Foye 2015 THESIS

The Perceptions of Monmouth University Students on the Impact of Social Media on Attitudes towards Law Enforcement

John Foye

CJ 490 02

Dr. Peter Liu

14 December 2015


Foye 1

Abstract

This study’s purpose is to assess whether or not a social media presence by police

influence people’s perception of them. The dependent variable of this study, views on police in

America, is broken down into three dimensions. (D1) is law enforcement. (D2) is service (D3) is

order maintenance. There are two independent variables. The first independent variable is social

media sites used. It is broken down into two dimensions. (D1) is perceived amount, and (D2) is

perceived law enforcement activity. The second independent variable is previous interactions

with the police. It is broken down by two dimensions. (D1) is the type of interaction, and (D2) is

the outcome of the interaction. Other variables that will be examined include major, age, gender,

and socioeconomic status. This survey was administered to 101 random Monmouth University

students, and is completely anonymous. The responses were analyzed using the statistical

analyses the ANOVA test, or the Analysis-of-Variance test, and Chi-Square test.


Foye 2

(1) Introduction and Statement of the Problem

In the last decade or so, social media has absolutely taken over the world. What was once

a novelty has become an absolute facet of everyday life. Citizens use social media every day for

multiple tasks. In fact, 57% of adults in the United States use Facebook, and 16% of adults in the

United States are Twitter users (King p. 6, 2015). People use social media sites like Facebook,

Twitter, Instagram, Tumblr and other sites to connect across from somewhere as far as halfway

across the world, or as close as across town. These sites allow for personal information to be

shared across the medium, and for connections to be made. It has gotten to the point where social

media has overtaken other sources of information, making it one of the first places people see

their news and information. It makes sense then, that social media users would be some of the

first to see the issues between the police and minorities in cities like Baltimore, Maryland,

Ferguson, Missouri, and New York City, among others. Because of the rapid speed information

travels at over social media, news of what had happened in these cities travelled like wildfire,

and cries for justice were voiced. Nowadays, police have”… frequently aggravated the problem

of public ambivalence by becoming more militaristic, reactive, and secretive” (Flanagan and

Vaughn, 1996, 113-128). Social media has been a constant, and because of the rapid transfer of

information, there has been an influx of anti-police stigma, especially by the way of social

media.

In response, more and more police departments have created their own social media

accounts on websites such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, to try and not converse with the

public and make announcements, but to also get their good deeds out there. Police departments

are attempting to give the public a better perception of police in the face of a lack of police-


Foye 3

support around the country based off of a number of situations, which include police brutality

cases and an overall negative stigma. This research study will be undertaken to investigate

whether or not a positive social media presence influences others perceptions of police in a

positive way.

To get an accurate study, there are a number of variables that are being investigated. The

dependent variable of this study are the “views on police in America”, and there are three

variables that go along with it. Dimension 1 is law enforcement, with sub units of effectiveness

and fairness. The sub units of “effectiveness” and “fairness” are used to see if the respondent

feels that law enforcement is effective at doing their job, and also fair within the community.

Dimension 2 is service, with the same subunits of “effectiveness” and “fairness”, to get a gauge

on whether or not the respondents believe that the community service, or community benefits

programs the police conduct are effective. Dimension 3 is the Order maintenance, with the same

subunits of “effectiveness” and “fairness”, and it is used to see if respondents believe that police

are effective at maintaining order within the community, but also to see if the police are fair at

maintaining order.

There are two independent variables in this study, one of which is the “social media sites

used”. It is further broken down into two dimensions. (D1) is the perceived amount, and (D2) is

the perceived law enforcement related activity posted by police departments. The second

independent variable is “previous interactions”, also with two dimensions. (D1) of this

independent variable is the type of interaction, either negative or positive. (D2) is the outcome of

the interaction, also either negative or positive. These two independent variables and the

dependent variable are both related as the amount of social media use an individuals has, coupled


Foye 4

with the perception one has of police based off of previous interactions, directly influences ones

perception of the police in America.

There are also two antecedent and control variables in this study. The first antecedent

variable is major, and the respondent will respond with their “major”, or area of study at

Monmouth University. The second antecedent variable is “socioeconomic status”, which is

looking to gauge the socioeconomic neighborhoods that the respondents come from, broken

down into low, medium, or high socioeconomic income neighborhoods. The two conditional

variables are “age” and “gender”. The first conditional variable is the age of those taking the

study. The ages of the respondents may vary, but they will all be in a certain range, as the

population sample is Monmouth University. The second conditional variable is the gender of the

respondent, either male or female. The idea behind using these variables is that based off of the

age, major and gender of the respondents, coupled with the socioeconomic area they are from,

will give a response that will support the hypothesis.

In response to the anti-police stigma in today’s society, along with the rampant social

media use the entire world, the scrutiny on police is at an all-time high. Because of the

prevalence of social media and the increase of an anti-police mentality, research has been done to

try and see if police departments are fixing the way they are conducting community relations.

Police departments today, are in fact, utilizing social media in their combatting of this anti-police

stigma. According to Rich Stanek (2013), “…Already 81 % of federal agencies, 71 % of state

agencies and 82% of local agencies are using social media”. This includes a variety of tasks,

such as “public relations, community outreach, soliciting crime tips, recruitment, and


Foye 5

investigations & crime solving” (Stanek, 2013). Police departments are making a concerted

effort to improve their image to fit this new social media age.

Although there is adequate information based upon the use of social media in America,

and the use of social media to interact with the community, there has not been a study to see

whether or not the use of social media by police has influenced ones perception of police in

America. The relationship between the police in America and the public is seen all over social

media sites, where social media users can interact with others and comment and share posts

based off of what they see or believe. Through the documented effects of social media use,

previous interactions, and views of police in America today, along with the social control theory,

will show if whether or not the relationship between the police and citizens is influenced by the

social media sites used by police in America.

(II) Review of Literature and Theoretical Framework

Proposition 1: Monmouth University students who follow police departments on social

media are more likely to have a positive perception of police after following social media

accounts.


Foye 6

Social media influences people’s perceptions of others. Today, any website that one

subscribes to is essentially their first news source, their first resource for information if they are a

social media user. Sometimes, in fact, social media sites are quicker to release information

before major news outlets are able to release it. A social media site is defined as “web-based

services that allow individuals to construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded

system, articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and view and traverse

their list of connections and those made by others within the system”(Boyd and Ellison, 2007).

Social media allows a free interaction of people and the release of ideas that has never seen

before. So it is no surprise that with the riots and outrage that have happened in cities like

Baltimore, New York City, or Ferguson, because of police violence that this rapid flow of

information has gone all around the world almost instantaneously. Reports of violence and cries

for justice swept the entire nation, with social media being a huge proponent of that.

Social media, however, is becoming more and more friendly to the police. In fact, police

have begun to create their own social media pages on social networking sites like Twitter,

Facebook, and others. Ruddell and Jones states, “…there are two main purposes of social media

in law enforcement: aiding in criminal investigations and using these tools as platforms for

disseminating information as well as managing public opinion” (Ruddell and Jones, 2013).

Police are utilizing the technology used by the rest of the public. In the study done by Ruddell

and Jones (2013), data from 504 community residents and 314 college students was collected. It

was found that one in five citizens had visited the police departments website, as well as 6.9%

visiting their Twitter feed, and 5.4 visiting the departments Facebook page. It was also found that

the younger generations enjoyed using social media and electronics better than the older


Foye 7

generations (Ruddell and Jones, 2013). Through this analysis, it makes sense to believe that

social media has an influence on citizens perceptions of police

A theory that helps explain this study, or explains the idea behind this study, is 69, the

Social Control Theory. Thought up by Travis Hirschi in 1969, the Social Control Theory has to

do with “…the bonds that people form to prosocial value, prosocial people, and prosocial

institutions” (Key Idea: Hirschi’s Social Bond/Social Control Theory, p. 58). This theory is

essentially stating that people do not commit crimes or conduct in anti-social behavior because of

the connections they have made. For this theory, the citizen and civilians in the neighborhood

would be the one being influenced by the police on social media. Whether or not it is directly or

indirectly, the social media aspect is definitely the driving force in today’s day and age. Instead

of direct or indirect contact with police in person, people today are more inclined to interact with

them through social media.

Proposition 2: Interaction with the community through social media leads to police and the

rest of the community to having a mutually beneficial relationship.

The use of social media to conduct community policing is a rather new thing, however

community policing is not. Community policing “…came about as a result of a desire to improve

upon the traditional policing model” (Scheider, Chapman, Schapiro, 2009, p. 695). The desire to

commit to community policing came from a time when the original ways of policing, which

included a rapid response time to the scene of a crime, investigations of crime, and arresting of

suspects. Community policing, overall, seeks “…to reconnect police to citizens and to encourage

innovative, proactive, collaborative and strategic approaches to crime prevention” (Scheider,


Foye 8

Chapman, Schapiro, 2009, p. 695). The police’s use of social media today can be seen as a

modern day community policing.

Today, 81 % of federal agencies, 71 % of state agencies and 82% of local agencies are

using social media accounts (Stanek, 2013, p. 40). The use of social media is mutually beneficial

for all involved. According to Stanek, (2013), during the Boston bombing, thousands of hours of

footage was received from the public (p. 40). It detailed completely who had committed the

heinous acts, and set off a manhunt that led to the death of one perpetrator and the capture and

incarceration of the other. Without the community involvement, the jobs of all those involved

would not have been at all simple. This mutually beneficial relationship, between the Boston

police department and the citizens of Boston, helped solve one of the worst crimes in American

history.

The use of social media with police departments and police in America “…creates a

soundboard and resource for discussions, concerns and conversations for all parties involved”

(Murnik, 2015, p. 40). It allows the community to be able to sound off their own ideas, while

also allowing the police to interact with the rest of the community by announcing events,

programs, and other necessary messages. Social media has been “…proven effective in cases of

Amber Alerts, missing reports, and cases where information needs to be transmitted to a

widespread audience” (Murnik, 2015, p. 40). In fact, according to Dees, sites such as Twitter use

“…Short Messaging System (SMS) or "texting" technology to keep people in touch with one

another” (Dees, 2015, p. 32). This form of social media is perfect for getting out real time

messages to those who need to hear it.


Foye 9

A theory that helps explain the use of community policing and the use of social media by

police would be the Broken Windows Theory. The Broken Windows Theory “…posits that

something as simple as a building with a broken window signals abandonment, a lax attitude

toward property, and therefore an absence of respect for the law” (Adams, 2006, p. 26). The

deterioration of a neighborhood is seen as a hot bed of crime and disorder, and as long as an area

like that is still in place, then crime will be prevalent. Criminals become more bold, and more

and more offenders come into the area. Now, social media is not a lawless area like the theory

states, however, the second part of the Broken Windows Theory states that an increased police

presence that takes away the prostitutes, the beggars, and the petty criminals, and the

neighborhood will improve (Adams, 2006, p. 26). In this case the police presence on social

media gives civilians something to latch onto. The influence of police on social media has means

that citizens begin to follow, and support law enforcement. The dependent variable of this study

is the perceptions of police in America, and this form of community policing helps improve the

community relations between civilians and the police.

(III) Hypothesis and Variable Measurement

In this study there are many hypotheses. The hypotheses of this study are indicated

below.

H1: Monmouth University students who follow police departments and agencies on social media are more likely to have a positive perception of police in AmericaH0: Monmouth University students who do not follow police departments and agencies on social media are not more likely to have a positive perception of police.

H2: Monmouth University students who live identify as a higher socioeconomic status are more likely to follow police departments on social media.


Foye 10

H0: Monmouth University students who live as lower socioeconomic status are less likely to follow police departments on social media.

H3: Criminal Justice majors/minors at Monmouth University are more likely to follow police departments’ social media accounts.H0: Non-criminal justice majors/minors at Monmouth University are less likely to follow police departments’ social media accounts.

H4: Previous interactions that were for positive reasons will result in a positive perception of police.H0: Previous interactions that resulted in arrests or tickets will result in a negative perception of police.

H5: Older students will be more likely to have a positive perception of police.H0: Younger students will be less likely to have a positive perception of police.

The dependent variable of the present study are the views on police in America. There are

three dimensions of this variable, which are law enforcement, service, and order maintenance.

For the following questions measuring this variable, respondents will circle the numbers, ranging

from 0-10, based upon their views on the questions that are asked. These questions were broken

up into the different dimensions of the study. These dimensions of the dependent variable are

(D1) Law Enforcement, and further broken up into sub dimensions of effectiveness and fairness.

The second dimension (D2) is Service, also, broken up into sub dimensions of effectiveness and

fairness. The final dimension (D3) is Order Maintenance, and is also broken up into sub

dimensions of effectiveness and fairness. The total number of questions for the dependent

variable is 16, but each dimension and its sub dimensions are represented as well. The questions

for each dimension and variable are as follows, and are classified as such:

(D1) Law Enforcement Effectiveness

1. Police are effective at making arrests:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2. Police are effective at responding to calls:


Foye 11

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

3. The police in the United States are fair:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

(D1) Law Enforcement Fairness

4. The police in the United States are fair when making arrests:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5. The police in the United States are fair when conducting traffic stops:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6. The police in the United States are fair when responding to and dealing with calls:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7. The police in the United States are fair when dealing with courts:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

(D2) Service Effectiveness

8. The police in the United States are effective at conducting community service:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

9. The police in the United States are effective at running community wellness programs:

(D2) Service Fairness

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

10. The police in the United States are fair when running community programs:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

(D3) Order Maintenance Effectiveness

11. Police patrolling the neighborhood in a squad car is effective at maintain order:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

12. Police walking the beat is effective at maintaining order in the neighborhood:


Foye 12

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

13. Police are effective at directing traffic:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

(D3) Order Maintenance Fairness

14. Police are fair when patrolling the neighborhood in squad cars:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

15. Police are fair when patrolling the neighborhood on foot:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

16. Police are fair when directing traffic:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

There are two independent variables of this study. The first independent variable is the

social media sites used. The questions in this set of questions were nominal in nature, and the

respondent circled whichever he or she felt best pertained to his or her social media use. These

questions were used to gauge the social media norms and the different types of way the sample

population received its information. The second portion this part of the survey asked about the

social media awareness of Originally there were two dimensions that made up this grouping of

questions. However, throughout the survey process, there came a time where the data was

condensed and computed together. This new variable took into account the social media usage

that the respondent used, while also taking into account the awareness the respondent has of the

social media presence of police. For example, if the respondents answered that they use social

media for 4 hours as well as circle 8 out of the 12 social media sites, than it can be classified that

the social media use of that respondent is high. However, for the next portion of the independent


Foye 13

variable, the portion about police, if a respondent answers unsure, and has a low knowledge

about the local police departments social media pages, then that person awareness of Police on

social media is low. The questions are as follows:

17. Do you currently use social media websites? (Please circle your answer).Yes No

18. Through which device do you most often use social media sites?Laptop Tablet Cellphone Other

19. Circle all the social media sites that you currently have an account with: Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn

GooglePlus Tumblr Bubbler Flickr

Vine YouTube Sparx Pinterest

20. How many hours a day do you go on social media during the day? (Please circle the hours that best suits yourself)

0 1 2 3 4 5+

21. Does your local police department use social media to disseminate information?

Yes No Not Sure

22. How much attention have you paid to the info posted by your local police department on social media?

Low Medium High

The second independent variable of this study is the previous interactions with police.

This is broken down into two dimensions, which is the type of interactions, and the outcome of

the interactions. The respondents will circle the answer that best suits their own views, as well as


Foye 14

expand upon their previous interactions. These three question, based off of the answers would

indicate the overall perception of the police, which became the second independent variable used

for data. For instance, if a respondent answered that the interaction they had with police was

positive and ended with a positive outcome, then it is concluded that the perception of police is

positive. The questions for the independent variable are as follows.

23. Have you had any interaction with police since 2012? If Yes, who initiated the contact?

No interaction I did Police Did Other_________________

24. Was this interaction positive or negative?

Positive Negative Neutral

25. Was the outcome positive or negative?


There are two antecedent variables in this study. The first antecedent variable is

socioeconomic status. Respondents will respond to this inquiry by circling the answer that best

suits their lifestyle.

26. I would classify my neighborhood’s socioeconomic status as:

Low Medium High

The second antecedent variable in this study is the major of the respondent. The

respondent will write in their major.

27. Please indicate your current major:_________________

There are two conditional variables in this study. The first conditional variable is the

gender of the respondent. Gender is indicated as “male” or “female”. Respondents will circle


Foye 15

their gender. This variable was not actually used in the study. In fact, it was only used in this

study in this survey to see what the sample population looked like.

24. Please circle your gender:

Male Female

The second conditional variable in this study is the age of the respondent. The respondent

will write in their age. This was used to see whether or not the sample population is equal in it

distributions between males and females at Momouth.

25. Please state your age: ______________________

When doing a survey, one of the main problems is that the survey can be twisted so that

the respondent isn’t answering the question correctly. The respondent may be just simply filling

out the survey by circling answers for no apparent reason. For instance, one of the worries was

having a respondent circle ‘10’s for 16 straight answers. That is not accurate data for the study.

In fact, to combat this type of problem, in question 19, it asks the respondent to circle the social

media sites that the respondent uses. These include major social media sites including Facebook,

Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube, but also social media sites that aren’t as famous, such as Vine,

Tumblr, Pinterest, and Flickr. To see whether or not respondents are actually paying attention to

the survey questionnaire, the researcher added two fake social media sites that, when glancing at

the names, look like they could actually be social media sites. These two fake sites are called

“Bubblr” and “Sparx”. The idea behind this was that if the respondents answered these questions,

than that data set would be unusable, because if the respondent answered with these answers,

than in the rest of the study, there would be unusable data.


Foye 16

(IV) Methods

Social media use is a very common thing in today’s society. So is the police. Therefore,

handing out a survey is the easiest form of gathering data for this study. This survey is absolutely

confidential and the respondents will only be required to place their initials on the form of

consent, if they choose to take the survey. Some of the pitfalls that may occur when taking a

survey include respondents not responding to the survey accurately, or just fill out random

answers leaving inaccurate answers. Using a survey is the easiest and most efficient way of

gathering mass data.

The sample population will be about 100 current students at Monmouth University.

Permission will be received by professors willing to assist in the process of gathering the data

necessary. So as to not get only criminal justice majors to take the survey, different classrooms

will be utilized so that people of all majors and grade levels can take the surveys. Surveys will be

handed out to those who are willing to take it, and will be administered by the researcher. The

respondents will then initial the survey. Those participating in the survey can, if they wish, stop

taking the survey at any time during it. All the information that is gathered is absolutely

confidential.

(V) Analysis

In total, there were 6 Oneway ANOVA tests done, and three Chi-Square analysis tests

done for this study with the data available. The Oneway ANOVA tests were done because the

Dependent Variable was broken up into three dimensions, and then further broken up into

effectiveness and fairness. These dependent variables, scale value, were tested against the

independent variables, which were ordinal in value. Therefore, a Oneway ANOVA test was


Foye 17

necessary. A total of two Oneway ANOVA tests were done for this study. For the Chi- Square

Analyses, the variables tested were the ordinal independent variables against the nominal

conditional/antecedent variables. A total of 3 Chi-Square tests were done for this study. The

following tables below states all the results of the tests run:

Hypotheses Variables Tested Dimensions Tested Signifigance

H1: Monmouth University students who follow police departments and agencies on social media are more likely to have a positive perception of police in America.

DV- Views on Police in America

Law Enforcement Effectivess

.180

Law Enforcement Fairness

.014

Service Effectiveness

.497

ID1- Social Media Usage and Awareness

Service Fairness .152

Order Maintenance Effectiveness

.612

Order Maintenance Fairness

.070

H2: Monmouth University students who live identify as a higher socioeconomic

IV1: Social Media

Usage and Awareness

.883


Foye 18

status are more likely to follow police departments on social media.

Ant. V.:

Socioeconomic Status

H3: Criminal Justice majors/minors at Monmouth University are more likely to follow police departments’ social media accounts.

IV1: Social Media

Usage and Awareness

.819

Ant. V.: Major

H4: Previous interactions that were for positive reasons will result in a positive perception of police.

D.V.: Views on Police in America

Law Enforcement .01

Service .078

IV2: Previous Interactions with Police

Order

Maintenance.

.080

H5: Older students will be more likely to have a positive perception of police.

Con. V.: Age .271

IV2: Previous Interaction with Police

For every single test done in this study, the significance level of .05 was used to

determine whether the resulting data from the test was significant or not. If the hypothesis tested

had a significance level under .05, then the hypothesis was significant, and could therefore reject

the null. If hypothesis tested had a significance level above .05, than the study was not

significant enough to reject the null, and therefore failed to reject the null hypothesis. Even if the


Foye 19

test concluded with a significance level of .051, it would still not be able to reject the null

hypothesis. It is important to know what level of significance is necessary to reject the null,

because without knowing that number, then the significance of the relationships being tested

would be difficult to figure out.

The first test that was done was Hypothesis 1, which states that Monmouth University

students who follow police departments and agencies on social media are more likely to have a

positive perception of police in America. The idea behind this hypothesis was that because of the

information that the police disseminates to the public, they will therefore have a more positive

perception of the police because of this quasi-community relations relationship. When

conducting the study, the dependent variable of “Views on Police in America” was tested against

the independent variable of “Social Media Usage and Awareness.” The Oneway ANOVA test

was used. First, the dependent variables’ dimension of Law Enforcement effectiveness was

tested first. Below is the following data received from the test:


Foye 20

The low, medium and high numbers indicate the awareness of police on social media and

the information that they present to the public. The low grouping had a 6.88 mean, indicating

that while they had a low awareness of policing and social media, they still had a positive

perception of law enforcement effectiveness. The medium grouping had a 7.27 average, meaning

that they had a higher than average idea of the information and sites used by police on social

finally, the high grouping had a higher understanding and awareness of social media information

disseminated by police, while also having higher appreciation of law enforcement effectiveness.

Though these means mean that there is support through law enforcement, there is not enough of

a relationship between the dependent and independent variables to gather a significance, as the

significance of the study was .180. There was not a enough of a significance for the researcher to

reject the null hypothesis.


Foye 21

The next dimension of the study was service, and was tested along with the independent

variable of social media usage and awareness. A Oneway ANOVA test was used. The results are

as follows below:

The data of the dimension of the dependent variable came out nearly the same as the

previous data set. The low had an average awareness of police’s usage of social media for

effective service programs, while the medium and high groupings were closer much like the

previous data set.

However, the difference between this data set and the other dimensions (that will follow

this one) was that the data was significant. The significance of this testing was .014, which

allowed the researcher the reject the null hypothesis and accept the study done. This is significant

because it shows that out of the sample population used, there was a correlation between service

effectiveness the social media usage that the public has. These two allow for further study to be


Foye 22

done, the population felt, as a whole, that the police are effective at conducting service to the

community, as well as promoting the service programs to social media websites.

The final dimension of the effectiveness sub dimension is order maintenance. The order

maintenance effectiveness of the first dimension is also tested against the independent variable of

social media usage and awareness. The test used is Oneway ANOVA. The results are as follows:

Now, looking at the data set, the low groupings is actually higher than the medium. This

means that the lower groupings of the population sample had a higher appreciation and

awareness of the order maintenance procedures done by the police through social media.

However, the higher awareness groupings has a the highest mean of all three, meaning that the

higher groupings are the most aware of the order maintenance procedures done by police, and

also think of the effectiveness the highest out of all three groups. However, the significance was

way above .05 at .497. This means that there was no significance, and the researcher was forced


Foye 23

to fail to reject the null hypothesis. Further study could be done to combat this potential issue,

but as it stands, the present population did not provide enough of a correlation to find any

significance in the test.

The next sub-dimension studied was the sub dimension of Fairness. This sub-dimension

measured the fairness of the dimensions of Law Enforcement, Service, and Order Maintenance.

The first, Law Enforcement Fairness, which was tested as the dependent variable, was tested

against the independent variable social media usage and awareness. A Oneway ANOVA test was

used to find the significance of this study.

The data received from this study shows that the both the low and medium groupings

have an average awareness about law enforcement fairness through social media, with a mean of

6.67 and 6.79, respectively. The high group was 7.5, meaning that they had a higher awareness


Foye 24

and usage of policing on social media. The significance of the study, however, was .152, and

therefore, the results were not significant enough, and the researcher is forced to fail to reject the

null.

The next data set of this dimension was the Service fairness sub dimension. It was tested

against the independent variable social media usage and awareness. The researcher used a

Oneway ANOVA test was conducted to see if there was any significant data between the two.

The data follows as such:

The means found through this testing was 6.47 for the low grouping, 6.96 for the

medium grouping, and 6.91 for the high grouping. Altogether, this is the lowest grouping out of

any dimension that was tested. This does show that the respondents did feel nearly the same

about policing and the fairness of the service programs that they conduct, which is average all


Foye 25

across the board. The significance of the study was .612, and therefore, the researcher is forced

to fail to reject the null hypothesis.

The final dimension and sub dimension tested was order maintenance fairness. This was

done testing the dependent variable of order maintenance fairness against the independent

variable social media usage and awareness. A Oneway ANOVA test was done for this study, and

the results are as follows:

The data received for this sub dimension was much higher than the previous sub

dimensions, for either effectiveness or fairness. Low grouping had a 7.06 average for order

maintenance fairness, the medium grouping had a 7.17 mean, and the high grouping had a 8.36

average. This result is staggering because it shows that no matter the knowledge of social media

with policing, these respondents still feel that the order maintenance that police officers conduct

is effective, and has noticed, as they answered the questions on the survey as high as they did.


Foye 26

The significance of the study is .070, however, which is still above the necessary significance

level. Therefore, the researcher fails to reject the null hypothesis.

After conducting all the tests, it was odd to see that nearly every sub-dimension for the

study had come out with a significance that warranted the researcher to fail to reject the null

hypothesis. The only sub-dimension that resulted in any sort of significance was the Service

effectiveness. This was surprising, because there were other sub-dimensions that were very close

to being significant, and if another test was done with the same variables and a different

population, there is a chance that there could be some significance to the study.

The second hypothesis is Monmouth University students who live identify as a higher

socioeconomic status are more likely to follow police departments on social media. This

hypotheses was tested by testing the Antecedent Variable socioeconomic status with the

independent variable social media usage and awareness. The idea behind this hypothesis was to

see whether or not there was any correlation between one’s socioeconomic status and

neighborhood, and see if that status affects the following of police on social media. The testing

was done by using a Chi-Square test between the two variables. The results of this testing was as

follows:


Foye 27

At the top of the table is the perceived socioeconomic status that the respondent

circled, and to the side is the awareness of the social media uses police have. The most common

socioeconomic status that shows throughout the table is medium, which in turn is also the lowest

amount of awareness to police and social media. The significance of the data was .883, which

forced the researcher to fail to reject the null hypothesis.


Foye 28

What was jarring about that study was that out of the 101 participants who took the

survey, 67 of them had a low knowledge of the police on social media. This falls across all of the

socioeconomic status’ of low, medium, and high. The other 44 respondents’ fell in the other

portions of the survey, however, it was not distributed well enough to make any significant

difference in the final data set. Only 11 respondents had a high knowledge of police’s use of

social media uses, and none of the 11 came from low socioeconomic neighborhoods, or

identified as such.

Hypothesis 3 was Criminal Justice majors/minors at Monmouth University are more

likely to follow police departments’ social media accounts. The basis of this hypothesis was that

if a student at any university was a criminal justice major, there is a chance that they would

follow the social media accounts of local, state, or federal law enforcement agencies. In the case

of the present study, it was the idea that the students at Monmouth University that identified as

criminal justice majors were more likely to follow police departments and other law enforcement

agencies on social media. This hypothesis was tested by using a Chi-Square analysis and testing

with the Antecedent variable of Major and the independent variable of social media usage and

awareness. The results are as follows:


Foye 29

As was the case before, there is no indication that the major of the respondents had any

sort of influence on their knowledge of police on social media. In fact, the majority of the sample

population, had a low knowledge of police’ use of social media. This was both Criminal Justice

majors and non-criminal justice majors. Only four Criminal Justice majors had a high awareness

of police on social media, and 7 non-criminal justice majors had a high awareness. What this

says is that either the police haven’t done enough to promote their department and their ideals or


Foye 30

the respondents have either never bothered to check or we’re not aware of the idea of police on

social media. Regardless, there was no correlation at all between the two, as the significance of

this test was .819. The researcher was forced to fail to reject the null hypothesis.

Hypothesis 4 was previous interactions that were for positive reasons will result in a

positive perception of police. The idea behind this hypothesis was that if a person has an

interaction with a police officer that started out positively, such as, for instance, a traffic stop that

was to warn you about a broken tail light, and then no ticket. The traffic stop, though could be

skewed to be negative, however because the officers intentions were to assist, not further

aggravate the issue, and leave the driver with a cordial goodbye and safe travels, that person will

have more of a positive perception than one who had nearly the same experience besides the

warning, and received a ticket instead. The test used was a Oneway ANOVA, and tested the

independent variable previous interactions with police, and the dependent variable of views of

police in America, with the dimension of Law Enforcement being tested first. The results:


Foye 31

The significance of the data was .01, which shows an incredibly strong relationship

between the independent variable and the dependent variable. This shows that the positive

interaction between a police officer influence that one person view on police. This data helps

show that the population strongly believes that a positive interaction with police calls for a

positive perception of the law enforcement portion of a police officer’s typical job. The mean for

positive was 7.6, which was above the negative and neutral respondents, which were 6.3 and 6.6

respectively. Further research into this subject could end up finding an even stronger correlation

between the relationship between the two variables, with a different sample population that isn’t

generalized to just college students. The researcher rejects the null hypothesis.

The second dimension of the dependent variable being tested is the Service dimension.

This dimension of the dependent variable is tested against the independent variable previous

interactions with police. A Oneway ANOVA test was used for these variables. The results:


Foye 32

The results of this test are another that are very close to being significant, but at .078, are

not significant. However, what is significant is the fact that the respondents had such awareness

for the service that police do. The positive group scored a 7.3, the negative scored a 6.4, and the

neutral scored a 6.6. Further research could be done to find whether there is any correlation

between the perceptions of the service of police and the views of police in America. The

researcher is forced to fail to reject the null.

The final dimensions of this test is the order maintenance dimension of the dependent

variables, views on police in America. This was tested against the independent variable of

previous interactions with police. The test used was a Oneway ANOVA test. The results are as

follows.


Foye 33

Much like the previous dimension of this hypothesis test, service, and the significance

was very close to being significant. It was at .080. The mean of the positive grouping was 7.6,

the negative was 7.1, and the neutral was 6.7. Once again, the researcher believes that the pitfalls

fall with the population. Having a different population other than a college campus with some

similar views and ideologies could definitely change the data and the significance. Overall,

though two of the dimensions did not have the correct significance, it is interesting to see two so

close to being significant. Further study to all could bring drastically different results that could

help reject the null hypothesis for two dimensions, but fails to reject the null.


Foye 34

Finally, the Hypothesis 5 is older students will be more likely to have a positive

perception of police. This study takes the conditional variable of age and tests it against the

independent variable previous interactions with police. Age was recoded into underclassmen and

upperclassmen. Underclassmen being any respondent between and including the ages of 19-20,

and Upperclassman are classified as ages 21+. A Chi-Square analysis was done for this test.


Foye 35

The results of the study did in fact show that 21 respondents that were classified 21+ did

have a more positive perception of police. However, those that classified as 21+ also either put

negative or neutral. In fact, combined, that total is 30 respondents. There was in fact some

correlation between the age and perceptions of police in this test. The test also showed that 13

respondents that classified as 19-20 had a positive perception of police. 12 scored negative.

However, 25 scored a neutral on the test. Overall, the significance of the study was .271. The

researcher is forced to fail to reject the null.

Overall, the study did not prove any of the hypotheses correctly. There were portions that

did have significance, like the service dimension of Hypothesis 1, and the law enforcement

dimension of Hypothesis 4. But overall, the limitations of the study were too great to overcome,

and the researcher is left having to fail to reject the null hypotheses for most of the dimensions

provided. However, it should be noted that there were numerous tests done throughout the data

analysis that could warrant more and more study, as the significance level was low enough to

warrant a possible change of population or change of variables to make this study work. Overall,

however, the researcher is pleased with the results of the study, as it shows the researcher that

while there is no correlation between social media and police perceptions on an overall


Foye 36

significance level, there are parts of the study that allow the researcher to speculate positively

that there are certain factors that will allow for a change to the survey questionnaire to better

represent the variables in the study, and the chance to change the sample population from college

students to other citizens in a different area for a better and more accurate data sample from a

larger population.

(VI) Discussion

Previous research for a study such as this one are few and between, as none has been

done to prove that there is a correlation between perceptions of police based off of the social

media information disseminated by the police departments and law enforcement agencies. These

studies included how to better promote ones agency to the public, the amount of users of social

media that are adults, and the sites used. There was no correlation between the two. Stanek

(2013) wrote that 82% of local police agencies have social media pages, and that is not including

the federal agencies at 81% and 71% of state agencies. The use of social media for adults on

Facebook, according to King, (2015), is 57% and adult twitter users are at 16%. This significant

portion of adults in the United States shows that social media is prevalent among our society.

The Ruddell and Jones (2013) found that out of a population of 504 students and 314

college students, it was found that 1 in 5 visited the police’s social media pages, as well as 5.4

for their Facebook page and 6.9 for Twitter. This data shows that for a study done, a population

does have an awareness of police through social media. This is significant because it shows that

when taking a sample population, that there is awareness of social media presence in the


Foye 37

population of that study. However, the Ruddell and Jones study does not account for the

perceptions of police after the following the police or after an interaction with them.

After doing this study, the researcher found that two sub-dimensions of the dependent

variable were significant, the service effectiveness dimension in Hypothesis 1 and the

standardized law enforcement variable in Hypothesis 4. Further study could be done to explore

the relationships between these variables and the publics perceptions through social media.

This study is not without its limitations. The sample population of 101 Monmouth

Students did not show any correlation between social media, policing and the perceptions of

police. The population of college students did not give an accurate portrayal of a population that

knew about social media and policing. In fact there was almost no knowledge of police on social

media, and what knowledge there was there was little of it. If this study is done again, with a

bigger population sample size, than it could be possible to get a better sample population of other

residents who understand and follow the police department on social media. With this new

information given to the researcher in this new study, a better data set can be produced by this

larger and more aware sample population.

Like any research survey questionnaire handed out to the public for research purposes,

there are many pitfalls that can occur. The validity of some of the data that was received could

come into question, as respondents could potentially have just answered the questions

dishonestly, making the data either unrealistic, and in turn, unreliable. However, even though the

data did not correlate with the hypotheses of the study, there is hope for the future that if another

study is done, then a different population and a different set of data will be found. Regardless of


Foye 38

the significance, the present study was done correctly, and the data that was significant will be

able to be used to help the field of criminal justice, as well as help the community at large one

day.

References

Adams, Joan. (2006). The "broken windows" theory. Supply House Times, 49(5), 26-27.

Dees, Tim. (2009). SOCIAL NETWORKS FOR BETTER POLICING: FACEBOOK,

TWITTER, BLOGS AND GOOGLE VOICE. Law & Order, 57(11), 32-36.

Ellison, Nicole; Boyd, Danah. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship.

Journal of Computer Meditated Communication. 13 (1) 210-230.

Hinkle, J. C. (2009). Making sense of broken windows: The relationship between perceptions of

disorder, fear of crime, collective efficacy and perceptions of crime (Order No. 3372858).

Murnik, Kathryn. (2015). Why every department should have a facebook page. Law & Order,

63(4), 60-61.

Ruddell, Rick; Jones, Nicholas. (2013). Social media and policing: matching the message to the

audience. Safer Communities, 12 (2) 64-70.

Pratt, Travis; Gau, Jacinta; Franklin, Travis. (2011). Key idea: Hirschi’s social bond/ social

control theory. Key Ideas in Criminology and Criminal Justice. 55-69


Foye 39

Scheider, Matthew. C., Chapman, Robert., & Schapiro, Amy. (2009). Towards the unification of

policing innovations under community policing. Policing, 32(4), 694-718.

Stanek, R. (2013). Social media in law enforcement. Sheriff, 65(4), 40-43.

MONMOUTH UNIVERSITYDepartment of Criminal Justice D.R.B.

INFORMED CONSENT FOR:The Perceptions of Monmouth University Students on the Impact of Social

Media on Attitudes towards Law Enforcement

We are currently engaged in a study of social media and law enforcement perceptions, and we are interested in learning how progressive the current trends are and what you can add to the research. To help gain further insights in the topic, I will ask you to fill out this survey questionnaire. Your participation in this study is voluntary and you may withdraw from participation at any time. All information will be held anonymous, so please do not write down your name, or any other identification number. Your response will be considered only in combination with that from other participants. There should be no or minimum risk for you from taking part in this research.

If you have questions at any time, you may ask me or directly contact the project director, Dr. Peter W. Liu, whose address, phone number, and email address are listed below.

By Monmouth University regulations, you are required to sign the Consent Form below. This form will be collected and filed separately from your survey questionnaire, so no one will know how you have provided the answers. Signing your name below only indicates that you have read and understand the contents of this Consent Form and that you agree to participate in this study.

Mr. John Foye Project Director Criminal Justice Department Dr. Peter W. Liu Monmouth University Criminal Justice Department West Long Branch, NJ 07764 Monmouth University (908)-721-7016 West Long Branch, NJ 07764

(732)571-7566 Email: [email protected]


Foye 40

Consent I have read the above information and I fully understand the nature of my participation. I understand that my involvement in this study will be confidential, and that if a summary of the results is used for educational or publication purposes, my individual results will not be identified. I also understand that I have the right to terminate my participation at any time during the study. Lastly, I understand the risks of participating in this study, including the self-consciousness I may feel while participating.

_________________________ ________________________________ Initials of participant Researcher’s signature after reading the

consent statement ________________________ _______________________________ Date Date

Questionnaire(Please answer as honestly as possible)

Please circle the number that best corresponds with your views, 0 being STRONGLY DISAGREE and 10 being STRONGLY AGREE:

1. Police are effective at making arrests:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2. Police are effective at responding to calls:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

3. The police in the United States are fair:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4. The police in the United States are fair when making arrests:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5. The police in the United States are fair when conducting traffic stops:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6. The police in the United States are fair when responding to and dealing with calls:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7. The police in the United States are fair when dealing with courts:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


Foye 41

8. The police in the United States are effective at conducting community service:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

9. The police in the United States are effective at running community wellness programs:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

10. The police in the United States are fair when running community programs:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11. Police patrolling the neighborhood in a squad car is effective at maintain order:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

12. Police walking the beat is effective at maintaining order in the neighborhood:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

13. Police are effective at directing traffic:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

14. Police are fair when patrolling the neighborhood in squad cars:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

15. Police are fair when patrolling the neighborhood on foot:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

16. Police are fair when directing traffic:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

17. Do you currently use social media websites? (Please circle your answer).Yes No

18. Through which device do you most often use social media sites?Laptop Tablet Cellphone Other

19. Circle all the social media sites that you currently have an account with: Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn

GooglePlus Tumblr Bubbler Flickr


Foye 42

Vine YouTube Sparx Pinterest

20. How many hours a day do you go on social media during the day? (Please circle the hours that best suits yourself)

0 1 2 3 4 5+

21. Does your local police department use social media to disseminate information?

Yes No Not Sure

22. How much attention have you paid to the info posted by your local police department on social media?

Low Medium High

23. Have you had any interaction with police since 2012? If Yes, who initiated the contact?

No Interaction I Initiated Police Initiated Other_______________

24. Was this interaction positive or negative?


25. Was the outcome positive or negative?


26. I would classify my neighborhood’s socioeconomic status as:

Low Medium High

27. Please indicate your current major:_________________

28. Please circle your gender:

Male Female

29. Please state your age:______________________

Documents

Foye 2015 THESIS