Research Spotlight: What the Public Looks for in a Police Chief

That selection problem is examined in “What signals police leadership quality to the public? A look at evidence-based policing and professional standards,” by Gordon Abner and Emily Mee. The article tests how members of the U.S. public weigh experience, current role, city size, evidence-based policing, and professional standards when choosing between hypothetical police chief applicants.

We spoke with corresponding author Gordon Abner of the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin to learn more about public preferences, external credentials, signaling, and the interpretation of open-ended responses. The study combines a conjoint experiment with qualitative analysis to examine both what people choose and how they explain those choices.

Police chief appointments shape organizational priorities, ethics, resources, personnel systems, and relationships with the public. Despite the importance of the role, there has been limited empirical evidence about which candidate signals the public values when comparing applicants.

The study also contributes to research on signaling. Leadership qualities such as integrity or supportiveness are difficult to observe before appointment, so selectors may rely on credentials that appear costly, verified, or prestigious. Understanding those preferences can help compare public expectations with actual appointment processes.

Gordon Abner reflected on the broader significance of the study: “The most important implication is that city leaders may be able to strengthen public confidence in their choice for police leadership by prioritizing candidates who have independently verified records of implementing professional standards and evidence-based policing.”

Three findings explain how respondents evaluated police leadership quality.

Professional standards carried the greatest weight. Respondents preferred candidates associated with CALEA accreditation over candidates described only as having helped implement professional standards. Accreditation was often interpreted as rigorous external validation and evidence of going beyond minimum expectations.

Evidence-based policing mattered, especially when externally recognized. Respondents preferred Hall of Fame recognition over implementation experience, although qualitative responses also raised concerns about prestige, politics, careerism, and distance from hands-on work.

Context and experience still shaped choice. Applicants serving larger populations and those with more years of experience were preferred, while current position had the smallest effect. The results suggest that respondents valued verified accomplishment more than title alone.

Looking back on the results, Gordon Abner said: “The most surprising finding was that respondents placed greater importance on a candidate’s demonstrated commitment to professional standards and evidence-based policing than on traditional qualifications such as years of experience or current rank.”

The study used a mixed-methods design. A discrete-choice conjoint experiment presented 303 Prolific respondents with nine pairs of hypothetical police chief applicants. Candidate profiles varied across current position, years of experience, population size served, professional standards credentials, and evidence-based policing credentials.

Approximately two weeks later, a follow-up survey collected 224 complete responses to two open-ended questions about how people distinguished CALEA accreditation from implementation experience and Hall of Fame recognition from evidence-based policing implementation. The first author conducted inductive thematic analysis, and the researchers compared those themes with an AI-assisted analysis.

The article used Evidano, formerly known as AILYZE, to triangulate the qualitative findings from the follow-up survey. The researchers used the platform to look for oversights, alternative frames, and possible personal biases in the human-coded themes.

Most human-coded themes were supported by the AI-assisted analysis with only minor wording differences. Evidano also suggested a Community and Departmental Benefits theme that the authors had not retained because the relevant responses were varied and did not cohere strongly enough in the human analysis.

That disagreement is methodologically informative. The research team did not automatically accept an additional AI-generated theme. They returned to the responses, judged coherence and support, and retained responsibility for the final thematic structure.

Gordon Abner also noted how AI tools can support careful research workflows when used responsibly: “Evidano was used to triangulate the qualitative findings from the open-ended responses by serving as an independent AI-assisted analysis that could identify potential oversights, alternative interpretations, and researcher biases. We found that AI can strengthen qualitative research by providing an independent check on human coding, but final decisions about theme validity should remain with researchers, who must assess whether a theme is sufficiently coherent, frequent, and supported by the data.”

For mayors, city managers, and councils, the results provide a public baseline against which appointment criteria can be compared. Selection processes can be more transparent about how professional standards, evidence use, experience, and organizational context are weighted.

For police leaders, the study suggests that external recognition can communicate quality to the public, but credentials should be connected with credible practice. Qualitative responses show that prestige can also trigger questions about politics, career incentives, and practical involvement.

For researchers, the article opens a broader agenda on police leadership selection. Future studies can examine city leaders, cross-national contexts, demographic moderators, and public responses to other reforms such as body-worn cameras, de-escalation, accountability systems, and crisis intervention.

Gordon Abner offered this takeaway for city leaders and researchers: “Public trust in police leadership may be shaped less by traditional credentials and more by visible, independently verified commitments to professionalism and evidence-based practices.”

The study ultimately shows that the public does not evaluate police chief candidates by title alone. It looks for credible signals that a candidate can institutionalize professional standards and use evidence in practice.