WHY DOES THIS MATTER IN POLICING?
A high-stress encounter, such as a use of force incident, takes up a great deal of attentional load. Following
such encounters, it’s not uncommon for an officer’s recollection of an incident to contain inconsistencies when
compared with witness accounts, the recollections of other officers, and video and audio footage. Sometimes,
members of the public or the investigative team see these inconsistencies as evidence the officer is deliberately
trying to distort the details of the incident to defend their actions. But due to the limitations of attentional
load and the focus of attention, inconsistencies or inaccuracies in an officer’s account are not at all surprising
and certainly are not necessarily indicative of deception. This is especially important to remember with video
evidence. Video often captures things that, due to the consequences of finite attentional resources, the officer
is not capturing at the time. It can be easy to look at a video and think, “How did the officer not see that?”
But what looks obvious to us, viewing the video from outside the incident, is very different than the officer’s
observations during this tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving event. And the U.S. Supreme Court has told us,
in Graham v. Connor, that courts and juries cannot use the benefit of hindsight to determine whether an
officer’s use of force was appropriate.
WHAT OTHER FACTORS IMPACT POLICE OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION?
To add to the problems of limited attentional load, there is also the impact of stress on human physiology.
Officers involved in use of force incidents are subject to extreme stress. When we perceive a threat, a
complex process immediately commences in the brain, resulting in, among other things, the release of adrena-
line and cortisol. This is what prepares the body for fight or flight, a response that has allowed our species to
survive predatory attacks. But side effects of this process can impede an officer’s ability to properly perceive all
available stimulus. Side effects of the fight-or-flight response include:
Selective attention, also known as tunnel vision. There will be an immediate tendency to focus on the per-
ceived threat, to the exclusion of all other stimuli. As a result, the officer may fail to perceive peripheral
activities.
Auditory exclusion. This is the hearing equivalent of tunnel vision. People operating in high-stress situations
may hear sounds and voices asmuffled or distant—or may lose hearing entirely.
Loss of motor skills. As a person’s heart rate reaches the 175 beats per-minute mark, they begin to lose
their gross motor skills, which can compromise an officer’s ability to effectively use their firearm or apply
some type of defensive tactic technique. Officers also face environmental factors such as inadequate light-
ing, inclement weather and the presence of factors known to the officer entering the situation (e.g., en-
countering a person near the scene of a “shots fired” call).
THE TAKEAWAYS
Police officers are human beings. A job title, training, or experience does not mean an officer’s brain will pro-
cess information any different than that of a civilian. And yet, too often the public and even law enforcement
agencies place expectations on officers that fail to account for the limitations of sensory input and processing.
Understanding basic concepts about human perception and recall will help law enforcement leaders:
Ensure use of force investigations are fair and impartial
Explain discrepancies between officer accounts and video from critical incidents
Better communicate to the media and public the dynamic factors that affect officer actions during use of
force incidents.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Jason Helfer is a graduate of the FABI National Academy and has been a law enforcement officer for over 17 years. He has served in various
roles for his department, including road patrol, crime scene processing, community services and internal affairs.
Mike Ranalli retired in 2016 after 10 years as chief of the Glenville (NY) Police Department. Mike began his career in 1984 with the Colonie
(NY) Police Department and held the ranks of patrol officer, sergeant, detective sergeant and lieutenant. He is also a Certified Force Science
Analyst, an attorney and a frequent presenter on various legal issues including search and seizure, use of force, wrongful convictions and civil
liability.
Reprinted with permission from Lexipol.
www.gachiefs.com • Page 19 • 2nd Quarter Newsletter