Truace
Subscribe
50/100

Moderate evidence

Cite
More
Export CSVExport JSONEmailLinkedInX

US survey experiment finds only low to moderate public support for AI-written police reports

Study title: Public perceptions of police use of artificial intelligence to assist in generating police reports: findings from an experimental study

Evidence type
Survey
Sources
1 sourcePeer-reviewed
Published
2 min read
Truvace record
TRV-2026-2663cite or check it

Study title: Public perceptions of police use of artificial intelligence to assist in generating police reports: findings from an experimental study

A survey experiment in Policing and Society asked a non-probability sample of US residents whether police should use AI and large language model tools to generate police reports. It found low to moderate support overall.

Read the study abstract

In the context of policing, artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLM) tools are being touted for their ability to reduce the amount of time officers spend writing reports while simultaneously improving their accuracy and completeness. Concerns have been raised, however, about bias, privacy, legality, inaccuracies, transparency, and the overall impact of the use of AI when generating police reports on legal proceedings and police legitimacy. Despite continued advancements in the technology and…

The problem

A survey experiment of US residents found only low to moderate public support for police using AI to write reports, with support rising only when people were told the tools were useful and how agencies check their accuracy.

In brief

Support was highest when respondents were told the tools were useful and what steps police agencies are taking to ensure their accuracy. The study tested how the information agencies share changes opinion.

The work matters because vendors promote these tools as cutting report-writing time while improving accuracy and completeness, yet concerns about bias, privacy, legality, inaccuracies and transparency remain. Because the sample was non-probability, the results may not represent all US residents.

Main points

  1. The study used a survey experimental design with a non-probability sample of US residents.
  2. Overall public support for police using AI to generate reports was low to moderate.
  3. Support was greatest when respondents learned the tools were useful and how police agencies ensure accuracy.
  4. The researchers tested whether trust in police or race and ethnicity changed these reactions.
  5. Concerns cited include bias, privacy, legality, inaccuracies, transparency and effects on legal proceedings and police legitimacy.

The full story

The study addressed three questions: how much the public supports police use of AI to generate reports, how views change with the information agencies share about the technology and its use, and whether trust in police or race and ethnicity moderate those relationships.

Tools built on large language models are being promoted for reducing officers' report-writing time while improving accuracy and completeness. Critics have raised concerns about bias, privacy, legality, inaccuracies, transparency and the impact on legal proceedings and police legitimacy.

The finding that support was strongest when respondents heard about the tools' usefulness and accuracy safeguards suggests that how agencies communicate about the technology shapes public acceptance.

Sources

1 on file
  1. Policing and Societydoi:10.1080/10439463.2026.2675429
    Peer-reviewed2026-05-22

Talk it over

Four questions to start onWho carries this cost, and what would have to change to prevent it?

Start with a question

US survey experiment finds only low to moderate public support for AI-written police reportshttps://truvace.com/item/public-perceptions-of-police-use-of-artificial-intelligence-to-assist-in-generat

  1. Who carries this cost, and what would have to change to prevent it?

    The problem A survey experiment of US residents found only low to moderate public support for police using AI to write reports, with support rising only when people were told the tools were useful and how agencies check their accuracy.

    Answer in the thread

  2. How do we know? What can this kind of evidence show, and what can’t it?

    The evidence This rests on a survey, from Policing and Society.

    Answer in the thread

  3. What does it leave open? What else would you want to know before acting on it?

    The record’s own caveat The study used a non-probability sample of U.S. residents, so its findings may not represent the wider US public.

    Answer in the thread

  4. Have you seen AI used this way where you study, work or live? Did it go the same way?

    Answer in the thread

The questions are the same on every record. The details under them are taken from this record as written.

What readers say

More from Crime