Why Training Design Matters
The Stress Mismatch
Applying one training curriculum to an entire agency creates the fundamental problem of an environment where the majority of participants feel either overwhelmed or underwhelmed. This dilemma arises through stress inoculation, a method police training borrowed from clinical psychology: the practice of slowly increasing the amount of stress a participant faces. This process is one of the best-supported ways to build tolerance to pressure as it relates to performance. Developed by psychologist Donald Meichenbaum, the method has been tested across many fields, and a review of 37 studies concluded that "stress inoculation training was an effective means for reducing performance anxiety" (Saunders et al., 1996, p. 170).
With the above assumption, you can deduce the specific problem: for ideal training, the specific amount of stress induced on a participant must match their current tolerance of stress. Meichenbaum (2007) describes the right stressor as one strong enough to activate a trainee's coping skills without being so strong that it overwhelms them. Imagine your last training class, and I am sure you will realize that the degree of participant experience is a significantly broad range. The result is that any given training curriculum is fixed somewhere along the continuum of stress inoculation, only efficiently serving the officers who match that level of experience.
Being on either end of the continuum is a familiar experience for officers. An officer whose experience level is above what is being taught often feels boredom; "going through the motions." An officer whose experience level is under what is being taught feels overwhelmed; "drinking through a fire hose." Psychologists have documented this effect for more than a century. In the 1908 study that became known as the Yerkes-Dodson law, mice trained under the strongest shocks still acted fast, but Yerkes and Dodson observed that "they were less careful in the former case and chose with less deliberation and certainty" (Yerkes & Dodson, 1908, pp. 476–477).
The small group of officers who perfectly match the level of stress being taught has just enough experience to not feel overwhelmed while simultaneously being challenged the perfect amount.
One example where this concept is easily recognized is the skill of drawing a handgun. Teaching an academy class how to pragmatically draw a pistol from a retention holster looks vastly different than teaching a SWAT unit. Now imagine mixing both these groups of officers into one training class and imagine the problem above playing out. Yerkes and Dodson found that the ideal amount of pressure depends on how difficult the skill is for the learner: "an easily acquired habit… may readily be formed under strong stimulation, whereas a difficult habit may be acquired readily only under relatively weak stimulation" (Yerkes & Dodson, 1908, pp. 481–482). For the SWAT operator, the draw is an easy habit. For the recruit, it is a difficult one. The unfortunate reality in law enforcement is that the instructor typically defaults to the lowest common denominator, effectively committing an injustice to the above-average officer.
Matching Stress to Skill
The principles introduced in this article are vital to modifying your current training program. Each program is highly unique, but below are some proposals to use as a starting point.
One solution is to divide the officers being trained into different groups using quantitative metrics, such as qualification scores, timed standards, or any test your agency currently uses. The training manager then modifies the curriculum into various levels of expertise. Although this method demands more overhead for the training staff, the final product yields a higher return on investment. This mirrors Meichenbaum's (2007) guidance that progression in stress inoculation should be based on demonstrated mastery, not on a fixed amount of training time.
Another option is to separate practical applications at the end of the course into the respective levels of experience and modify the drill accordingly. A possible advantageous byproduct of this system is healthy competition. Separating people into groups drives self-improvement and motivation. That said, a group assignment is not a label. Law enforcement is a team, and every officer is at a different point in their journey, with different skills to offer.
Applying the above solution to a range program is a great way to envision how the principles can be applied. An agency implements tiered range training days where officers fall into one of four groups. Each group has its own score range, based on qualification scores, times, or other tests the agency already uses. Every quarter, groups are adjusted based on each officer's most recent scores, so moving up is always within reach. The least proficient group gets instruction, drills, and scenarios tailored to their needs, like smooth trigger pull, grip, and stance, while the most advanced group spends more time on advanced concepts like shooting and moving, vision strategies, and confirmation levels. Research supports adding real pressure to range work. When Dutch police officers trained against an opponent who fired back with colored soap cartridges, researchers found "positive short- and long-term effects on police officers' shot accuracy under pressure" (Nieuwenhuys & Oudejans, 2011, p. 277), and the improvement was still present four months later.
The Case for Tiered Training
Training is the linchpin to the success of an agency and the solution to most of the problems law enforcement faces as society adapts what is expected of us. In a trial with Finnish tactical officers, training in stress control led to more correct use-of-force decisions, and the researchers noted that "improved use of force decision making directly translates into potential lifesaving decisions" (Andersen & Gustafsberg, 2016, p. 1). Every officer on your roster deserves training that meets them where they are, not where the average happens to be. Start small with one tiered range day, measure what changes, and build from there, so that every officer can complete their mission, make it home every day, stay out of jail, and protect their assets.
References
Andersen, J. P., & Gustafsberg, H. (2016). A training method to improve police use of force decision making: A randomized controlled trial. SAGE Open, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016638708
Meichenbaum, D. (2007). Stress inoculation training: A preventative and treatment approach. In P. M. Lehrer, R. L. Woolfolk, & W. E. Sime (Eds.), Principles and practice of stress management (3rd ed., pp. 497–516). Guilford Press.
Nieuwenhuys, A., & Oudejans, R. R. D. (2011). Training with anxiety: Short- and long-term effects on police officers' shooting behavior under pressure. Cognitive Processing, 12(3), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-011-0396-x
Saunders, T., Driskell, J. E., Johnston, J. H., & Salas, E. (1996). The effect of stress inoculation training on anxiety and performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1(2), 170–186. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.1.2.170
Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18(5), 459–482. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.920180503