Stress In Law Enforcement Essay, Research Paper
Police Officer Stress & A ; Agency Organizational Structure.
Role Ambiguity and Role Conflict
Organizational Factors Inventory
Personality Research Form
Role Ambiguity and Role Conflict
Arrested development Model
Role Conflict Model
Suggestions for Future Research
I. POLICE OFFICER STRESS & A ; AGENCY ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
Although, jurisprudence enforcement officers deal with nerve-racking state of affairss in the normal class of their responsibilities excessive emphasis on
single officers may impair their ability to transport out their duties. In add-on to the impact on persons, inordinate
emphasis on officers agencies that the jurisprudence enforcement organisation they serve suffers a adiminished capacity to function the populace.
Therefore, in order to maintain jurisprudence enforcement organisations runing at optimum degrees, decision makers must be able to place
the causes of dysfunctional emphasis on single officers and take effectual action to better its effects.
Much of the modern-day literature on the causes of jurisprudence enforcement emphasis focuses on factors personal to the person
officer. However, other research workers suggest that an officer & # 8217 ; s ability to get by with this emphasis is hindered by the construction and
operation of the organisation within which he or she works. In other words, the statement is made that aggregate-level elements
& # 8211 ; organisational construction and operation & # 8212 ; may lend in explicating the nature and extent of an individual-level phenomenon
& # 8211 ; jurisprudence enforcement officer emphasis.
Society can be conceived as a complex agreement of single relationships and mutualities within a model of
organisations. In one signifier or another, organisations exist for assorted lengths of clip and execute an unmeasurable assortment of
undertakings ( Hage & A ; Aiken, 1970 ) . Organizations are an single & # 8217 ; s manner of voyaging through modern-day being. We are
invariably concerned with measuring our functions and places within organisations. Yet our cognition of organisations is hard
to hold on.
Not merely are we members of many organisations, but as members of our society, we rely on organisations to supply and
protect our well being. The protection provided by organisations comes in two ways. First, organisations supply our support
and amusement. A great many of our personal interactions are as representatives of one organisation to another. Positive
interactions with organisations can take to improved self-pride, occupation satisfaction and a high quality of life. Second,
organisations provide for a division of labour that allows our complex society to be. An person does non necessitate to provide all
his ain nutrient, vesture and shelter, but is free to purse the activities that provide the agencies to hold other organisations supply
these demands. Among the myriad organisations supplying services are authoritiess, and more specifically, jurisprudence enforcement
organisations. Crime, and the attendant demand for jurisprudence enforcement, are perceived as being basically of import in current
society ( Webb and Smith, 1980 ) .
As portion of that protection system about 3,080 county sheriff sections exist in the United States. Of these, 501 have
50 or more pledged forces. Sheriffs & # 8217 ; organisations are alone among jurisprudence enforcement in that they provide a full scope of
services such as constabularies patrol, probes, corrections, tribunal security and civil maps. Like all public bureaus, sheriffs are
topic to changeless public reappraisal, have limited budgets, and are under force per unit area to run expeditiously. Detecting the agencies to
allow these organisations to work better is an of import public policy end. Besides alone to sheriff & # 8217 ; s sections is the
perceptual experiences that the desirableness of occupations differs among separate divisions of the bureau. For illustration, the Corrections division
may see its maps as less desirable than work in other divisions.
A brief treatment of constabulary emphasis and organisational dysfunction follows. This research contends that much of what is called
constabularies emphasis in world evolves from the creative activity of function ambiguity and function struggle. The attendant merchandise, police emphasis,
becomes dysfunctional to the single officer when the organisational construction exacerbates the effects of the stimuli alternatively of
I. A. POLICE STRESS
& # 8220 ; Police emphasis & # 8221 ; is considered by many analysts to be an of import societal job ( Cullen, et al. , 1985 ) , and constabularies work is
idea of as nerve-racking ( Kelling and Pate, 1975 ) . Law enforcement officers must be cognizant of the dangers of psychological emphasis
( Hurrell and Kroes, 1975 ) . Stress is the consequence of & # 8220 ; demands placed on the system & # 8221 ; and need non be harmful unless it is
mismanaged or present in big measures ( Stratton, 1978 ) . However, some analysis concludes that occupational and life emphasis
can do mental and even physical jobs ( Rabkin and Stuening, 1976 A, 1976 B ; Cassell 1975 ; Stratton, 1978 ) . For
case, one survey of 2,300 officers in 29 different constabulary sections reported that 36 per centum of the officers
had serious matrimonial jobs, 23 per centum had serious intoxicant jobs, 20 per centum had serious jobs with
their kids, and ten per centum had drug jobs. Yet, constabularies were good below the norm in seeking [ medical and ] mental
intervention ( Blackmore, 1978 ; Richard and Fell, 1975 ) . The & # 8220 ; macho & # 8221 ; image of a police officer may good suppress constabularies from
seeking such intervention ( Blackmore, 1978 ) . Law enforcement officers have significantly higher rates of wellness jobs,
premature deceases, self-destructions and general infirmary admittances than other businesss ( Richard and Fell, 1975 ) .
Law enforcement emphasis has been clustered into three scenes ( Stratton, 1978 ; Stalgaitis et al. , 198_ ; Phelps, 1975 ; Wallace,
1978 ) . These are: 1 ) stressors internal to the jurisprudence enforcement system ; 2 ) stressors built-in in the jurisprudence enforcement occupation itself ;
and 3 ) stressors external to jurisprudence enforcement. Regardless of the beginning, either external or internal, the stressors described below
can be attributed to either function ambiguity, function struggle, or the interaction between them.
Many research workers have cited the insufficiency of bipartisan communications between the disposal, supervisors, and line
officers, in jurisprudence enforcement, as a compelling internal stressor ( Duffee, 1974 ; Jacobs, 1978 ; Cheek and Miller, 1979 A ;
Stalgaitis et al. , 198_ ) . In add-on, many other stressors are cited in the literature. One is unequal feedback to act upon
decision-making policies ( Cheek and Miller, 1979 B ; Sheppard, 1975 ) . Second is uncertainness about the officer & # 8217 ; s prescribed
functions and responsibilities ( May, 1976 ; Pogrebin, 1978 ) . A 3rd is menaces to the officer & # 8217 ; s positive self-image ( Wallace, 1978 ) . Fourth is
interdepartmental jobs caused by internal political relations, publicities, and favouritism ( Baldwin, 1977 ; Eisenberg, 1975 ) . A fifth is
low wage ( Farlekas, 1975 ; Menard, 1978 ) . Sixth is low work topographic point morale ( Cheek and Miller, 1979 A ) . Seventh is the officer & # 8217 ; s
fright of making & # 8220 ; something incorrect & # 8221 ; and of being criticized or investigated. Finally, the hurt generated by displacement alterations frequently
required by jurisprudence enforcement scheduling causes both emotional and physical jobs, ( Stratton, 1978 ) . In a survey of line
officers and decision makers ( National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, undated ) both groups listed & # 8220 ; disposal & # 8221 ;
as the figure one stressor. The line officer & # 8217 ; s emphasis seemed to emanate from a & # 8220 ; menace to his professionalism. & # 8221 ; The decision maker
was the man-in-the-middle, equilibrating the operating demands from below with the bids and force per unit areas from above and
from the environment. Work overload and occupation ambiguity coupled with public dealingss were cited as the most specific occupation
stressors by constabulary decision makers.
Stressors internal to the occupation may be found when constabulary and correctional officers find themselves with conflicting functions
( Eisenberg, 1975 ) . Police spend much of their clip in activities non straight related to jurisprudence enforcement maps, while
rectification officers are placed in the double conflicting function of supplying both & # 8220 ; detention [ and ] intervention & # 8221 ; ( Grusky, 1959 ; Hosford et
al. , 1975 ; Stalgaitis et al. , 198_ ) . Law enforcement officers can develop personal struggles by being placed in the place of
holding to take between one or more contradictory ends. Such contradictions include the impressions of trueness to fellow officers
and honestness which includes & # 8220 ; . . . struggles originating from enticement, fright, or inabilities to ease human agony. . . [ struggle ] in
belief with the jurisprudence or governments & # 8221 ; ( Blum, 1970 ) . In add-on to these conflicting functions, officers must get by with the tight controls
of a quasi-military organisational construction combined with the frequently unstructured working conditions of the single officer
( Symonds, 1969 ) . The officer is portion of a rigorous concatenation of bid, yet he is frequently unsupervised in his work.
Another set of stressors straight related to jurisprudence enforcement work includes the feelings of danger ( Cullen, et al. , 1985 ; Brodsky,
1977 ; Jacobs, 1978, McCall, 1979 ) , force ( May, 1976 ) , job resolution ( Johnson, 1977 ) , deficiency of grasp of their occupation
attempts by the disposal and public, peer group force per unit area, function struggle ( Hillgren and Bond, undated A ) ; and the menace of jurisprudence
suits ( Jochums, 1978 ) . In research conducted by Cullen et al. , danger was an highly of import stressor. Yet, their topics
worked in comparatively crime-free communities. Few, if any, officers knew of colleagues that were physically injured on the occupation.
Cullen concluded that where the potency for hurt exists, this & # 8220 ; built-in and ever-present [ status ] in their occupational function
. . . may turn out hard for many officers to negociate and therefore may precipitate nerve-racking conditions. & # 8221 ; In a survey straight related to
existent unsafe and baleful state of affairss, Singleton ( 1977 ) found that the happening of deadly or near-lethal experiences does
non look to be correlated with interpersonal emphasis beyond that of get bying with any enquiries caused by the incident. However,
the officer & # 8217 ; s organic structure is frequently called on to be in a province of heightened watchfulness, and at times he is responsible for another person & # 8217 ; s
life ( Stratton, 1978 ) . Yet, jurisprudence enforcement officers consider themselves to be experts or governments in covering with force
( Skolnick, 1966 ) .
Another bunch of stressors includes those external to existent jurisprudence enforcement. These encompass job-related stressors such as
the deficiency of public support for their occupation ( May, 1976 ; McCall, 1979 ) . Law enforcement officers are frequently portrayed in the media
in an unfavourable visible radiation ( Jacobs, 1978 ; May, 1976 ; Blum, 1970 ) , and are frequently abashed or hesitating to uncover their
businesss to others ( Johnson, 1978 ) . In add-on, personal stressors such as matrimonial jobs, minority position and other
personal jobs that may be outside the work topographic point can impact occupation public presentation ( Blackmore, 1978 ) .
The above treatment lends support to the proposition that both the map and construction of jurisprudence enforcement organisations
are major beginnings of single emphasis. Therefore, a greater attempt must be made to place and take the conditions that lead to this
strain ( Baldwin, 1977, Handy, 1988 ) .
I. B. ROLE AMBIGUITY AND ROLE CONFLICT
Much of the research on constabulary emphasis overemphasizes the psychological degree of analysis. This misplaced focal point may deviate
attending from the importance of the organisational scene ( Handy, 1988 ) . Bacharach, et al. , ( 1986 ) suggest that emphasis is the
attendant application of many organisational constituents as opposed to the physiological differences of the persons. The
effects of emphasis are exacerbated when people work in either highly loosely or tightly structured organisations with the
ensuing regulations and ordinances that are imposed. These organisational disfunctions create an unwanted work environment.
Among those elements considered & # 8220 ; dominant & # 8221 ; occupation stressors are: function struggle, function ambiguity, organisational wages unfairness,
and deficiency of engagement in determination devising ( Martin, 1984 ) . Most reactions to function struggle are & # 8220 ; dysfunctional for the
organisation. . . and self-defeating for the individual. . . & # 8221 ; ( Kahn, et al. , 1964, 65 ) . Both function ambiguity and function struggle are
significantly related to most all the factors listed in the constabulary emphasis subdivision ( Bedeian, et al. , 1981 ; Miles, 1976 )
Role struggle can originate from three slightly differing beginnings. The first two are internal to the organisation and the 3rd is
external. The first occurs when successful completion of the assigned occupation map requires action outside the allowable
processs, yet established processs must be followed and non broken. Second, is the conflicting occupation outlooks placed on
an single by different groups or persons within the organisation. Third is the struggle that arises from expected occupation
maps and beliefs or ranks in organisations outside the work group ( Kahn, et al. , 1965 ) .
Role struggle is frequently manifested in & # 8220 ; overload. & # 8221 ; Overload occurs when a struggle is perceived between appropriate undertakings in
puting precedences. Again, the usual response to function struggle is withdrawal. To the person, the effects of function struggle
and ambiguity are similar ; & # 8220 ; low occupation satisfaction, low assurance, [ and ] a high sense of futility. . . & # 8221 ; ( Kahn, et al. , 1964, 380 ) .
Conflict can besides look as a consequence of a clang between public functions and private ideals. This struggle frequently leads to hapless
organisational public presentation ( Bernard & A ; White, 1986 ) . However, Kahn states that function struggle and ambiguity are & # 8220 ; independent
beginnings of emphasis ; either or both of them may be present in any given function & # 8221 ; ( 1964, 89 ) .
Role ambiguity is increased by the deficiency of handiness of a clear, concise, and successful communicating of the information
needed for a individual to finish the assigned undertakings. Examples of the needed information include, & # 8220 ; rights, responsibilities and
duties of the office. & # 8221 ; Along with the cognition of what actions will dispatch the & # 8220 ; duties of office and how
these activities can best be performed & # 8221 ; ( Kahn, et al. , 1964, 22 ) . Conflicting information of this kind besides increases function
While life itself has much ambiguity, and we can non foretell many results or personal events, function ambiguity has many of the
same emotional consequences as function struggle. & # 8220 ; Ambiguity leads to increased emotional tenseness and to decreased satisfaction with one & # 8217 ;
occupation. It besides contributes significantly to a sense of futility and to a loss of assurance & # 8221 ; ( Kahn, et al. , 1964, 85 ) . Kahn ( 1964 )
points out that lending to the sense of assurance is the regard with which 1 is viewed with by his colleagues. Role
ambiguity has changing effects on personal dealingss. In general, keeping close dealingss with colleagues in equivocal
state of affairss is hard. Therefore, the higher the ambiguity degree, the farther apart personal distance becomes which makes
communications even harder ( Van Sell et al. , 1981 ) . In bend, this leads to a coiling addition in ambiguity.
I. C. ORGANIZATIONAL DYSFUNCTIONS
While it can be unsafe to see an organisation as a type alternatively of a system of variables ( Stogdill, 1971 ; Udy, 1959 ) ;
organisational & # 8220 ; formalisation & # 8221 ; is used as a variable stand foring the sum of trust placed on regulations, ordinances and
enforcement to obtain the behaviour the organisation prefers. Formalization is & # 8220 ; the grade of work standardisation and the
sum of divergence that is allowed from criterions. . . [ a ] high grade of formalisation implies non merely a preponderance of regulations
specifying occupations and stipulating what is to be done, but besides the enforcement of those regulations & # 8221 ; ( Aiken and Hage, 1966, 499 ) .
Aiken and Hage cite surveies reenforcing their thoughts that show: 1 ) a public organisation with & # 8220 ; an about obsessional trust on
modus operandis and processs & # 8221 ; has a great trade of worker dissatisfaction and small employee coherence ; 2 ) an Air Force tracking
station with & # 8220 ; great accent on regulations & # 8221 ; where the employees felt their work was & # 8220 ; meaningless ; & # 8221 ; and 3 ) a state of affairs where
supervisors & # 8217 ; increased force per unit area resulted in a diminution in morale. The deficiency of clip or liberty, or merely the sensed deficiency of
control over how one operates and performs the occupation is a stressor ( Hall, 1986 ) . Yet, Bamber, Snowball and Tubbs ( 1989 )
found that senior professionals perceived less emphasis in structured organisations than those in unstructured organisations. This
supports the work by Podsakoff, Williams and Todor ( 1986 ) which holds that formalisation of work regulations has the ability to
cut down emphasis in both professional and non-professional workers. They go on to propose that the more structured or formal the
regulations, the higher the degree of committedness to the organisation.
The treatment to this point suggests that increased degrees of single emphasis, as measured by function ambiguity and function struggle,
are unwanted and that organisational disfunction is a lending factor to both. The construct can be expanded so that the
decrease of emphasis will promote productiveness by supervising that allows & # 8220 ; an equal grade of freedom for enterprise in undertaking
public presentation & # 8221 ; ( Stogdill, 1971 ) . But, morale can be thought of as the & # 8220 ; freedom from restraint & # 8221 ; ( Stogdill, 1971 ) . The research
does non do the connexion between impressions of productiveness, coherence, and morale on the one manus and emphasis on the
other. However, morale is related to the development of emphasis as defined in the research. Stogdill defines the factors that make
up morale as:
1 ) the clear definition of functions, which permits each member to cognize what he is expected to make, and 2 ) the proviso of adequate
freedom for enterprise so that each member can assail his undertaking with assurance and a feeling of achievement ( 1964, 38 ) .
Stogdill & # 8217 ; s definition of morale is the decrease of emphasis and a proper grade of organisational formalisation. A major portion of
condemnable justness literature trades with the combination of low morale and dissatisfaction in jurisprudence enforcement officers. Cheek and
Miller ( 1983 ) name this the & # 8220 ; double-bind & # 8221 ; of corrections. As an illustration, guards who are over-controlled by the disposal
react negatively and be given to be severe and inflexible with inmates ( Blau, et al. , 1986 ) . Yet, if guards tend to be
uncompromising in implementing ordinances, they can lose control of the inmates ( Wright, 1977 ; Clare and Kramer, 1976 ) . The
guards are dependent on the inmates & # 8217 ; cooperation and acquiescence to keep their control. Formal, extremely structured
organisations frequently tend to hold developed & # 8220 ; scripts & # 8221 ; learned through assorted organisational socialisation, work experience and
symbolic direction that can take to a signifier of & # 8220 ; mindless & # 8221 ; behaviour. Part of this & # 8220 ; mindlessness & # 8221 ; is a deficiency of watchfulness in
operations, altered perceptual experiences, headlong decisions and unsound acquisition. None of these factors is positive for either the
single or the organisation. Each serves merely to increase function struggle and ambiguity ( Ashforth and Fried, 1988 ) .
II. RESEARCH ISSUES
The Sheriff and Undersheriff & # 8230 ; , felt they had a job between the divisions, particularly between patrol and corrections, in
work attitude and general bid response. These issues were displayed by the evident dissatisfaction and deficiency of
enthusiasm for operations in the new state-of-the-art corrections installation. The proposed research examines the proposition that
the issues of jurisprudence enforcement stressors were non decently connected to the existent undertakings facing the single officer, and
the root cause of single emphasis could be organizationally bound. Could the organisation itself, the quasi-military construction
combined with the great single discretion available to single officers implemented by an improper degree of formalisation,
generate these stressor conditions?
Possibly the concepts of function ambiguity and function struggle could explicate the elements of jurisprudence enforcement stressors discussed
above. The first research inquiry, is: 1 ) Is jurisprudence enforcement officer emphasis, as measured by function ambiguity and function struggle, the
consequence of organisational disfunction?
Drawn-out observations of assorted sheriff & # 8217 ; s sections leads to the belief that emphasis is related to the division where one works.
The corrections division, in non-scientific observation, is perceived by officers to be a less desirable and of lower position than the
other constabulary maps in the section. The inquiry arises 2 ) Is Stress related to the Current Division where one works?
The different divisions of the section perform separate undertakings under widely different working environments. This leads to the
inquiry 3 ) Does the division affect the perceptual experiences of the section & # 8217 ; s demands as measured by the Organizational Factors
Inventory and if the reply is yes so is at that place a relationship between formalisation and the current division? ( 1.Common
cognition, would take one to believe that in any multi-division organisation the outlook would be for differences on the
points measured by the Organizational Factors Inventory associating to the demands and maps of the divisions. While the current
division may hold an consequence of formalisation, it is dubious that formalisation will consequence division. Unless the statement that signifier
creates function holds true. )
The intent of the research is to analyze the association between the single & # 8217 ; s perceptual experiences of group degree properties and
single degree perceptual experiences of workers traits in the different operating divisions of the & # 8230 ; Department. The first aggregate-level
property, organisational formalisation, is measured by the & # 8220 ; Hage and Aiken Formalization Inventory & # 8221 ; ( Aiken and Hage, 1966 ;
Hage and Aiken, 1967A ; 1967B ; 1970 ) . The other aggregate-level properties, function ambiguity and function struggle, are measured by
the & # 8220 ; Index of Job-Related Tensions in Organizations of Robert L. Kahn, et al. , ( 1964 ) .
Incorporated into the survey is an instrument developed in cooperation with the Sheriff used to mensurate organisational concerns
of the disposal which were specific to the section, the & # 8220 ; Organizational Factors Inventory. & # 8221 ; Two other instruments
were besides utilized. The first is a brief demographic questionnaire on personal information and professional background. Second,
is the Jackson Personality Research Form.
Robert L. Kahn et al. , ( 1964 ) developed an & # 8220 ; Index of Job-Related Tensions in Organizations. & # 8221 ; The Tension Index consists of
two parts: function ambiguity and function struggle.
II. A. ROLE AMBIGUITY
Role ambiguity steps such points as an single & # 8217 ; s uncertainness about his or her duties and what others expect from
him/her on the occupation actions. It besides measures a degree of organisational ambiguity. Role ambiguity is measured in an person by
such inquiries as: 1 ) being ill-defined on merely what the range and duties of your occupation are ; 2 ) thought that you will non be
able to fulfill the conflicting demands of assorted people over you ; and 3 ) non cognizing merely what other people you work with
expect of you. On the study used, eight inquiries composed the function ambiguity graduated table.
II. B. ROLE CONFLICT
The 2nd facet of the Tension Index, function struggle reveals another facet of emphasis. These struggles & # 8220 ; within the construction of
the work function are major beginnings of emphasis & # 8221 ; ( Kahn, et al. , 1964, 59 ) . While these are frequently & # 8220 ; minor or occasional thorns & # 8221 ; they
can make personal emphasis. Kahn constructs function struggle from the constructs of & # 8220 ; function overload. . . [ and ] person-role struggles & # 8221 ;
( 59 ) . Within this model, inquiries arise such as: 1 ) feeling that you have excessively small authorization to transport out the duties
assigned to you ; 2 ) feeling that you have excessively heavy a work burden, one that you can & # 8217 ; t perchance complete during an ordinary working day ;
3 ) feeling that you have to make things on the occupation that are against your better opinion ; and 4 ) feeling that you are non to the full
qualified to manage your occupation. Seven inquiries constitute the function struggle graduated table. Both graduated tables are scored with Likert type
II. C. FORMALIZATION INVENTORY
The & # 8220 ; Hage and Aiken Formalization Inventory & # 8221 ; ( Aiken and Hage, 1966 ; Hage and Aiken, 1967 A ; 1967 B: 1970 ) consists of
15 inquiries. The formalisation index is broken down into five different graduated tables: occupation codification, regulation observation, regulation manual,
occupation descriptions and specificity of occupation descriptions ( Miller, 1983 ; Aiken and Hage, 1966 ) . The occupation codification graduated table is made
up of such inquiries as: 1 ) I feel that I am my ain foreman in most affairs ; or 2 ) people here are allowed to make about as they
please. Five inquiries make up a & # 8220 ; occupation codification & # 8221 ; graduated table.
Hage and Aiken & # 8217 ; s & # 8220 ; index of regulation observation & # 8221 ; consists of replies to two inquiries: 1 ) the employees are invariably being
investigated for regulation misdemeanors ; and 2 ) people here feel as though they are invariably watched to see that they obey all the regulations.
The regulation manual Question is: there is no regulation manual. Along the same lines, a inquiry on the employee & # 8217 ; s occupation description asks
whether a complete, written occupation description exists for his or her occupation. The last formalisation index, & # 8220 ; specificity of occupation
description, & # 8221 ; incorporates six inquiries. These inquiries are: 1 ) we are to follow rigorous operating processs at all clip ; and 2 )
everyone has a specific occupation to make. These single inquiries are scored with a Likert Scale.
II. D. ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS INVENTORY
The last of the organisational instruments, the & # 8220 ; Organizational Factors Inventory, & # 8221 ; is a questionnaire consisting of 16 points
taken from a & # 8220 ; Nominal Group Technique & # 8221 ; run intoing held with about 15 determination and policy shapers of the
section, This consists of seven indexes. The first index consists of two inquiries, trades with staffing degrees, and is designed
to find whether the officers perceive a deficiency of staff to carry through the undertakings at manus. The 2nd index concerns equipment and
is made up of two inquiries such as the sum and quality of the equipment available.
Third is the division differences & # 8217 ; index. The five inquiries included here are designed to find the perceptual experiences of the
officers as their division is seen by others in differing divisions and their cognition of other divisions. Fourth is the wage inquiry
inquiring & # 8220 ; sing what I do, I am reasonably paid. & # 8221 ; Fifth is three inquiries covering with organisational factors, such as the physical
separation of parts of the organisation and deficiency of administrative staff. Sixth is a inquiry on supervising. The last index
concerns public dealingss and consists of two inquiries refering the demand for increased public dealingss attempts. Again the
single inquiries are scored with a Likert Scale.
II. E. PERSONALITY RESEARCH FORM
The 6th subdivision, the Jackson Personality Research Form, is besides an built-in portion of this research. McNeil and Rubin defined
personality as & # 8220 ; . . . the form of characteristic behaviours and ideas we use to cover with our environment & # 8221 ; ( 1977, 447 ) .
& # 8220 ; The Personality Research Form represents an application of developments in the countries of personality theory, personality
appraisal, and trial theory to personality trials & # 8221 ; ( Jackson, 1984, 4 ) . The graduated tables are based on & # 8220 ; carefully defined theoretical. . .
constructs of what each graduated table should mensurate & # 8221 ; ( Jackson, 1984, 9 ) . The PRF graduated table is designed to give & # 8220 ; a set of tonss. . .
loosely relevant to the operation of persons in a broad assortment of state of affairss. It therefore focuses chiefly upon countries of normal
operation, instead than upon abnormal psychology & # 8221 ; ( Jackson, 1984, 4 ) . It provides a step of 21 personality traits
coupled with an extra cogency graduated table. A complete description of the graduated tables are in the appendix.
III. A. Sample Selection
The population frame for this survey was the pledged forces of
the Erie County, New York, Sheriff & # 8217 ; s Department. All sworn
officers, except the Sheriff, Undersheriff and direct members of
the disposal were included in the sampling frame. Table 1
includes a sum-up of some of the demographic features of
The unit of analysis in this survey is the single Deputy Sheriff
regardless of rank, except as celebrated above, in the & # 8230 ; Department.
Two processs were used to garner the information. The first was a
stratified, by displacement, non-probability convenience sample. The
process used is as follows:
The revolving agenda of five yearss on and two yearss away has one
twenty-four hours where there are more people on responsibility than the remainder of the
hebdomad. This is known as a & # 8220 ; Wheel Day. & # 8221 ; Memos were sent to all
division displacement commanding officers with instructions to direct as many
forces as they could to the preparation room in the Holding Center.
The memo requested that officers of differing features and
experience be referred. The first session was held at 5:00 A.M. to
catch the 12:00 to 8:00 A.M. displacement. At 9:00 A.M. the 2nd
session with the twenty-four hours displacement people was held. On the following & # 8220 ; wheel
twenty-four hours & # 8221 ; at 2:00 P.M. , another session with the twenty-four hours displacement officers
( more than half the section works the twenty-four hours displacement ) was
conducted. At 5:00 P.M. a session to include some eventide displacement
people was held. This resulted in a sample size of 63