1932

Abstract

Law enforcement agencies increasingly use big data analytics in their daily operations. This review outlines how police departments leverage big data and new surveillant technologies in patrol and investigations. It distinguishes between directed surveillance—which involves the surveillance of individuals and places under suspicion—and dragnet surveillance—which involves suspicionless, unparticularized data collection. Law enforcement's adoption of big data analytics far outpaces legal responses to the new surveillant landscape. Therefore, this review highlights open legal questions about data collection, suspicion requirements, and police discretion. It concludes by offering suggestions for future directions for researchers and practitioners.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-030839
2018-10-13
2024-04-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/14/1/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-030839.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-030839&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Ajunwa I, Crawford K, Schultz J 2017. Limitless worker surveillance. Calif. Law Rev. 105:3735–76
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Barocas S, Rosenblat A, boyd d, Gangadharan SP, Yu C 2014. Data & civil rights: technology primer Presented at Data & Civil Rights: Why “Big Data” Is a Civil Rights Issue Washington, DC: Oct. 30. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2536579
  3. Barocas S, Selbst A 2016. Big data's disparate impact. Calif. Law Rev. 104:671–732
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Becker H 1963. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance New York: Free Press
  5. Beckett K, Nyrop K, Pfingst L, Bowen M 2005. Drug use, drug possession arrests, and the question of race: lessons from Seattle. Soc. Probl. 52:3419–41
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Braga AA 2003. Serious youth gun offenders and the epidemic of youth violence in Boston. J. Quant. Criminol. 19:133–54
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Braga AA, Flynn EA, Kelling GL, Cole CM 2011. Moving the Work of Criminal Investigators Towards Crime Control Washington, DC: Natl. Inst. Justice
  8. Braga AA, Kennedy DM, Piehl AM, Waring EJ 2001. Reducing Gun Violence: The Boston Gun Project's Operation Ceasefire Washington, DC: Natl. Inst. Justice
  9. Braga AA, Weisburd DL 2010. Policing Problem Places: Crime Hotspots and Effective Prevention New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  10. Brantingham PJ, Brantingham PL 1981. Environmental Criminology New York: Sage
  11. Brantingham PJ, Tita GE, Short MB, Reid SE 2012. The ecology of gang territorial boundaries. Criminology 50:3851–85
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Brayne S 2014. Surveillance and system avoidance: criminal justice contact and institutional attachment. Am. Sociol. Rev. 79:3367–91
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Brayne S 2017. Big data surveillance: the case of policing. Am. Sociol. Rev. 82:5977–1008
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Brayne S, Rosenblat A, boyd d 2015. Predictive policing Presented at Data & Civil Rights: A New Era of Policing and Justice Washington, DC: Oct. 27. http://www.datacivilrights.org/pubs/2015-1027/Predictive_Policing.pdf
  15. Christin A 2018. Counting clicks: quantification and variation in web journalism in the United States and France. Am. J. Sociol. 123:51382–415
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cohen J, Tita G 1999. Diffusion in homicide: exploring a general method for detecting spatial diffusion processes. J. Quant. Criminol. 15:4451–93
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Cook PJ, Laub JH 2002. After the epidemic: recent trends in youth violence in the United States. Crime Justice 29:1–37
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Daston L, Galison P 2007. Objectivity New York: Zone Books
  19. Desmond M, Papachristos AV, Kirk DS 2016. Police violence and citizen crime reporting in the black community. Am. Sociol. Rev. 81:5857–76
    [Google Scholar]
  20. DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW 1983. The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Am. Sociol. Rev. 48:2147–60
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Exec. Off. Pres. 2014. Big data: seizing opportunities, preserving values Rep., White House Washington, DC: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/big_data_privacy_report_may_1_2014.pdf
  22. Ferguson AG 2015. Big data and predictive reasonable suspicion. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 63:2327–410
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ferguson AG 2017. The Rise of Big Data Policing New York: N.Y. Univ. Press
  24. Floyd et al. v. City of New York et al., 959 F. Supp. 2d 540 2013.
  25. Fourcade M, Healy K 2017. Seeing like a market. Socioecon. Rev. 15:19–29
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Gillespie T 2014. The relevance of algorithms. Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society T Gillespie, P Boczkowski, K Foot 167–94 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Goel S, Rao JM, Shroff R 2016. Precinct or prejudice? Understanding racial disparities in New York City's stop-and-frisk policy. Ann. Appl. Stat. 10:1365–94
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Haggerty KD, Ericson RV 2006. The New Politics of Surveillance and Visibility Toronto: Univ. Toronto Press
  29. Harris A, Evans H, Beckett K 2010. Drawing blood from stones: legal debt and social inequality in the contemporary United States. Am. J. Sociol. 115:61753–99
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Hetey RC, Monin B, Maitreyi A, Eberhardt JL 2016. Data for Change: A Statistical Analysis of Police Stops, Searches, Handcuffings, and Arrests in Oakland, Calif., 2013–2014 Stanford, CA: SPARQ Stanford
  31. Innes M 2001. Control creep. Sociol. Res. Online 6:1–10
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Int. Assoc. Chiefs Police. 2015. 2015 Social Media Survey Results Alexandria, VA: Int. Assoc. Chiefs Police http://www.iacpsocialmedia.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/FULL-2015-Social-Media-Survey-Results.compressed.pdf
  33. Joh E 2014. Policing by numbers: big data and the Fourth Amendment. Wash. Law Rev. 89:35–68
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Joh E 2016. The new surveillance discretion: automated suspicion, big data, and policing. Harvard Law Policy Rev 10:115–42
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Keizer K, Lindenberg S, Steg L 2008. The spreading of disorder. Science 322:1681–85
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Kennedy DM 1997. Pulling levers: chronic offenders, high-crime settings, and a theory of prevention. Valpso. Univ. Law Rev. 31:449–84
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kennedy DM, Braga AA, Piehl AM 1997. The (un)known universe: mapping gangs and gang violence in Boston. Crime Mapping and Crime Prevention D Weisburd, T McEwan 219–62 New York: Crim. Justice
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Kennedy LW, Caplan JM, Piza E 2011. Risk clusters, hot spots, and spatial intelligence: risk terrain modeling as an algorithm for police resource allocation strategies. J. Quant. Criminol. 27:3339–62
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Kerr O 2011. An equilibrium-adjustment theory of the Fourth Amendment. Harvard Law Rev 125:476–543
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Kohler-Hausmann I 2013. Misdemeanor justice: control without conviction. Am. J. Sociol. 119:2351–93
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Kohler-Hausmann I 2018. Misdemeanorland: Criminal Courts and Social Control in an Age of Broken Windows Policing Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  42. Krent H 1995. Of diaries and data banks: use restrictions under the Fourth Amendment. Tex. Law Rev. 74:49–100
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Lane J 2015. The digital street: an ethnographic study of networked street life in Harlem. Am. Behav. Sci. 60:43–58
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Lane J, Ramirez F 2016. Beyond admissibility: the prosecutorial affordances of social media use Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention Fukuoka, Japan: June 9–13
  45. Laney D 2001. 3D data management: controlling data volume, velocity, and variety. Application Delivery Strategies Blog Feb. 6. https://blogs.gartner.com/doug-laney/files/2012/01/ad949-3D-Data-Management-Controlling-Data-Volume-Velocity-and-Variety.pdf
  46. Langton L, Berzofsky M, Krebs C, Smiley-McDonald H 2012. Victimizations Not Reported to the Police, 2006–2010 Washington, DC: Bur. Justice Stat.
  47. Lazer D, Radford J 2017. Data ex machina: introduction to big data. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 34:19–39
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Manza J, Uggen C 2006. Locked Out: Felon Disenfranchisement and American Democracy New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  49. Matsueda RL, Kreager DA, Huizinga D 2006. Deterring delinquents: a rational choice model of theft and violence. Am. Sociol. Rev. 71:195–122
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Mayer-Schönberger V, Cukier K 2013. Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
  51. Meyer JW, Rowan B 1977. Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am. J. Sociol. 83:2340–63
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Mohler GO, Short MB, Malinowski S, Johnson M, Tita GE et al. 2015. Randomized controlled field trials of predictive policing. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 110:5121399–411
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Murphy E 2013. The politics of privacy in the criminal justice system: information disclosure, the Fourth Amendment, and statutory law enforcement exemptions. Mich. Law Rev. 111:485–546
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Pager D 2007. Marked: Race, Crime, and Finding Work in an Era of Mass Incarceration Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  55. Papachristos AV 2009. Murder by structure: dominance relations and the social structure of gang homicide. Am. J. Sociol. 115:74–128
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Papachristos AV, Kirk DS 2015. Changing the street dynamic: evaluating Chicago's group violence reduction strategy. Criminol. Public Policy 14:3525–58
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Papachristos AV, Wildeman C, Roberto E 2015. Tragic, but not random: the social contagion of nonfatal gunshot injuries. Soc. Sci. Med. 125:139–50
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Pasquale F 2015. Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  59. Patton DU, Brunton DW, Dixon A, Miller RJ, Leonard P, Hackman R 2017. Stop and frisk online: theorizing everyday racism in digital policing in the use of social media for identification of criminal conduct and associations. Soc. Media Soc. 3:1–10
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Police Exec. Res. Forum. 2014. Future Trends in Policing Washington, DC: Police Exec. Res. Forum
  61. Ratcliffe JH 2008. Intelligence-Led Policing Cullompton, UK: Willan
  62. Ratcliffe JH, Taniguchi T, Groff ER, Wood JD 2011. The Philadelphia foot patrol experiment: a randomized controlled trial of police patrol effectiveness in violent crime hotspots. Criminology 49:795–831
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Renan D 2016. The Fourth Amendment as administrative governance. Stanford Law Rev 68:1039–129
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Ridgeway G 2018. Policing in the era of big data. Annu. Rev. Criminol. 1:401–19
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Riley v. California 573 US ___ 2014.
  66. Rios V 2011. Punished: Policing the Lives of Black and Latino Boys New York: N.Y. Univ. Press
  67. Robinson DJ 2018. The challenges of prediction: lessons from criminal justice. I/S J. Law Policy Inf. Soc. In press. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3054115
  68. Sampson RJ, Raudenbush SW, Earls F 1997. Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science 277:5328918–24
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Saunders J, Hunt P, Hollywood JS 2016. Predictions put into practice: a quasi-experimental evaluation of Chicago's predictive policing pilot. J. Exp. Criminol. 12:347–71
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Scott R 2004. Reflections on a half-century of organizational sociology. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 30:1–21
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Sherman L 2013. The rise of evidence-based policing: targeting, testing, and tracking. Crime Justice 42:377–451
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Sherman LW, Gartin PR, Buerger ME 1989. Hot spots of perdatory crime: routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology 27:27–56
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Sierra-Arévalo M, Papachristos AV 2017. Social networks and gang violence reduction. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 13:373–93
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Slobogin C 2016. Policing as administration. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 165:91–152
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Smith v. Maryland 442 U.S. 735 1979.
  76. Smith M, Austin RL Jr. 2015. Launching the police data initiative. White House Blog May 18. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/05/18/launching-police-data-initiative
  77. Thrasher FM 2013 (1927). The Gang: A Study of 1,313 Gangs in Chicago Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  78. Trottier D 2012. Policing social media. Social Media as Surveillance: Rethinking Visibility in a Converging World D Trottier 135–54 Abingdon, UK: Ashgate
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Uchida CD, Swatt ML 2013. Operation LASER and the effectiveness of hotspot patrol: a panel analysis. Police Q 16:3287–304
    [Google Scholar]
  80. United States v. Jones 132 S. Ct. 945, 565 U.S. __ 2012.
  81. United States v. Miller 307 U.S. 174 1939.
  82. US Dep. Justice. 2015 (2001). L.A. Consent Decree. Washington, DC: US Dep. Justice
  83. US Dep. Justice Civil Rights Div. 2015. Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf
  84. Wasserman S, Faust K 1994. Social Network Analysis Methods and Applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Waxman M 2009. Police and national security: American local law enforcement and counter-terrorism after 9/11. J. Natl. Secur. Law Policy 3:377–407
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Weisburd D, Mastrofski SD, McNally AM, Greenspan R, Willis JJ 2003. Reforming to preserve: COMPSTAT and strategic problem-solving in American policing. Criminol. Public Policy 2:421–56
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Western B 2006. Punishment and Inequality in America New York: Russell: Sage Found.
  88. Western B, Pettit B 2005. Black-white wage inequality, employment rates, and incarceration. Am. J. Sociol. 111:2553–78
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Whyte WF 1969 (1943). Street Corner Society Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  90. Willis J, Mastrofski SD, Weisburd D 2007. Making sense of COMPSTAT: a theory-based analysis of organizational change in three police departments. Law Soc. Rev. 41:1147–88
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-030839
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-030839
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error