OnPolicing Blog

Police in the U.S. are faced with the ongoing challenge of forging positive relationships with the communities they serve. Communities are not one homogenous group, however, and some relationships are more significantly strained in communities that have a long history of conflict with the police. Communication mediates these relationships and can play a significant role in creating successful community partnerships.

Intergroup Communication and Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT)

In intergroup situations, where different social groups interact (such as “us versus them” or “police vs. civilians”), social group memberships often override individual characteristics, guiding how people communicate and relate to one another (Dragojevic & Giles 2014). Research on intergroup communication often focuses on groups with salient group identities and significant anxieties between them. Some common group identities include race, gender, sexual orientation, social class, religion, or political affiliation.

Intergroup anxiety can be broadly defined as anxiety or arousal people experience when anticipating or engaging in an intergroup interaction because of negative expectations of rejection or discrimination (Stephan, 2014). Those affected may feel apprehension, uneasiness, or distress. An interaction between a police officer and a member of the public would be an intergroup situation under many contexts, especially when there is a significant power differential (e.g., traffic stops and arrests). Intergroup anxieties in interactions can become more complex when dealing with conflicting social identities, such as those between police and ethnic minorities (Dixon, 2008).

The challenge of building bridges between the police and community members, particularly those with high intergroup anxieties (such as ethnic minorities), remains an omnipresent and enduring issue in modern policing. Communication is the foundation of these social relationships, and understanding the social psychology of communication is critical for success.

Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT) is a social psychological theory that explains how individuals adapt their communication styles across different contexts and how social distance is managed during interactions. Communication perceived as accommodating can cause two people to converge communicatively toward one another. Convergence explains what happens during an interaction when people adapt to each other’s behavior and speech patterns. It can be helpful during an interaction with high levels of intergroup anxiety. Some examples of behaviors in an interaction that could be considered convergence would be an officer demonstrating respect, overall listening, pleasantness, helpfulness, and approachability with a member of the public (Dixon et al, 2008). Studies have found that when officers were perceived as more accommodating towards members of the public, those members of the public positively evaluated the officers and their services (Giles et al., 2006; Maguire et al., 2024).

Additionally, a research study showed that more officer accommodation, as perceived by the public, led to increased trust in the police by the public (Hajek et al., 2006). On the other hand, communication perceived as non-accommodating can cause divergence (adjustments to be more dissimilar), damaging relationships, and resulting in distrust between groups (Giles, 2016). Divergence is often associated with adverse reactions and can be perceived as hostility toward a communication partner, resulting in communication being more representative of an interaction between two groups as opposed to two individuals. Some examples of behaviors in an interaction that could be considered divergence are dismissiveness, indifference, impatience, and patronization (Dixon et al., 2008). Understanding convergence and divergence can help practitioners navigate interactions with community members who have strained histories with law enforcement, especially those with uneven power differentials.

 

Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT) provides a conceptual framework that can help to bridge the gap between law enforcement agencies and disenfranchised communities.

-Italiano, Ramirez, & Chattopadhyay (2021); Giles, Linz, Bonilla, & Gomez (2012)

Police-Public Partnerships

In the wake of the Civil Rights movement, the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice (1967) marked a significant shift in policing approaches, making an about-face from the previous era of reform (Kelling & Moore, 1989). The Commission called for “long-range, full-scale effort[s] to acquaint the police and the community with each other’s problems and to stimulate action aimed at solving those problems” (President’s Commission, 1967, p. 100). Furthermore, the Commission acknowledged the importance of how police communicate with the public.

One strategy endorsed by the Commission was “Team Policing.” Team policing, coined from the Aberdeen project in post-World War II Scotland, was initially designed to boost morale and esprit de corps. It underwent several evolutionary iterations—first in England and then in the United States. Team policing would evolve to encompass three key elements: (1) assigning officers to specific geographical areas, (2) fostering stronger team cohesion, and (3) improving internal and external communication (Sherman, Milton, Kelly, & MacBride, 1973). While team policing shared similarities with community policing, another study emphasized that team policing had narrower objectives, primarily focused on enhancing crime control by establishing channels for extracting information from the community. In contrast, community policing “represents a fundamental redefinition of the basic police role” (Samuel Walker, 1993, p. 39).

Team policing was akin to one group, the police officers, trying to build the bridge while holding tightly onto their side, isolated from the other group, the community. The approach had challenges and failed to cultivate lasting, meaningful community relationships because it hindered the essential exchange of information and collaboration necessary for successful crime prevention and control. As a result, community policing emerged as the prevailing paradigm, aiming to build a more inclusive and collaborative bridge between the police and the public.

 

People yearn for personal contact of a non-adversarial character, with police.

-Manning (1984, p. 212)

 

Despite the wealth of literature exploring police and public partnerships, the concepts and terminology have often become diluted. As Robert Trojanowicz (1990) lamented: “Community policing is not police-community relations.” The term “community policing” has unfortunately lost its scholarly significance and has become a common buzzword. This dilution is further compounded when the term is used merely as a political platitude. As a result, pragmatic police administrators face significant challenges in effectively implementing community policing. The concept of community policing is intricate, marked by its hyper-local and multi-dimensional nature, which often adds to its opacity. In this post, we emphasize the importance of evidence-based interventions prioritizing successful intergroup communication and communication accommodation, offering a valuable opportunity to address these challenges and cultivate meaningful connections between law enforcement and communities.

A 1984 study proposed that community policing is founded on 10 assumptions. Among these assumptions, the fourth asserts that “people yearn for personal contact of a non-adversarial character, with police” (Manning, 1984, p. 212). This assumption is highlighted because contact serves as a communication prerequisite, and communication is estimated to encompass 97% of police service (Thompson, 1983). Communication has been broadly accepted as the primary tool for law enforcement to meet their fundamental challenges (Sklansky, 2011; Womack and Finley, 1986).

Toward Applying Accommodative Practices

Communication theories offer more than a half-century of convincing research and evidence on communication strategies and interventions that reduce conflict and intergroup anxieties (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006; Hill et al., 2021; Nuño et al., 2022). Our contention is rooted in the proposition that CAT provides a conceptual framework that can help bridge the gap between law enforcement agencies and disenfranchised communities (Italiano, Ramirez, & Chattopadhyay, 2021; Giles, Linz, Bonilla, & Gomez, 2012). Further, it empowers pragmatic police administrators with an evidence-informed approach to navigate complex intergroup histories when delivering internal and public messaging. CAT also provides a valuable perspective when facing what Maguire and colleagues (2023) have referred to as accommodative dilemmas, where police leaders are subjected to the strain of attempting to convey a message in a way that is accommodating both to the community and the officers they lead.

For example, Maguire and Giles (2022) examined statements made by criminal justice officials, including police chiefs, in the aftermath of controversial instances involving questionable uses of force and found police executives rarely expressed sympathy or empathy during social media posts, news releases, and press conferences. Empathy and sympathy, when used appropriately in context, can promote a successful interaction and encourage convergence between conversational partners.

Where police executives issued public statements following the death of a community member as a result of police use of force, they expressed empathy or sympathy for the decedent in only 26.7% of all 30 cases reviewed in the study. Included in this study, however, was an example of empathy or sympathy by a police executive. It was a statement from Prince George’s County (MD) Police Chief Hank Stawinski, following the death of William Green, who stated: “I want to extend my heartfelt sorrow and sympathies to the Green family.” In this instance, the police executive acknowledged the humanity of the decedent and his family.

A more straightforward example of law enforcement being more accommodating could be seen in how an officer interacts with a person during a traffic stop. Using the examples mentioned earlier of convergence, an officer may be respectful during the interaction (introduce him- or herself and allow the same for the driver), allow time for the driver to express themselves (vent frustrations, explain why the violation occurred), be helpful during the interaction (explain how the driver can correct a violation, provide directions), and empathize with the driver when appropriate.

Evidence to Action: How CAT Can Best Inform Practice

With an understanding and appreciation that communication is the primary tool for law enforcement to meet the fundamental challenges they face (Sklansky 2011; Womack and Finley 1986), and considering the research and evidence behind CAT, we propose the following agenda for police leaders to consider when applying the principles of communication accommodation:

• Develop Community Partnerships to Support Intergroup Interventions. Evidence from intergroup contact theory has been used for decades to successfully resolve conflict between groups (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). Intergroup communication interventions (Hill & Giles, 2021) seek to reduce friction, improve intergroup relationships, and increase empathy and trust, allowing for stronger relationships and partnerships.
• Educate Your Messengers in Intergroup Dynamics. Interactions between police and members of the public are a classic example of intergroup contact (Choi & Giles, 2012). Understanding the dynamics during intergroup communication can better inform us about the challenges of sustaining or improving relationships between police and the public.
• Understand When Your Message Will Be Perceived as Non-accommodative and Provide an Explanation of Your Position. People who experience non-accommodation or have a desire to understand the intentions of the speaker can influence the recipient’s evaluation of the speaker (Gasiorek & Giles, 2013). Demonstrating an understanding of outgroups’ anxieties can show empathy and minimize the likelihood of a negative response from outgroup members (Maguire & Giles, 2022).

In conclusion, understanding intergroup communication and Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT) can be a valuable tool for police chiefs in improving interactions between police officers and the public. By recognizing how communication mediates relationships and learning how to implement accommodative practices, police chiefs can bridge gaps, increase empathy, and foster better understanding between the police and the various communities they serve. Building stronger community partnerships through effective intergroup communication can lead to more positive police-community relations and a safer, more cohesive society.

---

References

Choi, C., & Giles, H. (2012). Intergroup messages in policing the community. In H. Giles (Ed.), Handbook of intergroup communication (pp. 264–277). Routledge.

Dixon, T., Schell, T.L., Giles, H., & Drogos, K. L. (2008). The influence of race in police-civilian interactions: A content analysis of videotaped interactions taken during Cincinnati police traffic stops. Journal of Communication, 58(3), 530–549.

Dragojevic, M., & Giles, H. (2014). Language and interpersonal communication: Their intergroup dynamics. In C. R. Berger (Ed.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 21–59). De Gruyter Mouton.

Giles, H., Fortman, J., Dailey, R., Barker, V., Hajek, C., Anderson, M. C., et al. (2006). Communication accommodation: Law enforcement and the public. In R. M. Dailey & B. A. Le Poire (Eds.), Applied interpersonal communication matters: Family, health, and community relations (pp. 241–269). New York: Peter Lang.

Gasiorek, J. & Giles, H. (2013). Accommodating the interactional dynamics of conflict management. International Journal of Society, Culture, and Language, 1(1), 10–21.

Giles, H., Maguire, E.R., Hill, S. L. (2023). The police and those policed as intergroup par excellence: Current trends and future prospects. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 26(4), 781-795. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221142317 

Giles, H., Linz, D., Bonilla, D., & Gomez, M. L. (2012). Police stops of and interactions with Latino and White (non-Latino) drivers: Extensive policing and communication accommodation. Communication Monographs, 79(4), 407–427.

Giles, H. (Ed.). (2016). Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal and social identities across contexts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hajek, C., Barker, V., Giles, H., Louw, J., Pecchioni, L., Makoni, S., et al. (2006). Communication dynamics of police-civilian encounters: American and African interethnic data. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 35(3), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475750601026909

Hill, S. L., Giles, H., & Maguire, E. R. (2021). VOICES: A theory-driven intervention for improving relationships between police and the public. Policing: An International Journal, 44(5), 786–799. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-09-2020-0154

Italiano, R., Ramirez, F., & Chattopadhyay, S. (2021). Perceptions of police use of force among U.S. adults and the role of communication accommodation in improving police-civilian interactions. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 49(6), 669–686.

Kelling, G. L., & Moore, M. H. (1989). The evolving strategy of policing (No. 4). U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

Maguire, E. R., Giles, H., Hill, S. L. (2023). Caught in the middle: Accommodative dilemmas in police-community relations. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 29(4), 486–496. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000399

Maguire, E. R., & Wells, W. (2002). Community policing as communication reform. In H. Giles (Ed.), Law enforcement, communication and community (pp. 33–66). John Benjamins.

Maguire, E. R., & Giles, H. (2022). Public expressions of empathy and sympathy by U.S. criminal justice officials after controversial police killings of African-Americans. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 41(1), 49–75.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X211057238

Maguire, E. R., Hill, S. L., & Brimbal, L. (2024). The effects of communication accommodation on Hispanic immigrants’ willingness to cooperate with U.S. police. American Behavioral Scientist. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642241301659

Manning, P. K. (1984). Community policing. American Journal of Police, 3(2), 205–228.

Nuño, L. E., Hill, S. L., Maguire, E. R., & Giles, H. (2022) Experiencing VOICES: Police and public reactions to an intergroup communication intervention. Police Practice and Research, 24(6), 631–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2022.2147069

Scott, M. S. (2021). Speaking truth to power through strategic police communication. In H. Giles, E. R. Maguire, & S. L. Hill (Eds.), The Rowman and Littlefield handbook of policing, communication, and society (pp. 175–186). Rowman and Littlefield.

Sklansky, David A. 2011. The persistent pull of police professionalism. New Perspectives in Policing (Executive Session on Policing and Public Safety), March. Harvard Kennedy School. Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/232676.pdf

Sherman, L. W., Milton, C., Kelly, T. V., & MacBride, T. F. (1973). Team policing: Seven case studies (pp. 11–22). Washington, DC: Police Foundation.

Thompson, G. J. (1983). Verbal judo: Words for street survival. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

United States. President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. (1967). The challenge of crime in a free society: A report. U.S. Government Printing Office.

Walker, S. (1993). Does anyone remember team policing lessons of the team policing experience for community policing? American Journal of Police, 12(1), 33–56.

Stephan, W. G. (2014). Intergroup anxiety: Theory, research, and practice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(3), 239–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314530518

Turner, H.M., Voci, A., & Vonofakou, C. (2008). A test of the extended intergroup contact hypothesis: The mediating role of intergroup anxiety, perceived ingroup and outgroup norms, and inclusion of the outgroup in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 843–860. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0011434

Womack, M. M., & Finley, H.H. (1986). Communication: A unique significance for law enforcement. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.