Police work requires making suitable observations which form the basis of situational awareness (SA) of the encounter in progress. Incomplete early-stage SA (i.e., perception) can lead to errors in subsequent judgement and decision-making that can have severe consequences for performance, learning, and occupational health. SA in police contexts is still relatively understudied and requires closer examination using objective measures. The current preliminary study aimed to measure the gaze and fixation patterns among novice and expert police officers to understand early-stage SA at different levels of professional experience. Participants included 23 novices (10 early, 13 intermediate) and 11 experienced officers and instructors in tactics and use of force. Visit duration and fixation order were measured while participants viewed various static images of staged encounters. Results showed that all participants fixated longer on targets compared to the periphery, and fixated earlier on suspects’ faces compared to hands, bodies, or the environment. Further, experts fixated earlier on hands and spent less time scanning the environment than early novices. The current findings reveal eye movement patterns while officers engaged in typical police encounters. Future research can inform evidence-based police training to achieve optimal SA and minimize negative outcomes in training and operational field settings.

Situational awareness (SA) is the most important skill required by police to effectively assess and respond to encounters, including critical incidents. Incomplete or sub-optimal SA strategies can lead to errors in subsequent judgement, decision-making, and action, including tactics and use of force (UOF). Errors in UOF, especially lethal force, in training or operational field settings, have severe consequences for learning, occupational health, and public safety. Therefore, adequately defining and instructing SA is an important gap to fill in existing applied police literature and practice. Using a mixed-methods approach, the current study aimed to define and conceptualize SA in police-specific contexts. Participants included 23 novice trainees and 11 experienced officers and instructors in tactics and UOF. Participants were shown 13 static images of various staged encounters, ranging from non-threatening to high-threat. Following each image, participants were interviewed and asked to describe what they saw and how they would respond. Thematic analyses of the interview data revealed the following seven themes that are highly interrelated and more completely define police-specific SA: distance/time laws; partner/roles; profiling the suspect; tactical options and opportunities; ongoing assessment of own tactical activities and outcomes; surrounding environment and conditions; and dangerous objects. Expert officers provided more detailed and multidimensional descriptions of the themes and statistical analyses confirmed that experts identified more themes compared to novices. By making tacit knowledge visible, the current findings establish a professional standard for SA formation, which can inform evidence-based police training in SA, tactical decision-making, and UOF while improving operational safety.

In spite of significant interest in the application of police use of force (UOF) from organisations, researchers, and the general public, there remains no industry standard for how police UOF is trained, and by extension, evaluated. While certain UOF behaviours can be objectively measured (e.g., correct shoot/no shoot decision making (DM), shot accuracy), the subjective evaluation of many UOF skills (e.g., situation awareness, SA) falls to the discretion of individual instructors. The aim of the current brief communication is to consider the operationalisation of essential UOF behaviours as objective and subjective measures, respectively. Using longitudinal data from a sample of Canadian police officers (n = 57) evaluated during UOF training scenarios, we discuss how objective and subjective measures reflect changes in officer performance over time. Objective lethal force DM was measured as a binary ‘correct–incorrect’ outcome and subjective SA was measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘unacceptable’ to ‘exceptional’. Subjective evaluation of SA demonstrated significant changes over time, while DM remained relatively high and stable. Given the practical and professional implications of UOF, we recommend that a combination of objective and subjective measures is systematically implemented at all stages of police UOF training and evaluation (i.e., basic, advanced, in-service).