Dawes, James

Dulla, Joseph

Horrigan, Joseph

Lockie, Robert G.

Orr, Rob Marc

English

A common perception among incumbents and some trainers is that muscular enduranceand aerobic capacity are the most prevalent and important components of occupationalfitness as they relate to the regular tasks of California Peace Officers assigned to dailypatrol duties. The purpose of this study was to review job demand studies, and presentthe most recent data from a job task analysis for peace officers in California. In 1983, theCalifornia Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training conducted a statewidephysical job task-demands study. The data of 1,625 officers showed that the underlyingfitness components of agility, anaerobic capacity, anaerobic power, and strength weremore predominant in daily peace officer tasks than muscular endurance and aerobiccapacity. As a result, a five event Work Sample Test Battery (WSTB) was developed andvalidated. With the exception of a 500-yard run, the other four WSTB events (99-yardobstacle course, chain link fence climb, solid wall climb, dummy drag) assessedcomponents of agility, strength, power, and anaerobic capacity. In a 2008-2010 survey ofLos Angeles County Sheriff’s Deputies assigned to patrol duties, components of fitnessreported as important by Deputies (n=162) were: 15% strength; 15% muscularendurance; 13% power; 13% anaerobic power; 12% trunk strength; 11% equilibrium; 11%flexibility; and 10% aerobic capacity. An even larger 2018 statewide survey of Californiapeace officers assigned to patrol duties (question responders = 2,874-3,937) provided thefollowing data pertaining to components of fitness required for patrol officer tasks: 17.9%stability; 14.4% flexibility; 13.3% power; 13.3% agility; 12.3% anaerobic capacity; 10.3%muscular strength; 8.25% muscular endurance; 5.6% balance; and 4.6% aerobic capacity.Taken together, the results from these large-scale job demand studies indicate thereported importance by those assigned to patrol duties of anaerobic qualities (e.g.strength and power). Training programs used to develop future peace officers that areweighted toward muscular endurance and aerobic capacity may limit the adaptiveresponses actually required officers. To increase effectiveness and optimize job-relevantin the day-to-day physical tasks of patrol performance, physical training programmingshould more closely target and reflect the actual components of fitness of stability,power, agility, muscular strength, muscular endurance, balance, and aerobic capacit

Bond University Research Portal

Bond UniversityResearch RepositoryPerceived vs. Actual Reported Peace Officer Physical Job Demands: What Three Points inTime Tell UsDulla, Joseph; Dawes, James; Horrigan, Joseph ; Orr, Rob Marc; Lockie, Robert G.Published: 01/10/2018Document Version:Peer reviewed versionLink to publication in Bond University research repository.Recommended citation(APA):Dulla, J., Dawes, J., Horrigan, J., Orr, R. M., & Lockie, R. G. (2018). Perceived vs. Actual Reported PeaceOfficer Physical Job Demands: What Three Points in Time Tell Us. Poster session presented at The 38th AnnualMeeting of the Southwest Regional Chapter of the American College of Sports Medicine, Costa Mesa, UnitedStates.General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.For more information, or if you believe that this document breaches copyright, please contact the Bond University research repositorycoordinator.Download date: 10 May 2019Joseph M. Dulla1 w Jay J. Dawes2 w Joseph Horrigan3 w Robin M. Orr4 w Robert G. Lockie51Recruit Training Unit, Training Bureau, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2Department of Health Sciences, University of Colorado-Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO, USA.3Southern California University of Health Sciences, Whittier, CA, USA. 4Tactical Research Unit, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.5Center for Sport Performance, Department of Kinesiology, California State University, Fullerton, CA, USA.Perceived vs. Actual Reported Peace Officer Physical Job Demands: What Three Points in Time Tell Us INTRODUCTIONMETHODSCONCLUSIONSRESULTS• Study #1 (CA POST-1 from 1983)2 containedlimited information and the showed that theunderlying fitness components of agility,anaerobic capacity, anaerobic power, andstrength were more predominant in dailypeace officer tasks than muscular enduranceand aerobic capacity• Study #2 (LASD)1 contained greaterinformation and the distribution ofunderlying physiological constructs aredepicted in Figure 1.• Study #3 (CA POST-2018)3 contained similarinformation to Study #2 and the distributionof underlying physiological constructs aredepicted in Figure 2.• When the results of all three large scale studies1,2,3 are examined for trends, the reportedimportance by those assigned to patrol duties appear to focus on the constructs of anaerobicqualities, strength, and power. Agility also consistently ranked highly.• The prevalence of stability in Study #3 (POST-2-2018)3 can be attributed to more precisedefinitions of constructs for this specific study. The Study #3 stability trend can also be observed inStudy #2 (LASD) under the equilibrium category.• Taken together and longitudinally, these job task analyses indicate that numerous respondents(SME and California patrol officers) over nearly 35 years continually rate the underlyingphysiological constructs required in patrol work as stability/equilibrium, anaerobic, agility,strength, and power as more prevalent (importance/critical, frequent, and time spent performing)and than muscular endurance and aerobic tasks.• The five event CA POST Work Sample Test Battery4 (a state required physical ability test tograduate all peace officer academies) is also reflective of these observed trends.• As a result, law enforcement physical training programs should as closely as possible reflect thereported physical ability demands of the patrol function to ensure successful completion ofrequired physical job tasks.• For this inquiry, three large scale studies were reviewed. The first and third studies wereconducted by the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (CA POST) andthe third was a local study by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD).• Study #1 (CA POST-1)2 was conducted in 1983 and surveyed 1,625 LEO’s on physical abilitiesrequired of the California patrol officer by frequency performed, importance/criticality to success,time spent performing.• Study #2 (LASD)1 was conducted between 2008-2010 and surveyed 162 deputies assigned topatrol duties in Los Angeles County.• Study #3 (CA POST-2018)3 was conducted in 2018 survey (question responders = 2,874-3,937) andon physical abilities required of the California patrol officer by frequency performed,importance/criticality to success, time spent performing.• Subject matter experts assigned to each study at the respective point in time each study wasconducted rated physical tasks identified in surveys and assigned each tasks to an underlyingphysiological construct. Following this, underlying physiological constructs from each study wascompared.References1. Gebhardt, D. L., Baker, T. A., Polaki, J. (2008). Job analysis for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department patrol deputy assignment. Beltsville, MD: Human Performance Systems, Inc.2. Goldberg, R., Weiss, S., Weyers, S. Medical Screening Manual for California Law Enforcement, Patrol Officer Job Demands: Their Implications for Medical Screening, California Commission onPeace Officer Standards and Training (POST), Sacramento, California pages 21-33, 2015. https://post.ca.gov/medical-screening-manual.aspx; http://lib.post.ca.gov/Publications/JobDemands.pdf.3. Krueger, K. California Commission on POST, Principal Consultant, personal communication September 10, 2018.4. Work Sample Test Battery Proctor Manual. Retrieved November 10, 2017, from: https://post.ca.gov/post_docs/regulationnotices/2012-05/WrkSmplTestBattryProctrMan.pdf.• Essential job tasks for law enforcement officers (LEOs) include numerous physical motions such aspushing, pulling, dragging, running, and other physically demanding body movements.1,2,3 Theseactions are often completed while the LEO is under load carriage conditions (bullet-resistant vest,gun belt, and other equipment). However, the actions could also be completed while not under thesame load (the LEO not wearing the above listed protective equipment).• To ensure candidates and employees can successfully complete required job tasks, a job taskanalysis is an industry-accepted first step.• A job task analysis (a survey of tasks performed by employees) at the state or local level is part of amulti-step process that forms the basis for selection standards, training, rehabilitation, and “returnto play/duty” standards.• In the case of Law Enforcement Agencies, these types of analysis are often conducted at the statelevel by a Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST Commission).• The physical job task analysis process requires respondents (usually subject matter experts [SME]and incumbent patrol officers) to rate the criticality, frequency, and time spent performing specifictasks. The responses are then grouped into underlying physiological constructs such asaerobic/anaerobic capacity, muscular strength and endurance, power, agility, stability, balance, etc.• The purpose of this study was to review job demand studies, and present the most recent datafrom a job task analysis for LEOs in California.ABSTRACTA common perception among incumbents and some trainers is that muscular endurance and aerobic capacity are the most prevalent andimportant components of occupational fitness as they relate to the regular tasks of California Peace Officers assigned to daily patrol duties.The purpose of this study was to review job demand studies, and present the most recent data from a job task analysis for peace officers inCalifornia. In 1983, the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training conducted a statewide physical job task-demandsstudy2. The data of 1,625 officers showed that the underlying fitness components of agility, anaerobic capacity, anaerobic power, andstrength were more predominant in daily peace officer tasks than muscular endurance and aerobic capacity. As a result, a five event WorkSample Test Battery (WSTB)4was developed and validated. With the exception of a 500-yard run, the other four WSTB events (99-yardobstacle course, chain link fence climb, solid wall climb, dummy drag) assessed components of agility, strength, power, and anaerobiccapacity. In a 2008-2010 survey of Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Deputies1 assigned to patrol duties, components of fitness reported asimportant by Deputies (n=162) were: 15% strength; 15% muscular endurance; 13% power; 13% anaerobic power; 12% trunk strength; 11%equilibrium; 11% flexibility; and 10% aerobic capacity. An even larger 2018 statewide survey of California peace officers assigned to patrolduties (question responders = 2,874-3,937)3 provided the following data pertaining to components of fitness required for patrol officertasks: 17.9% stability; 14.4% flexibility; 13.3% power; 13.3% agility; 12.3% anaerobic capacity; 10.3% muscular strength; 8.25% muscularendurance; 5.6% balance; and 4.6% aerobic capacity. Taken together, the results from these large-scale job demand studies indicate thereported importance by those assigned to patrol duties of anaerobic qualities (e.g. strength and power). Training programs used to developfuture peace officers that are weighted toward muscular endurance and aerobic capacity may limit the adaptive responses actually requiredin the day-to-day physical tasks of patrol officers. To increase effectiveness and optimize job-relevant performance, physical trainingprogramming should more closely target and reflect the actual components of fitness of stability, power, agility, muscular strength, muscularendurance, balance, and aerobic capacity.Figure 2. CA POST-2 relative contribution of patrol physical abilities distribution based on statewide SME input.Figure 1. LASD patrol physical abilities distributionbased on LASD SME input.

Perceived vs. Actual Reported Peace Officer Physical Job Demands: What Three Points in Time Tell Us

https://pure.bond.edu.au/ws/files/28490055/Perceived_vs._Actual_Reported_Peace_Officer_Physical_Job_Demands.pdf

Perceived vs. Actual Reported Peace Officer Physical Job Demands: What Three Points in Time Tell Us

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Bond University Research Portal