An Analysis of the New York City Police Department's 'Stop-and-Frisk' Policy in the Context of Claims of Racial Bias.¶
Gelman, A., Fagan, J., & Kiss, A. (2007). An Analysis of the New York City Police Department's 'Stop-and-Frisk' Policy in the Context of Claims of Racial Bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 102(479), 813-823.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Bycatch
- Law enforcement: a sweep, raid, or stop-and-frisk programme aimed at a target population also detains, searches, or charges non-target people who match the selector imprecisely, and the burden is uncounted in the operation's arrest metric.
This sourceAnalyzes ~175,000 stops and documents the large non-target burden of stop-and-frisk relative to its hit rate.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
Shows most NYPD stops end without arrest (about 1 in 8 to 1 in 10), but does not frame this as uncounted burden on non-targets or a missing metric.
“Most stops do not lead to arrests, and most arrests do not come from stops.”
- Law enforcement: a sweep, raid, or stop-and-frisk programme aimed at a target population also detains, searches, or charges non-target people who match the selector imprecisely, and the burden is uncounted in the operation's arrest metric.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:5fdd43f02ae2 · see in the full table