Civilian threat reduces distance perceptions and officer punishment in police use-of-force encounters

People turn to video evidence to make judgments about the justifiability of an officer’s actions in use-of-force incidents. Despite beliefs that video offers an objective account of events, use-of-force footage elicits different judgments among those watching it. Across four experiments ( N total = 2615), we investigated whether discrepant punishment judgments arise in part because of differences in perceptions of the physical space that separates an officer and civilian. We focus on third-party observers’ subjective perceptions, as they shape public discourse and justice outcomes, influence institutional accountability, and fuel public response. Despite watching the same video, civilians appeared physically closer to officers when they were portrayed (or appraised) as more threatening compared to less threatening, and when bystanders testified to the near proximity of the civilian to the officer. Structural equation modeling showed closer perceived distance was associated with judgments of increased justifiability and decreased punishment for the officer. These same pathways also extended to police attitudes: media depictions that made civilians seem more threatening or closer indirectly predicted greater identification with police, support for police, and appraised police legitimacy. Our findings raise awareness of the impact the media may have on contextualizing video evidence, eliciting biased assessments of case facts, and polarizing civilians’ attitudes about officers.