Abstract
Purpose. Police organizations in the twentieth century have undergone a tremendous amount of growth and change. However, controlling and mitigating the misuse of force by police officers is still a perplexing problem. This study examines the cognitive processes a command level officer may engage in when affixing causal factors and moderators to cases involving differing levels of excessive force. A cornerstone of attribution theory is Weiner's classification schema of internal and external attributions. This study examines whether a command officer tends to affix causation of an incident to the employee's control or to factors beyond the control of the employee. Methodology. Twelve attribution factors were compiled into a questionnaire format and administered to fifty-four police managers in six statewide mid-sized California police departments. The respondents' answers were measured using Chi-square tests, measures of central tendency, multiple-regression analysis, and frequency distributions. Findings. Data indicate that command level officers are more likely to make external attributions in cases involving excessive force. These findings are consistent with other analyses in the law enforcement field. The findings demonstrated a divergence between attribution theory as applied to law enforcement as compared to other fields. The study indicates that command officers' rank, assignment, and department employment are not factors. Conclusions and recommendations. There have been very few studies and research addressing law enforcement organizational punishment practices. However, the method(s) are widely used in the field to reduce misconduct by police officers. The incongruence noted in these findings and contemporary literature in the field identify a need for more inferential research to answer the question "why.".