论文代写：刑事警察自由裁量权
论文代写：刑事警察自由裁量权
在本研究中，通过使用多变量方法不同的警察自由裁量权进行了评估。这项研究的数据集已获得从三个资源。第一组的统计和访谈数据收集从超过300名警察的采访，从100多个警察机构在加拿大，考虑到所有的省份和地区，不同的社区和警察服务。在分层随机抽样中选择了警察机构，以确保适当的代表性和人口规模。立意抽样的方法，曾与罪犯，所有不同的警察部门和水平表示可以证实的受访者。不同的经验的警务人员，确保已涉及与青少年罪行，他们所有的采访录音磁带。面试数据进行定量编码的答辩人的水平，从而处理的磁带记录的面试的可靠性的问题。这些选择性的观察是由一个确认偏见的人员被要求比较的方面的犯罪和他们的程度影响警方的自由裁量权与年轻的罪犯。为了尽量减少错误，他们被要求将影响自由裁量权的因素归类为“主要因素”，一个“次要因素”，和一个“次要因素”或“不是一个因素”。
乘坐沿数据收集从三十个警察机构与年轻的罪犯。用于在数据收集四～十二小时乘车时间（卡林顿& schelenberg，2004）。一个直接观察者观察并记录在详细的现场笔记期间和之后的旅程。在乘车过程中，记录了三种类型的信息，事件的细节和它的描述，警察的行为和自由裁量权。访谈以及数据从而消除错误骑如泛化和不准确的观察。
论文代写：刑事警察自由裁量权
Varying police discretion has been assessed in this research by using multivariate methods. Datasets of this research has been obtained from three resources. The first set of statistical and interview data is gathered from over 300 interviews of police officers from more than 100 police agencies across Canada, taking into account all provinces and territories, different communities and police services. Police agencies are selected in stratified random sampling so that proper representation and population size can be ensured. Purposive sampling is used to select interviewees who have worked with the offenders so that representation of all the different police departments and levels can be confirmed. Police officers with different experiences are ensured to have been involved with youth offences and all their interviews are tape recorded. The interview data is quantitatively coded to the level of the respondent, thus dealing with the question of reliability of a tape recorded interview. These selective observations are met by a confirmation bias as officers are asked to compare the aspects of crime and their extent of affecting police discretion with young offenders. In order to minimize errors, they are asked to categorize the factors affecting discretion into a “major factor”, a “secondary factor”, and a “minor factor” or “not a factor”.
Ride-along data is collected from thirty police agencies with young offenders. The duration of time for ride-along data collection ranged from four to twelve hours (Carrington & Schelenberg, 2004). A direct observer is observed and recorded in detailed field notes during and after the ride-along. During ride-along, three types of information are recorded, the details of the incident and its descriptions, police behaviour and discretion. The interviews as well as the ride along data thus serve to eliminate the inaccuracies such as overgeneralization and inaccurate observation.
