Database Reference
In-Depth Information
fill this void. Before we can discuss the application of augmented reality, how-
ever, we have to unify the underlying epistemological bases (philosophy concern-
ing the nature of knowledge) underlying the 'real environment' and the 'synthetic
environment' of policing. Within the policing profession the distinction between
the two epistemological bases becomes clear by examining perspectives on 'old'
and 'new' knowledge. In policing 'old' knowledge refers to knowledge related to
traditional case-specific criminal investigations; 'New' knowledge refers to
knowledge gained through digital data analysis, including the identification of
trends, hotspots, 'hot moments', and other patterns (Ratcliffe 2008). Exploiting the
potential of 'new' knowledge has become known as ILP, which in the Netherlands
developed into a doctrine (Kop and Klerks 2009). As information within the ILP
doctrine is treated as 'data given meaning and structure' (Ratcliffe 2008a: 4), its
epistemological basis is clearly positivistic. Indeed, information is treated as an
object that may be stored, enriched, and disseminated. In traditional case-specific
criminal investigations, on the other hand, police officers are utterly aware of con-
text, antecedents, and idiosyncratic perspectives. Hence, 'old' knowledge clearly
has an interpretive-constructivist epistemological basis.
The emerging concept of KBP, which is an offspring of ILP (Brodeur and Du-
pont 2006), is thought to bring the worlds of 'old knowledge' and 'new knowledge'
together (Ratcliffe 2008; Williamson 2008). To do so successfully, however, we
argue that the epistemological bases have to be unified first. The positivist basis of
ILP does not provide for the divers, dynamic, and complex nature of information
which characterizes 'old' knowledge-based police work. Hence, we propose to
follow Innes et al. (2005) and adopt an interpretive-constructivist perspective
for both 'old' and 'new' forms of knowledge. We make this proposal specific by
redefining the key-concepts (data, information, knowledge, and intelligence) ac-
cordingly. We then introduce the concept of boundary objects. This serves two
purposes. First, boundary objects help to bridge the gap between information ana-
lysts, police officers, and other fields of discipline (Bechky 2003; Carlile 2003).
Second, we use boundary objects as knowledge-structure to augment reality.
After our modest attempt to create a more suitable and holistic basis for KBP
we turn our attention to augmented reality. Where people are limited to five highly
sophisticated senses to observe their environment, virtuality provides opportuni-
ties to augment reality. Not necessarily by algorithms and routines that unearth
hidden trends or other patterns in large databases, but in particular by processing
data which is automatically obtained, filtered, and analyzed in real-time (through
profiles) and integrated in policing practice, much like our human senses do.
Where human senses, however, are intrinsically restricted to a given time and
place, this is not necessarily so for artificial sensors. For example, a series of dis-
crete observations of multiple geographically distributed sensors may be united
into one composite observation. Such an endeavor requires the processing of large
quantities of -often privacy related- data. Moreover, the observations include data
related to people that legally may not be suspected of any legal offense. Hence, the
application of augmented reality has to be brought in accord with the juridical
framework of policing. We believe that KBP, as we are presenting it, provides a
Search WWH ::




Custom Search