A Meta-Analytic Review of the Correlates of Perceived Stress among Police Officers A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Criminal Justice of the College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services by Jennifer H. Webster B.A., East Tennessee State University, 2001 M.S., University of Cincinnati, 2002 Committee Chair: Lawrence F. Travis, III, Ph.D. ABSTRACT There appears to be widespread belief (among lay persons, academics, and police officers alike) that the occupation of policing is highly stressful (Kappeler et al., 2000). Furthermore, many believe that operational variables unique to policing are the primary causes of this stress (e.g., Waters & Ussery, 2007). The near-dogmatic resiliency of this image of policing has helped create a popular culture where all matters related to the profession are approached with these underlying assumptions. It has also given rise to the tendency among stress researchers to focus on the operational or organizational demands facing officers without giving due consideration to the process of cognitive appraisal - and the many influences on that process - which shape the evaluation of those demands. This atheoretical approach in combination with variability in methodological quality across studies, including gross inconsistencies in the choice and measurement of the independent variables (i.e., stressors), and even in the measurement of the dependent variable of interest itself (stress), has given rise to a body of research that has been characterized in multiple narrative reviews as contradictory and inconclusive. The current study is an effort to take stock of the research on perceived stress among police officers by quantitatively synthesizing the available empirical literature on the subject via the use of meta-analysis. The research plan proposed to first compare individual correlates of perceived stress in order to draw conclusions about their relative strength and stability. Unfortunately, the 103 studies which met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were so fraught with missing data there were not enough effect size estimates for individual correlates to allow for meaningful comparisons at that level. However, the systematic documentation of the depth and breadth of missing data is an important contribution of the current study, and should help guide future research in this area. ii The current study also proposed a model of stress and coping as an interactive process between an individual and his or her environment. Although the large amount of missing data did not allow for meaningful comparison of individual predictors, collapsing correlates into predictor domains that mirrored the proposed model of stress and coping did allow for a preliminary analysis of some of the constructs in that model. While the broad confidence intervals generated for each domain do urge caution in interpretation, the findings at least suggest that each domain contributes to the perception of stress and that knowledge in this area might best be advanced by recognizing the importance of each in shaping an interactive process of stress and coping rather than attempting to rank individual correlates. In short, the data do not allow definitive conclusions that personal characteristics or job characteristics, for example, are more important than others in shaping stress perception among police officers. Clearly, these findings are limited by the degree of missing data, but it may be that questions about what is most important in shaping police stress have remained unanswered because the variables of interest make equally important contributions to a complex process. iii iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation could not have been completed without the support of many people. First, I extend a heartfelt thanks to my committee members. My committee chair and long-time advisor and encourager, Dr. Lawrence F. Travis, III, provided a level of professional guidance and instruction, tempered with personal concern and humor, without which I fear this journey would never have been completed. Dr. Paula Smith was generous with her time, expertise, and encouragement. Dr. James Frank was instrumental in shaping my academic career, both in and out of the classroom. Finally, Dr. John Violanti was gracious in offering his time and the benefit of his research experience to better my work. Ms. Jennifer Lux put in a lot of hours of hard work on relatively short notice to code studies for inter-rater reliability calculations; I am especially grateful for her professional integrity and attention to detail. I have enjoyed the support of all my Northern Kentucky University colleagues, but especially a certain few: Dr. William J. Attenweiler, who has offered invaluable social and instrumental support and for whom I have the greatest admiration and respect; Ms. Janis M. Cassiere, Ms. Amy Racke, Ms. Melody McMillan, Mrs. Aprile Conrad Redden, and Ms. Candice Van Loveren Geis, all of whom have been my cheerleaders every step of the way. Dr. Melissa Moon deserves thanks for taking the time to tell an undergraduate student after a research methods class in the summer of 2000 that she “really should consider going to graduate school.” We should never underestimate the power of faculty to change the trajectory of a life with a few simple words. Many friends have encouraged me throughout this process, but none more than Dr. Andrea Fieler, my confidante and heroine extraordinaire. v I have been blessed with a large and loving family, all of whom have shared the burden of carrying me during those times when I could not walk on my own. I am especially grateful to my parents, Clarence and Doris J. Childress, for their unconditional love and for the examples of integrity they have been throughout my life. I thank my brother, Patrick J. Childress, for always knowing when to offer a hug or a kick in the derriere. I am indebted to all of my in-laws for embracing me as a daughter and a sister and offering their love and practical support through these many years. But there is no one who deserves thanks and recognition more than my loving husband, Brandon K. Webster. His belief in me never wavered though I often did not believe in myself. His sacrifices for me and for our daughters have made this success possible. Finally, it is for our daughters, Lily Anneliese and Abigale Jeane, I have worked so hard to see this journey to completion. I hope one day they will read this and know that they are, and will always be, most precious to me. God is love, and His greatest demonstration of His love for me is that He has allowed me to be their mother. vi Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM………………………………...........1 The Development of Police Stress Research..………………………………………….3 Defining “Stress”…………………………………………………………………...…..6 The Bio-physiological Origin of “Stress”………………………………………....7 Selye’s “General Adaptation Syndrome”………………………………………….7 Eustress vs. distress………………………………………………………………..8 Individual Perception and the Experience of Stress………………………………9 Coping…………………………………………………………………………….10 Summary of the Stress Appraisal Process………………………………………..11 The Current Study.………………………………………………………………….…11 Summary and Outline of the Dissertation……………………………………………..12 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW………………………...………………………13 Models of Occupational Stress…………………………………………………….….13 Person-Environment Fit………………………………………………………….13 Demand-Control-Support………………………………………………………...14 Effort-Reward Imbalance……………………………………………………......15 An Integrative Model of Stress and Coping……………………………………..16 The Environmental Situation…………………………………………………17 Cognitive Appraisal…………………………………………………………..17 Primary Appraisal………………………………………………………..17 Secondary Appraisal……………………………………………………..18 Coping………………………………………………………………………..20 Person-Environment Fit………………………………………………………20 Limitations of Prior Police Stress Research…………………………………………..22 Atheoretical Approach…………………………………………………………...22 Inconsistency of Measurement…………………………………………………..25 Influences……………………………………………………………………..27 Over-reliance on Null-Hypothesis Significance Testing………………………...28 Variable Rigor of Methodological Design…………………………………….…30 Organizing Police Stress Research……………………………………………….…...30 Individual-Level Influences……………………………………………………...31 Sociodemographics…………………………………………………………...32 Race/ethnicity and gender…………………………………………….….32 Age…………………………………………………………………….…35 Level of Education……………………………………………………….37 Marital Status…………………………………………………………….38 Personality & Coping………………………………………………………...39 Past Experiences……………………………………………………………...43 Current Situation……………………………………………………………..44 Career Stage……………………………………………………………..44 Rank……………………………………………………………………..46 Job assignment…………………………………………………………..48 Shift assignment…………………………………………………………49 vii Workload…………………………………………………………………50 Work-Family Conflict……………………………………………………51 Current Negative Life Experiences………………………………………52 Operational-Level Influences………………………………………………...….52 Organizational Structure……………………………………………………...53 Organizational Size…………………………………………………………...55 Organizational Support……………………………………………………….55 Social Support……………………………………………………………56 Organizational Culture………………………………………………………..58 Organizational Fairness………………………………………………………59 System-Level Influences…………………………………………………………61 Situational (Community)-Level Influences……………………………………...62 Police-Community Relations…………………………………………………62 Crime Rate……………………………………………………………………63