Scholarlink

Objective <p>This study examines patrol officer and supervisor perceptions of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to assist with officer report writing. We compare attitudes among patrol officers randomly assigned to use the AI tool against those who were not.</p> Methods <p>Following a randomized controlled trial within a single agency, we conducted a post-intervention survey of patrol officers and supervisors.</p> Results <p>Patrol officers expressed generally favorable perceptions toward AI-assisted report writing, though no significant differences emerged between treatment and control groups in perceived utility, speed improvement, or quality enhancement. Despite these non-significant differences, 48% of treated officers reported time savings. Supervisors perceived noticeable improvements in report quality, completeness, and writing efficiency.</p> Conclusion <p>Officer perceptions of AI-assisted report writing were broadly positive but did not differ significantly by experimental exposure. Agencies adopting similar tools should anticipate mixed officer reactions and prioritize training, realistic expectations, and supervisor support.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Writing at the speed of hype: officers’ post-experimental perceptions of AI report writing

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月21日

查看全文
  • Hunter M. Boehme,
  • Ian T. Adams,
  • Matt Barter,
  • Irick A. Geary Jr.,
  • Kyle McLean

摘要

Objective

This study examines patrol officer and supervisor perceptions of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to assist with officer report writing. We compare attitudes among patrol officers randomly assigned to use the AI tool against those who were not.

Methods

Following a randomized controlled trial within a single agency, we conducted a post-intervention survey of patrol officers and supervisors.

Results

Patrol officers expressed generally favorable perceptions toward AI-assisted report writing, though no significant differences emerged between treatment and control groups in perceived utility, speed improvement, or quality enhancement. Despite these non-significant differences, 48% of treated officers reported time savings. Supervisors perceived noticeable improvements in report quality, completeness, and writing efficiency.

Conclusion

Officer perceptions of AI-assisted report writing were broadly positive but did not differ significantly by experimental exposure. Agencies adopting similar tools should anticipate mixed officer reactions and prioritize training, realistic expectations, and supervisor support.