change Yes 72.6% 76.5% +3.9% ND 23.1% 17.9% -5.2% Don't know 1.9% 1.7% -O.2% No response 2.1% 3.7% +1.6% Lakewood, Ca1ifornia3 Evaluator -— C. Robert Guthrie, Institute for Police Studies, California State University, Long Beach. Method -— A statistically adequate random sample telephone poll was conducted. Sample size -— Size was not stated in narrative. Question - Citizens were asked if they "felt more secure" as a result of helicopter patrol. Results —- The citizens polled responded positively as follows: Men , Women Yes 60% 80% No 40% 20% SUMMARY In general the results of these earlier researches indicate that helicopter patrol has generated a "high feeling of security" as perceived by the citizenry. This feeling is believed to be closely 3C. Robert Guthrie, Aerial Surveillance Methods of Crime Prevention: Evaluation (Long Beach, California: Institute for Police Studies, California State College, 1968), p. 57. 14 tied to the basic need of individuals in society for safety and a material protector-—i.e. the highly visible airborne police officer. It should be noted, however, that the research reported to date has been of a very general nature and much is still unknown concerning the variables associated with and influencing its occur- rence. This project is intended to add some insight on this subject. CHAPTER III STUDY DESIGN AND PROCEDURES The study design selected to test the hypotheses was the "before-after" experimental type employing interchangeable groups, i.e. control and experimental. With this design the two groups (control and experimental) are selected in advance from the popula- tion that is to be exposed to the independent variable (helicopter patrol). As in other designs, random selection provides assurance that the groups probably did not differ by more than a specifiable amount before introduction of the independent variable, and thus they may be treated as interchangeable. The difference between the "before helicopter patrol" measure taken on the first group (Y1) and the "after helicopter patrol" measure taken on the second group (Y2) is then assumed to be a measure of the effect of the indepen- dent variable or the change (d). Mathematically, the formula for this design is expressed as _ 1 d-Yz-Y]. 1Clair Selltiz and others, Research Methods in Social Rela- tions (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1959), pp. 112-113. 15 16 RELEVANT POPULATION The population from which the groups were selected and to which the hypotheses are relevant are adult household members (eighteen years or older) who reside in the city of Lansing, Michigan. There are 43,018 households in the city from which the samples could be selected.2 Description of Lansing, Michigan The city is an industrial, educational, and state governmental center covering nearly thirty-four square miles. Its resident popula- tion is racially mixed and totals 135,219. The city makes up the core of a metropolitan area of 378,423 persons within three adjoining counties.3 SAMPLING Sample Selection Individual housing units for both groups were picked at random under the following procedure. To begin with, it was determined that 98 percent of all Lansing households had a telephone system supplied exclusively by the Michigan Bell Telephone Company.4 This includes a 2R. L. Polk and Co., Management Report by Census Tract for 1974-75, Report # V6000 (Detroit: R. L. Polk and Co., 1975), p. 1. 3The 1974 Lansing Police Department Annual Report (Lansing, Michigan: City of Lansing, 1975), pp. 1-2. 4Per, Mr. George L. Voohis, Public Information, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, 221 N. Washington, Lansing, Michigan 48933, March 1974. 17 total of ten exchanges with approximately 10,000 lines per exchange. The selection of individual households for each group was made from lists of random telephone numbers, which gave each telephone number in each exchange an equal opportunity for selection. This procedure, in addition, specified that only one person per household would be selected for examination. In practice this person was the first adult resident of Lansing who answered or came to the phone. That person was then assumed to represent the adult attitudes within the housing unit, although not every member has exactly the same views. This then may be a source of error-—the assumption that all adults in the unit will respond in the same way. Sample Size The sample size for both the pre or "before" test (Y1) and the post or "after" test (Y2) was set at 384. This sample size was selected so that in ninety-five samples out of a hundred (confidence limits) the population value should be within an interval of 5 percent (tolerated error) either direction of the estimate.5 However, due to a limited number of qualified interview personnel, several defec- tive interviews, and other timing considerations both samples fell short of the planned 384. This resulted in the pretest sample total- ing 351 (thirty-three cases short) and the posttest 369 (fifteen cases short). This problem lowered both samples' tolerated error to .+.6 percent.6 5Charles H. Backstrom and Gerald H. Hursh, Survey Research (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1963), pp.732-33. 6Ibid. 18 PRETEST DATA COLLECTION METHODS The general method selected for data collection, as pre- viously stated, was the telephone interview. To ensure accurate, valid, and useful data a structured interview format and stan- dardized questionnaire was constructed for the pretest.7 A descrip- tion and the background relating to the questionnaire is presented next. Pretest Questionnaire The pretest questionnaire was administered during the six-week period immediately prior to the introduction of helicopter patrol by the Lansing Police Department on June 24, 1974. Up until the actual beginning of the helicopter patrol a deliberate effort was made by Lansing Police personnel to limit the amount of media coverage to "low key" in the local newspaper (The State Journal), on the two local commercial television stations, and the half dozen radio sta- tions in the area. This was done to limit the interference of community-wide knowledge concerning the helicopter patrol which could have biased the "before" value of the pretest. The pretest questionnaire included a total of twenty-five questions. Of those questions twenty-three were directly related to the variables addressed within this research project. The 7In general, the pre- and posttest questionnaires were con- structed in a similar fashion. Differences in the two were primarily from changes in verb tense from the pretest to the posttest and from the addition of a few questions on the posttest. 19 remaining two questions dealt with associated topics to be used in other works. (See Appendix C for the complete pretest question- naire.) The individual questions and their purpose are outlined next. Qualifyingquestions. The first two questions on the ques- tionnaire dealt with determining the respondent's qualifications to be interviewed. Specifically, this required that the respondent be identified as a resident of the city of Lansing, Michigan, and that he or she be eighteen years old or older. Once this had been deter- mined the interview continued and the appropriate data were collected. Dependent variables. The "feeling of efficacy" for the helicopter patrol's ability to perform its mission of crime preven- tion was measured by the reSponse to this question: Do you think the Lansing Police helicopter patrols would help to prevent crime by their presence in the air? Strongly Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly Disagree Refused The respondent's reply was then recorded in the proper space on the "Likert" type scale. The variable "feeling of security" was measured through the response to this question: 20 Do you think the Lansing Police helicopter patrols would make you feel more secure and protected? Do you: Strongly Agree Agree Uncertain _Disagree :Strongly Disagree :Refused The respondent's reply was then recorded in the proper Space on the "Likert" type scale. Independent variables. "Information reception" was measured by the response to the following question: Have you heard or read anything about the Lansing Police Department using helicopters in the city? Yes No Don't know Refused The respondent's reply was then recorded in the space that indicated his pre-helicopter patrol awareness level. The variable "knowledge of police use of helicopters" was measured by the response to this question: Do you know what the Lansing Police would use the helicopter for? Yes No Uncertain Refused The respondent's reply was then entered in the correct Space accord- ing to his prior knowledge on the police use of helicopters (without any follow-up on the respondent's accuracy). A measure of anxiety, A series of five questions was also asked to form an index of the individual's concern for his personal 21 8 To safety as well as his general concern about the crime situation. form this "Anxiety Index," the response to questions concerning safety as a criterion for residence selection, perceptions of per- sonal danger in the neighborhood, wanting to move to a safer location, belief that neighbors create disturbances, and a belief that crime is getting worse in the neighborhood and city were combined. Based on this combined score, the respondent was then ranked as low, medium, or high in anxiety toward crime. Demographic variables. A series of questions was also included in the pretest to record the demographic characteristics of the respon- dents. Variables included were sex, age, race, education, and employ- ment. The individual questions to collect these data were asked in a straightforward manner. Other variables. A variety of "other" variables associated with the project were also included. They were addressed at measur- ing the respondent's situation or attitude on: (a) whether he had been a victim of a crime, (b) whether crime has been going up or down in the last year, and (c) his awareness of the frequency of conven- tional police patrol in his neighborhood. 8The index and questions used in this project were drawn from an earlier research project conducted under contract to and published by The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, Field Surveys I. Report