Earlier this week in the discussion forum, you reviewed several scenarios and discussed one or two studies that you would be interested in using for the Week Six Intervention Proposal. You should now make your final decision regarding which case study you would like use to create your Intervention Proposal and begin doing your research. As part of that research, this week you will be creating an annotated bibliography of seven to eight peer-reviewed, contemporary articles (published within the past 10 years) from the Ashford University Library. For each article, provide a brief annotation (approximately 150 words).
Remember, you are not writing an abstract; you are writing an annotation. The annotation should be a scholarly evaluation of article. Explain why you think this article is important and address any potential ethical concerns with research. In essence, each annotation is like a mini article critique.
Your research should cast a wide net and the articles should represent different sides of the research (approximately a 50-50 split). As you do your research, it is good to keep an open mind to ensure you do not miss something important. While there is no set page requirement for this bibliography, it should be approximately four to five pages in length and be formatted according to APA-style guidelines as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. For additional guidance on how to format and what to include in your Annotated Bibliography, view the Sample Annotated Bibliography from the Ashford Writing Center.
Below is the attached information to start the Annotated bibliography:
Scenario Two: Police Interrogations and False Confessions On August 1, 1988, Tanner Martin awoke to find both of his parents unconscious and bloody in the family home. Tanner, 17 years old at the time, called police who immediately suspected him of harming his parents. They took him to the police station, administered a polygraph examination, and interrogated him for 15 hours. After 15 hours of intense interrogation, the police told Tanner that he failed the polygraph. They also told him that his father had regained consciousness and reported that Tanner bludgeoned him and his wife. Tanner denied any recollection of committing such a heinous act. However, he stated that he has never known his father to tell a lie. Tanner believed he must be guilty of the crime and confessed that he bludgeoned his parents. At trial, Tanner’s attorney found out that the police lied to Tanner. Tanner actually passed the polygraph examination and both of Tanner’s parents were deceased when police arrived at the scene of the crime. Therefore, Mr. Martin never made a statement of Tanner’s guilt. The judge ruled that police are allowed to lie to suspects about such things. The jury heard Tanner’s confession and rendered a unanimous verdict of guilty. The judge sentenced Tanner to 50 years to life in prison. Tanner appealed his conviction immediately. However, it was not until DNA evidence found at the scene was finally tested and unequivocally cleared him that his conviction was vacated and he was released from prison in 2013. The DNA belonged to Mr. Martin’s business partner who had embezzled $500,000 from their company and faked his own death five days after the Martins’ murder. This situation has been very embarrassing and citizens’ trust in the police chief and mayor has plummeted as a result. They want to make sure something similar never happens again. The police chief now has a clear understanding that 25% of wrongful convictions in the United States are the direct result of false confession. Therefore, the police chief has reached out to you, an expert in the social psychology of police interrogation tactics and false confessions, to understand how it is that officers elicit false confessions and why people confess to crimes they did not commit. The police chief has retained you, an applied social psychology expert, to provide a scholarly analysis of the scientific, peer-reviewed literature on the factors related to false confessions such as confirmation bias, obedience to authority, compliance, social influence, and (interrogative) suggestibility. You must also render a professional opinion regarding your conclusion as to where police erred and what they should avoid doing in the future. Your opinion should be based on the scientific, peer-reviewed social psychology research that you reviewed. The following peer-reviewed journal articles are a good place to start to familiarize yourself with the social psychology of false confessions. Gudjonssen, G.H. & Pearse, J. (2011). Suspect interviews and false confessions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 33-37. Kassin, S. M. (2012, April 30). Why confessions trump innocence. American Psychologist, Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0028212
WEEK 6 Intervention Proposal In Week Three, you created a literature review around the scenario that you selected in Week One. For the Week Six assignment, you will create an intervention proposal that contains a professional recommendation for the chosen case study. The Intervention Proposal should incorporate any feedback that the instructor provided in the Week Four Literature Review or Week Two Annotated Bibliography assignments.
In a 10- to 12-page paper (not including the title page or references page) the student will: Briefly restate the problem from the chosen case study. Compose a thesis statement that contains the student’s professional recommendation. The thesis statement should be located near the end of the second paragraph of the report. Explain the relevant theories and empirical studies that have led to the student’s professional recommendation. The explanation must include evaluations of seven to eight, peer-reviewed articles from the Annotated Bibliography that was created in Week Two. At least one of these articles must be about a specific empirical study. In addition, the explanation must: Evaluate each article (comparing and contrasting them with the other articles) and answer the following questions: What was the researchers’ research question? What was their hypothesis? How many participants did they have? Was the research design method appropriate for that particular hypothesis? Was it valid? Did their findings support the hypothesis? What are the implications? What are the limitations? Discuss the opposing sides to the student’s recommendation and explain: Why it is relevant. Why it should be considered. Why it should be discounted for this recommendation. Discuss any limitations or gaps in existing research. Restate the professional recommendation in one to two concluding paragraphs. The paper must include a title page and references page, and it must be formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
Organization tip: It is best to start with the least related and most broad article and move toward the most relevant. It can be helpful to think of the organization for this report as a funnel: The articles evaluated should get more and more specific and narrow in breadth throughout the report.
Language Note: This report is being written for an audience that is not familiar with the theories and material that are discussed. This means that the paper needs to be accessible to all individuals. All technical terms, acronyms, and theories should be explained and jargon should be avoided.