skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 237965 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Comparing Safety Outcomes in Police Use-Of-Force Cases for Law Enforcement Agencies That Have Deployed Conducted Energy Devices and A Matched Comparison Group That Have Not: A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation
Author(s): Bruce Taylor Ph.D.; Daniel Woods; Bruce Kubu; Chris Koper Ph.D.; Bill Tegeler; Jason Cheney; Mary Martinez; James Cronin; Kristin Kappelman
Date Published: September 2009
Page Count: 101
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Grant Number: 2006-IJ-CX-0028
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Dataset: DATASET 1
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Document; Document (Online)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This is among the first studies to use a quasi-experiment to compare safety outcomes for officers and citizens with law enforcement agencies (n=7) that deploy conducted-energy devices (CEDs) compared with matched law enforcement agencies (n=6) that do not deploy CEDs.
Abstract: The agencies that use CEDs had improved safety outcomes on six of nine safety measures compared to the matched non-CED agencies. These six measures pertained to officer injuries; suspect injuries, including severe injuries; officers and suspects who received injuries that required medical attention; and suspects who received an injury that resulted in the suspect being taken to an emergency treatment facility. For CED agencies, in some cases officers’ actual use of a CED was associated with improved safety outcomes compared to other less-lethal weapons. There were no differences, however, between the CED and non-CED agencies on the outcomes of the number of suspect deaths, officer severe injuries, and officer injuries that required hospitalization. Based on these findings, the study concludes that CEDs can be an effective weapon in preventing or minimizing physical struggles in use-of-force cases. Agencies should consider the utility of the CED as a way to avoid up-close combative situations and reduce injuries to officers and suspects. The study controlled for a variety of incident factors: force used by an officer, time frame of an incident, suspect race/gender/age, suspect resistant behavior, and suspect weapon use. It also controlled for agency-related factors: agency policy on CEDs, size/density of the agency, and population density of the jurisdiction. For the agencies that used CEDs, data were collected 2 years before deployment and 2 years after CED deployment. For the non-CED agencies, data were collected for 4 years over a similar period. 20 tables and 109 references
Main Term(s): Police weapons
Index Term(s): Comparative analysis; Lawful use of force; Less lethal technologies; NIJ final report; Police safety; Tasers
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.