I’m glad you found the video interesting.

I haven’t read any research that specifically discusses how resource allocations within near repeat risk areas effects overall incident volume. Most of the research in that domain relates to saturating patrols within crime hotspots.

The near repeat pattern exposes something a bit different from a crime hotspot map and the two are utilized together to inform patrol strategy.

If you are interested in how officer deployment can suppress incident volume you may be interested in reading the Philadelphia Foot Patrol study that was conducted by some professors at Temple University. You can take a look at their work here:

http://www.temple.edu/cj/FootPatrolProject/documents/PFPE_research_brief.pdf

I have a question concerning the “Near Repeat” analysis. Knowing when an area may be a hotspot is great, and I can see how officers could be positioned to counteract or as you said, “destroy” the risk. Ideally, if the risk is removed, you will see a decrease in the number of incidents in that area. Is there any correlation to the resources (like officers) deployed to the area and the change in the number of incidents?

For instance, after forecasting a high probability of incidents around an intersection, officers were sent to patrol the area more often than usual. As a result there isn’t as many incidents, because the officers were around. Is there any feedback into the system as to how resources can affect the realities?

Hope that makes sense. Thanks!

[...] Every once in a while we choose blogs that we read. Listed below are the latest sites that we choose [...]……