Police Training Effectiveness

Police Training Effectiveness

Prior to beginning work on this assignment, read Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 from the required textbook, Introduction to Forensic Psychology: Research and Application.

The goal of this assignment is to develop your critical thinking skills and enhance your ability to evaluate and analyze peer-reviewed research articles in the field of police and investigative psychology.

You will select one peer-reviewed research article that has been published during the last three years and write a comprehensive critique of the article. You can refer to Writing an Article CritiqueLinks to an external site. resource for assistance. This assignment will help you understand the components of a research article, evaluate its strengths and weaknesses, and consider its implications for the field.

To complete this assignment, you will:

• Summarize a peer-reviewed research article of your choosing in the area of police psychology or investigative psychology that was published in the last three years.
• Evaluate the research problem or question addressed in the article.
• Critique the research methodology identified in the article.
  • Discuss the research design, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• Analyze how the research study contributes to an understanding of police or investigative psychology techniques.
  • Discuss how the findings contribute to existing knowledge, identify potential applications, and suggest any future research directions.

The Police and Investigative Psychology Research Article Critique paper

Check our essay writing services here

APA

Police Training Effectiveness

Critique of Di Nota, Huhta, Boychuk, & Andersen (2024): Police lethal force errors and stress physiology during video and live evaluation simulations

Summary of the article

Di Nota et al. (2024) examined whether police officers’ lethal-force decision-making errors and physiological stress responses differ between video-based simulations and live, reality-based simulations administered during an agency’s annual requalification. The sample included 187 active-duty Canadian officers (M_age ≈ 33 years; ≈7.5 years’ experience). Each officer completed five scenarios (two “shoot,” three “no-shoot”) split across a video block and a live block. Lethal-force errors (e.g., firing in a no-shoot or failing to use appropriate force when required) were scored by certified UOF instructors; autonomic arousal was indexed via heart rate (HR) relative to resting baseline using ambulatory sensors.

Key findings: overall error rates were significantly higher in video simulations (5.92%) than live simulations (0.81%). Within video simulations, officers made more errors in no-shoot scenarios (7.55%) than in shoot scenarios (2.69%). Both modalities elicited substantial stress (HR increases from ~79 at rest to ~115 video and ~127 live), with higher peak HR in live scenarios. The authors argue that video simulations may introduce perceptual/physical constraints that reduce ecological validity and increase decision errors, particularly in no-shoot conditions. They recommend using each modality strategically—video for efficiency/standardization, live for higher-fidelity assessment—rather than letting video replace live scenarios without validation. Tampere University Research Portal

Evaluation of the research problem

The authors address a timely, practice-relevant question: how the evaluation modality (video vs. live) influences lethal-force errors and stress during mandated requalification. As many agencies consider virtual or VR tools to save time and cost, understanding performance consequences is crucial. The problem is well-situated within contemporary debates on