Answer:
According to Greene’s study, the area an officer patrols is associated with certain outcomes related to the officer’s behavior, attitude, and performance. The study compared two types of patrol areas: fixed beats, where officers are assigned to a specific geographic area for a long period of time, and random beats, where officers are rotated among different areas on a daily basis. The study found that officers who patrolled fixed beats had the following outcomes:
Increased job satisfaction: Officers who patrolled fixed beats reported higher levels of satisfaction with their work, their supervisors, and their peers than officers who patrolled random beats. They also expressed more positive views about their role in the community and their ability to make a difference.
Decreased likelihood of receiving discipline: Officers who patrolled fixed beats had fewer complaints filed against them and fewer disciplinary actions taken against them than officers who patrolled random beats. They also had lower rates of absenteeism and sick leave.
Increased community engagement: Officers who patrolled fixed beats had more contacts and interactions with residents and business owners in their areas than officers who patrolled random beats. They also developed more trust and rapport with the community members and received more information and cooperation from them.
Decreased likelihood of police shootings: Officers who patrolled fixed beats had fewer incidents of using deadly force than officers who patrolled random beats. They also had fewer injuries and fatalities among themselves and the suspects they encountered.
Therefore, the correct answer to the question is all of the above. Greene’s study suggests that the area an officer patrols is associated with increased job satisfaction, decreased likelihood of receiving discipline, increased community engagement, and decreased likelihood of police shootings.