EVIDENCE-BASED LP by Read Hayes, Ph.D., CPP Dr. Hayes is director of the Loss Prevention Research Council and coordinator of the Loss Prevention Research Team at the University of Florida. He can be reached at 321-303-6193 or via email at rhayes@lpresearch.org. © 2013 Loss Prevention Research Council
Opinion vs. Fact A
s the old saying goes—“We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not to our own facts.” This column emphasizes how the best path to improving the impact of loss prevention or asset protection programs is by developing enough research findings to support real, evidence-based practice. LP practitioners require good operational how-to concepts plus cross-sectional and experimental research evidence to better diagnose and treat the myriad of dangerous and costly problems retailers face daily.
Many retailers and solution partners are doing small tests, but many of these tests are not rigorously designed or executed, and most are never peer-reviewed and reported. But because of the incredible efforts of over thirty-five retailers driving the LPRC now, and many others, we’ll get there. Best Practice vs. Evidence-based Practice
I took the following example from an evidence-based medical publication (Yokl, 2010) to illustrate the difference between anecdotal and evidence-based practice: “Do you see the difference? Anecdotal or loosely based evidence, even if reported by hundreds of practitioners, doesn’t make a best practice legitimate. Do you remember when it was believed that almost all stomach (or peptic) ulcers were thought to be caused by stress? Now, we know with certainty, based on rigorous evidence-based research in 1982 by two Australian scientists that 70% to 90% of peptic ulcers are caused by bacteria. “It’s interesting to note that John Lykowkis, a general practitioner in Greece, believed peptic ulcers were caused by bacteria in 1958, and then treated his patients with antibiotics, which is now an evidence-based best practice. But he never did
48
the rigorous evidence-based research to prove it. Unfortunately, he left the rest of his colleagues to figure it out for themselves.” Believe it or not, for decades most physicians refused to believe clean hands prevented infection. It wasn’t until randomized controlled trials were published in the late 20th century that doctors started washing their hands before surgery. And so it is in our discipline. Many retailers and solution partners are doing small tests, but many of these tests are not rigorously designed or executed, and most are never peer-reviewed and reported. But because of the incredible efforts of over thirty-five retailers driving the LPRC now, and many others, we’ll get there.
What Happens Over Time?
One concept our LPRC and University of Florida research teams take into account in innovation and evaluation projects is that of the role of time and behavior. Time is so critical in crime and loss control. It takes time for crime prevention measures to take effect (reach therapeutic level) since offenders need to personally or otherwise learn of their presence and mechanisms of action. And if the protective measures are perceived effective, the word has to spread out there. So, we have to be patient, and we need long-term studies to better calculate these timelines and their causes. Time also reveals how criminals react to our countermeasures. We’ve discussed the concept of crime displacement. Prevention treatments can convince offenders to alter their target, timing, location, and methods rather than just desist. Many studies show this type of crime movement is common, but not always as common as the opposite effect called diffusion of benefits, or the halo effect where offenders mistakenly believe other items and places are similarly protected when they really aren’t. A longer term effect of crime and loss control efforts may also lead to adaptation where offenders learn of protective measure design or execution flaws and adapt their behavior accordingly. We can all pick our favorite LP measure that is no longer as effective as it used to be since cynical bad guys found out or heard the thing doesn’t work, is a bluff, or employees don’t enforce it. There is more to come later on our research that is taking the effects of time on LP programs.
Impact 2012 Conference Highly Rated
It’s really tough to improve on certain things. Our annual Impact conference is far from perfect, but this past year’s
January - February 2013
|
LPportal.com
