Police cynicism is a widely acknowledged, little quantified property of the police subculture. It is a belief that the world—or at least the criminal justice system—operates according to rules that are opposite to its publicly articulated principles. The concept summarizes an ingrained belief that there is no altruism, everyone is out for themselves at the expense of anyone who gets in the way, and everyone lies—espe-cially to the police.
It may be that police cynicism is little different than any other form of occupational cynicism. On the surface, there is an apparent relation between cynicism and “burnout.” A cynical individual is jaded, seemingly no longer devoted to professional ideals, simply “going through the motions” and making judgments based on an impaired, narrow interpretation of the facts available. Citizens and policy makers have real concerns that cynical individuals will make erroneous decisions that are life changing for citizens.
Most police officers enter the work with idealism, however, and never really lose it. There is reason to understand police cynicism as a pressure valve, something that allows officers to deal with their frustrations through verbal outlets that are not connected to their official actions. Another recognizable widespread trait of police culture, “gallows humor,” performs the same function, and is only a step away from the realm labeled “cynicism.” Police speak vividly and directly, and their viewpoints are continuous sources of interest to social scientists and other observers, who may misinterpret the relationship between verbal expressions and any actions they may actually commit in their capacity as officers. In modern systematic observations of police behavior, scholars have noted a dissonance between the privately held views police officers express toward particular groups and the professional manner with which the officers deal with members of those groups in the field.
Contemporary police agencies are not monolithic, but staffed with individuals representing a wide range of backgrounds and outlooks. Cynicism in such a setting represents the voice of past experience at one level, giving words to alternative interpretations that otherwise might be suppressed as “politically incorrect.” At the same time, the cynic’s voice is but one of many, leavened by (and a leaven for) others with alternative views.
Early Research
The subject was first explored scientifically by Arthur Niederhoffer (1967), using an instrument called the F-scale to examine the tendency of police subculture to foster cynicism and authoritarianism. His observation that ”[a]s the cynic becomes increasingly pessimistic and misanthropic, he finds it easier to reduce his commitment to the social system and its values” (Nie-derhoffer 1976, 208 [1967]) is in accord with the perceived alienation of the police from society. Cynicism is ”learned as part of socialization into the police occupation,” which Niederhoffer identifies as taking a full five years to complete (Nie-derhoffer 1976, 209 [1967]). Progressing from benign, affected pseudo-cynicism in the police academy through the resentment and hostility of ”aggressive cynicism” around the ten-year mark of an officer’s career, cynicism becomes a resigned acceptance of the foibles of humanity and the criminal justice system. Viewing cynicism as ”a mode of adaptation to frustration” (209), Niederhoffer noted other dimensions of variance as well, including position and status within the organization, recognition and achievement factors, and socioeconomic background.
Cynicism is a hard-shelled attitude, one of the by-products of the conditions in which the police work. Much of Jerome Skolnick’s concept of a ”working personality” forged by constant potential danger, a craft based on suspicion, and imposed expectations of ”efficiency” holds true today, despite considerable gains in raising education levels and diversifying the police force. Cynicism arises from similar factors of suspicion, conflicting demands, and unrealized expectations. The tension between stated goals and observed factual conditions—in public life and within police organizations themselves—produces a belief that ”the job ain’t on the level.”
Police suspicions are based on more than just potential danger: To do police work is to deal constantly with liars. ”Liars” are not just people who tell bald-faced untruths, but also people who shade the truth to their advantage, omit important facts that might work against them, provide false rationales for questionable actions, deny accusations, and grudgingly admit only to things that the police can already prove. These behaviors are expected when dealing with the criminal element, but police officers encounter the same behaviors among respectable citizens. In response to a steady diet of lies, immersed in a web of half-truths and indeterminate evidence, the police develop an operational cynicism, the willing suspension of belief.
Police also endure periodic intrusion by moral entrepreneurs who demand that the police devote resources to a specific target of choice, then move on to other pursuits or different venues. Other sources of disdain are politicians, especially high-profile ones whose positions shift with the winds or the public opinion polls. The feet of clay of these reputed leaders, and the periodic scandals that erupt in other echelons of the justice system, are major sources of cynicism. In politicized departments, the phrase ”the job ain’t on the level” summarizes officers’ disdain for processes where connections and influence take precedence over merit.
The view also extends to those higher up in the police hierarchy, those superiors who—in the view of the line officer and those who still think like line officers— have ”forgotten what it’s like to be a cop.” An attitude heard in one form or another in many police agencies around the country denigrates the process of promotion: Line officers may scoff that a supervisor had been a failure when she or he was on patrol, and that’s considered grounds for promotion in this department.
Consequences of Cynicism
One of the outgrowths of a cynical outlook is a tendency to look for the down side of everything: Well-connected crooks will go free despite overwhelming evidence, programs are launched only for political capital, funding will disappear, or whatever process is established will quickly be co-opted and manipulated to the selfish advantage of a few, sometimes even by the nominal targets the program is intended to suppress. Cynicism is one of the major obstacles to new initiatives or meaningful reform of unethical or outdated practices.
(In this regard, police cynicism also embodies a certain amount of irony: There are a number of cases in which the public has succeeded in establishing a police review board to deal with allegations of police misconduct, and the police and their supporters have rushed to try to “stack the deck” with police sympathizers, but this is not subject to the same police scrutiny as the motives of those who advocate for the board in the first place.)
In day-to-day encounters, visible cynicism can be damaging to police-community relations. If citizens detect subtle or overt indicators that the police do not believe them, they may interpret the cues as products of bias or contempt. Individual and public support of the police can be damaged, and valuable information withheld.
The Sources of Cynicism
Unrealistic expectations on the part of the police themselves may be a major contributor to the formation of cynicism. Despite vigorous attempts to transform the occupation, most of line-level police culture defines police work in terms of “law enforcement,” the detection, apprehension, and successful prosecution of criminals. That worldview subscribes to an intuitive version of Herbert Packer’s “crime control” model, an assembly-line process of justice wherein decision makers at each stage rely on the judgment of the decision maker at the prior stage. The police, as the gatekeepers to the criminal justice system, expect that supervisors, prosecutors, judges, and juries will accept and confirm the officer’s original judgment. Whenever that expectation is thwarted, cynicism attributes the result to incompetence or corruption.
Such a view ignores (sometimes willfully) the other realities of the system. Officers who recognize the primacy of the presumption of innocence, strength of evidence, how well the police ”make their case” in the report, and the occasional triage of cases demanded by prosecutors’ workloads are less vulnerable to developing cynical attitudes.
Similarly, police cynicism about new programs also has a firm grounding in reality, and a counterpart in the community outlook: “innovation fatigue.” Officers who invested personally in new programs, as well as those who took a wait-and-see approach, have seen projects fail from lack of resources, misguided political interference, or personnel changes. A pattern of false starts creates an expectation that all programs will suffer the same fate; therefore, there is no reason to invest in them. The attitude is certainly not universal: New ideas and new programs invariably attract acolytes who see the possibility of doing something good. Nevertheless, cynicism impedes agencies’ ability to obtain the buy-in needed to expand a good project beyond its original champions.
Complaints about the department’s promotional policy may have a variety of sources. Not every negative assessment of an agency’s practices is a product of cynicism alone. Despite advances in pro-fessionalization, politicized departments remain places where ”who you know” determines career paths. There are departments that are poorly structured and managed, marked by cronyism or burdened with a legacy of past mistakes.
Not every officer necessarily appreciates the demands of the upper or special positions, and they may be unable to appreciate the judgments of those who make promotion decisions. Complaining officers may have an unrealistic view of their own knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) for certain positions. Some foreign police prepare potential supervisors and others with training courses prior to the promotional process, including training achievements in their promotability assessment. American police tend to promote on standardized test scores (a marginal improvement over the seniority system that existed before the modern reform era), and occasionally on performance in the previous assignment. Critics of the process suggest that it is not suited to selecting the best candidates, or even those amenable to the subsequent training.
To dismiss all criticisms as the whining self-pity of no-hopers would be cynical in itself. Promotions and desired assignments are hard won in an occupation that has few of the private sector’s reward opportunities. Disappointments and perceived injustices may be more keenly felt, and past errors magnified.
Additional Research
The utility of the F-scale has been challenged. Bayley and Mendelsohn’s (1969, 15-18) personality scales indicated that Denver police, at least, were ”absolutely average people” and found police recruits to be ”somewhat more idealistic” than community members. That finding echoed McNamara’s (1967, 195) conclusion that police recruits were less authoritative than the general public. These studies actually bolster Niederhoffer’s argument that cynicism and authoritarianism are the result of the socialization process, not an inherent quality that a recruit brings to the work. Because they examined only the rookie year, however, they do not address the development of cynicism over time.
Regoli (1976, 237) criticized the F-scale used to measure cynicism, on the grounds that ”cynicism is a multidimensional phenomenon” and ”it is possible that police can be cynical toward one aspect of the occupation and not others, or toward any combination of aspects simultaneously.” Additional studies failed to validate the F-scale on measurement grounds, yielding only mixed results with modest effects and low reliability (Regoli et al. 1987; Lang-worthy 1987). Niederhoffer’s original cohort has long since retired; recruitment, management, and the sociolegal environment have all changed. Current research has all but abandoned trying to validate cynicism as a concept, in favor of examining the multiple factors affecting police job satisfaction.
