Summary
The study investigated the link between felony case dispositions and eyewitness identification evidence by examining a total of 725 felony cases. The research findings indicate that there is identification in most accepted cases as opposed to rejected cases. However, while acquaintance cases demonstrated a more significant association, stranger cases did not. Amid other underlying factors, the research provides compelling evidence to guide public policy development.
Abstract
The article includes a succinct abstract, which meets some of the criteria outlined by the American Psychological Association relative to the description of the research problem, research findings, and practical implications. However, the abstract is weak and limited in the sense that it does not include a description of the participants and their attributes, the research design, and the conclusion. Therefore, the abstract misses out on some major points, which are captured in the rest of the article. Furthermore, one cannot tell from the abstract, the type of research study being conducted. Overall, the abstract fails to reflect the quality recommended by the American Psychological Association.
Introduction
The research article provides a thorough and well-written introduction, which reviews both current research studies and some studies published in the last 20 years relative to the research problem under study. From the introduction, one can see what is already known and the research gaps, which warrant the present study. For instance, the researchers note that most studies have documented the prevalence of wrongful convictions because most prosecutors tend to rely on witness evidence regardless of other implicating or exonerating evidence. Therefore, it is important to examine the link between eyewitness evidence and felony outcomes to guide policy development relative to lowering the incident of wrongful convictions (Flowe, Mehta, & Ebbesen, 2011, p. 140). Despite the introduction relying on sources falling out of the 5-year range as recommended by the American Psychological Association, it provides sufficient background with minimal details to back the present study. On the other hand, the specific purpose and goals of the study can be identified from the last part of the introduction; however, specific hypotheses and research questions are missing from the introduction. Overall, the literature review that was conducted is balanced and objective.
Method
The article provides a good description of the methodology used in sampling the cases reviewed and the inclusion criteria, which is based on closed or no-appeal-pending case categories. This section also provides a thorough description of the sampled cases and their underlying attributes relative to whether the cases were related to robberies, rape, or assaults among other characteristics (Flowe et al., 2011, pp. 144-145). The materials used in the study and the execution of the research methodology are sufficiently described with the authors noting that case files with police records were obtained and the cases coded by about 46 research assistants to ensure reliability (Flowe et al., 2011, p. 145). Moreover, a detailed description of the measures used is provided with the primary outcome measure being the felony case issuing. Conversely, measurable case predictors included eyewitness variables, crime incidents, and suspect characteristics. The study also includes a total of six measures reflecting the indicators of eyewitness strength such as proximity, retention interval, and confidence among others. Further, this section provides a brief description of the data analysis plan and the scoring criteria used in data collection. Overall, the methodology section demonstrates quality and adherence to almost all rules outlined by the American Psychological Association.
Results
This section provides a thorough description of all the descriptive attributes of the samples in a table coupled with a description of statistical tests conducted in the study such as zero-order correlations to provide the relationships between various variables (suspect characteristics, incident characteristics, and eyewitness characteristics) and case issuing decisions (Flowe et al., 2011, p. 149). On the other hand, chi-square analyses with relevant confidence levels provided the basis for the examination of the link between positive eyewitness identification and case decisions. Additionally, this section includes appropriate probability values relative to the likelihood of identification. From the results, it is evident that the association between identification and case decisions was statistically significant in acquaintance cases as opposed to stranger cases. Further, five tables are used to enrich the quality of this section with the authors providing both in-text and stand-alone interpretations of the contents. Despite the authors failing to describe the statistical software used to code the results, this section provides sufficient information to suffice the recommendations of the American Psychological Association. Furthermore, the statistical analyses conducted are sufficient and appropriate in terms of meeting the purpose and goals of the study.
Discussions
A detailed and clear summary of all the research findings is provided in this section with minor comparisons made to previous studies on the same and related topics. Further, the authors provide relevant recommendations in terms of the factors to consider when evaluating the strength of the witness evidence provided to the prosecutors. On the other hand, the authors note that their study methodology is limited in the sense that it does not allow for the identification of cause and effect conclusions from the research findings. Other factors regarding the validity and completeness of the information provided in police files are also identified as possible sources of limitations to the present study (Flowe et al., 2011, pp. 156-157).
Overall, this research article is well written and clear considering that it provides details clarifying a seemingly unfamiliar association between witness evidence and case decisions in criminal justice. Therefore, this research contributes both to the body of knowledge and practice within the fields of psychology, public policy, and law. As a result, I will be more than willing to include this article in my future research studies.
Reference
Flowe, H.D., Mehta, A., & Ebbesen, E.B. (2011). The role of eyewitness identification evidence in felony case dispositions. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17(1), 140-159.