Analysis: After 60 years, black officers rare

[cato2]

[quote=Bluehawk;3414315]I've taken this out as a separate issue...

So, there too I would question the findings... myself being from the rural part of America, and being a descendant of several generations who were likewise. I guess one could think that if I am unwilling to accept "scientific proof", then there is no point in offering it? To the contrary, after a long life of seeing and being subjected to specious "proofs", I have noticed that they aren't all they're cracked up to be, they are not as reliable as some people think, and they are not a dependable source of truth about right living.

While in your personal observations in the past you have come to a conclusion that differs from the report, that does not mean that the report is wrong. Your personal observation is just that, one observation. The study takes into account a number of respondents, and not simply one.

Let me give you an example of the abstract of a poster that I will be presenting in the APA in Boston on Aug 14th.(APA 2008 Convention Homepage ) It is not asking arbitrary questions but very specific questions that are then measured. And it is not limited to one or a few individuals. The paper also points out out areas that future investigators may wish to explore.

Notice also that the strength of the argument does not lay simply on this questionnaire, but includes prior research which is included in the body of the paper. Thus it ties into, and gains strength from prior research concerning the subject. One of the authors here, Hosch, is the Assoc Dean of Liberal Art, worked with the NSF in DC and is the head of my lab at school.

Abstract

Often in a criminal proceeding, a defendant will offer an alibi as a defense against criminal charges. The alibi is evidence the person could not have committed the crime. Often, this alibi will take the form of collaborating testimony from an eyewitness or physical evidence that proves the defendant was elsewhere. This research presents the results of a survey conducted to gauge what general attitudes and beliefs exist concerning alibis. Survey results are reported. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted on the survey results and the preference for alibi content was regressed onto the four factors identified.

A questionnaire had to be developed asking specific questions. The responses were recorded as a factor. What follows is the raw data and the methods used.

A survey on the general attitudes, beliefs, and expectations of alibis

Alibis, or the claims that an individual was elsewhere at the time of a crime’s commission, may be one critical feature of a defendant’s claim of innocence. The perception of the alibi itself comes under scrutiny if the alibi is not sufficiently strong enough to prevent the criminal trial. Normally a suspect in a criminal proceeding is investigated by the police and either released or investigated further. Sommers and Douglass (2007) found evidence that an alibi was more credible and was stronger if it was presented in the context of a criminal investigation and not a trial. The offered interpretation was that if the investigation by the police resulted in criminal prosecution, by then the alibi was sufficiently discredited.

The alibi witness is an important factor in the evaluation of the claim of being elsewhere. In one study investigating the impact of the alibi witness, Hosch and Culhane (2004) looked at the impact of the relationship between the witness and the defendant. In a study conducted by Culhane & Hosch (2004) it was found that convictions occurred less often if there was no known relationship between the alibi witness and the defendant. Having a girlfriend testify was no better than having no alibi corroborator at all. Furthermore, when the jury perceived that the witness was not confidence the conviction rate was higher.

In jury trials, alibi strength may depend upon not only eyewitness testimony, but also physical evidence. In a study conducted by Olson & Wells (2004), the presence of physical evidence was found to augment and overwhelm simple alibi testimony. The presence of physical evidence was found to be so strong, that it would often supersede the verbal testimony. Support was found for an alibi taxonomy proposed that physical evidence could be fabricated and that alibi witnesses may be motivated to concoct false testimony for the accused.

While there have been few studies that have examined alibis explicitly (Culhane & Hosch, 2004; Olson & Wells, 2004; Sommers & Douglass, 2007), no published research has attempted to determine the general attitudes, beliefs, and expectations regarding alibis. The proposed study reports the results of a general survey on alibis and the subsequent exploratory factor analysis that was conducted on the results. As this survey was intended to serve as a first step on which to construct future alibi research, no substantive hypotheses were advanced.

Two hundred fifty eight participants took part in the study. 51% of participants were male and, on average, participants were 22.07 (SD = 5.16) years of age. Consistent with the ethnic composition of the city of El Paso, 80.2% of participants self-reported their ethnicity to be Hispanic American. Only participants who were at least 18 years of age or older and who reported either possessing a valid driver’s license or voter registration card were included in data analysis, consistent with the State of Texas’ jury-eligibility standards.

Participants were asked to complete a brief questionnaire designed to gauge their general attitudes and beliefs about alibis. Thirteen items that were designed to capture this data were measured on 7 point Likert-type scales where 0 corresponded to “strongly disagree” and 6 corresponded to “strongly agree.” Self-report question dealt with how often alibis are provided in criminal cases and how often family, friends, and other individuals are asked to testify. One question asked if it was more important to have an alibi witness, physical evidence, or both. Finally, participants were asked to estimate how much contact both they and criminal defendants have with potential alibi corroborators (e.g., sister, coworker) in an average 30-day month.

Descriptive statistics were conducted on all Likert-type scale items and self-report data pertaining to how often alibi witnesses testify in court and the percentage of time when family, friends, and other individuals testify in court for a defendant. Surprisingly, 3.4% endorsed, as a best option, having an alibi corroborator and 32.8% reported that having physical evidence is most important for an alibi, compared to the 63% who endorsed that it was equally important to have both.
Exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation was conducted on the 13 Likert-type questions. Four eigenvalues exceeded 1.0. Three items loaded on factor 1, labeled “risks of falsely testifying.” Four items loaded on factor 2, labeled “relation to and contact with defendant.” Four items loaded on factor 3, labeled “propensity to fabricate.” Three items loaded on factor 4, labeled “exonerating testimony and evidence.” One item, asking if alibi witnesses who do not know the defendant personally can be trusted to tell the truth, loaded onto both factor 2 and factor 4. Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4 explained 18.77%, 17.90%, 13.86%, and 12.94% of variance, respectively, for a total of 63.47% variance explained by the four factors. Preference for alibi testimony, physical evidence, or both was regressed on the four factors. The regression model was non-significant, F(4, 257) = .82, p > .05; no factor emerged as a significant predictor of preference for alibi content.
Surveys of people’s general attitudes and beliefs about alibis may illustrate areas of the nascent field that need to be explored. In this survey, a noticeable proportion of individuals indicated that they would prefer not to have the benefit of both an alibi corroborator and physical evidence, which appears counterintuitive. Future researchers may want to distinguish exactly who will serve as an alibi corroborator and what the physical evidence will be when inquiring as to what a person would like to have in an claim that he or she was elsewhere.

References

Culhane, S. E., & Hosch, H., M. (2004). An alibi witness’ influence on mock jurors’ verdicts. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 1604 -1616.
Olson, E., A. & Wells, G. L. (2004). What makes a good alibi? A proposed taxonomy. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 157-176.
Sommers, S. R., & Douglass, A. B. (2007). Context matters: Alibi strength varies according to evaluator perspective. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 12, 41-54.

[Bluehawk]

Originally Posted by cato2

While in your personal observations in the past you have come to a conclusion that differs from the report, that does not mean that the report is wrong. Your personal observation is just that, one observation. The study takes into account a number of respondents, and not simply one.

Let me give you an example of the abstract of a poster that I will be presenting in the APA in Boston on Aug 14th.(APA 2008 Convention Homepage[size=3] ) It is not asking arbitrary questions but very specific questions that are then measured. And it is not limited to one or a few individuals. The paper also points out out areas that future investigators may wish to explore.

Notice also that the strength of the argument does not lay simply on this questionnaire, but includes prior research which is included in the body of the paper. Thus it ties into, and gains strength from prior research concerning the subject. One of the authors here, Hosch, is the Assoc Dean of Liberal Art, worked with the NSF in DC and is the head of my lab at school.

Respectfully, thank you for reminding me of my last (and final) term paper as an undergraduate psychology student.

I believe you have proven the exact point I am making... namely, such reports and scientific method essentially consist of well-crafted jargon prepared as a significant contribution to a profession for publications which speak primarily to others who are doing the same thing.

And, what is more, I hasten to add that the mere presence of a report which takes into account a "number of respondents" in no way at all diminishes or refutes the position I have taken in rebuttal and in which I am quite sure to be joined by uncountable numbers of others. The difference is that in one case the opinion was published by friendly supporters, and in the other it is merely part of a civil conversation... which does not make it wrong or less than; or false.

Returning then to the original premise of this thread which I take to have been that there are few or too few blacks at the highest officer ranks (presumably all branches?) and, accordingly (to some people) this is both a fact and due to "subtle" racism... I had an opportunity to put that matter to a close friend, former submarine Commander in the Pacific Fleet, and one of the current Blue and Gold - Candidate Guidance officers assisting the Naval Academy to find suitable appointees from our region.

He reminded me that the minimum qualifications for any Academy appointment include having a SAT score somewhere between 650-700, having played an average of 3 sports and been captain of 1 of those teams, a fairly long list of other volunteer activities and being ranked in the top 10% of their graduating class.

He confirmed that there are no known affirmative action points granted for applicants, of any kind... although graduates who were sports stars may be given some leeway at the time of consideration.

He also clarified that when a minority member of Congress does fail to make an appointment during a given year it may just as easily have been due to the fact that each member of Congress is only allowed a total of not more than 6 appointees, including BOTH those who are presently serving IN an Academy and those applying for admission; and that any appointments not made by anyone are credited back to the Academies and used for another State or States.

He also made clear that, at least at Annapolis, the kind of job an officer ends up doing in service after graduation and in which branch (Marines or Navy) is totally a function of one's class rank in the last 6 months of the 4 year training period. Those higher in the class get their choice of slots until all the limited number of prime slots (i.e. presumably combat commands, aviation and USMC preference) are filled. The result is easy to see in that anyone not in the top 25% or so of every graduating class will be assigned to less and less prestigious jobs... which in turn lessens the probability of their being considered for rank advancement all along the way.

Naturally, there are still other non-Academy ways to become a military officer and to get combat assignments, but it is safe to realize that those who HAVE completed Academy quals are certain to be given special consideration and credit when promotions do arise... even including that group which came in at the very bottom of their graduating class at any one of the 4 military Academies.

This is good information to have apropos of your premise, or the premise of the report.

[cato2]

I am not sure you know the difference between a term paper and a research paper there Blue. The is an experiment that I ran and collected data. The results were then submitted to the APA for approval in the conference. After one revision, peer revision, it was accepted for the conference. I am not graded in a class that I am attending. This is independent research with peer review. This will be published and a resource for further reseach for anyone seeking to explore this. And it can be challenged and found to be wrong by peers. It is the second time I will have my name out there before graduating from school, and something that will help in the effort in applying to grad school.

As for my other posts on this thread, I stand by the conclusion I have drawn, my opinion of the subject.

[Bluehawk]

Originally Posted by cato2

I am not sure you know the difference between a term paper and a research paper there Blue. The is an experiment that I ran and collected data. The results were then submitted to the APA for approval in the conference. After one revision, peer revision, it was accepted for the conference. I am not graded in a class that I am attending. This is independent research with peer review. This will be published and a resource for further reseach for anyone seeking to explore this. And it can be challenged and found to be wrong by peers. It is the second time I will have my name out there before graduating from school, and something that will help in the effort in applying to grad school.

As for my other posts on this thread, I stand by the conclusion I have drawn, my opinion of the subject.

The difference between a term paper and a research paper is that one is done is college, and the other is the same except done for publication.

The "scientific method" is identical.

What makes you think I myself haven't been through this before?

Congratulations for getting yourself on the spinning wheel of publish or perish. I hope you'll enjoy it.

I didn't.

I found that the pressure to publish results in specious, spurious and superfluous peer reviewed research papers read once and filed away forever.

Source link:
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123108249

[cato2]

Did you look at the data that closely?

Two hundred fifty eight participants took part in the study. 51% of participants were male and, on average, participants were 22.07 (SD = 5.16) years of age.

That is collecting data via having 258 live participants come directly into the lab to fill out that questionnaire. That took two weeks alone. That was done in my lab, here in the Psy dept, not a classroom environment.

Then that data is plugged, in this case the SPSS software for statistical analysis. It was not simply reading other research papers and manipulating the information.

[cato2]

Originally Posted by cato2

Did you look at the data that closely?



That is collecting data via having 258 live participants come directly into the lab to fill out that questionnaire. That took two weeks alone. That was done in my lab, here in the Psy dept, not a classroom environment.

Then that data is plugged, in this case the SPSS software for statistical analysis. It was not simply reading other research papers and manipulating the information.

If your data is relevant it would be sited and published as a resource within further research.