↓ Skip to main content

Writing Alone or Together: Police Officers’ Collaborative Reports of an Incident

Overview of attention for article published in Criminal Justice and Behavior, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
Title
Writing Alone or Together: Police Officers’ Collaborative Reports of an Incident
Published in
Criminal Justice and Behavior, May 2018
DOI 10.1177/0093854818771721
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annelies Vredeveldt, Linda Kesteloo, Peter J. van Koppen

Abstract

After witnessing an incident, police officers may write their report collaboratively. We examined how collaboration influences the amount and accuracy of information in police reports. Eighty-six police officers participated, in pairs, in a live training scenario. Officers wrote a report about the incident, either with their partner or individually. Reports by two officers working together (collaborative performance) contained less information than reports by two officers working individually (nominal performance), with no difference in accuracy. After the first report, officers who had worked individually wrote a collaborative report. Police officers who recorded their own memories prior to collaboration included less incorrect information in the collaborative report than police officers who wrote a collaborative report immediately after the incident. Finally, content-focused retrieval strategies (acknowledge, repeat, rephrase, elaborate) during the officers' discussion positively predicted the amount of information in collaborative reports. Practical recommendations for the police and suggestions for further research are provided.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 29%
Student > Master 1 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 14%
Student > Postgraduate 1 14%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 57%
Social Sciences 2 29%
Computer Science 1 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2020.
All research outputs
#2,788,757
of 15,164,723 outputs
Outputs from Criminal Justice and Behavior
#225
of 1,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,741
of 277,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Criminal Justice and Behavior
#5
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,164,723 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,004 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,293 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.