Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the growing body of research literature on case clearance levels. Through a social artifact framework, the authors seek to understand the role that documentation of key solvability factors in investigative reports plays in shaping case clearance outcomes.

Design/methodology/approach

For this study, 166 non-fatal shooting investigative case files were obtained from a local mid-sized urban police department and coded to assess whether investigators identified key solvability characteristics for non-fatal shooting incidents. Using a logistic regression, the authors assessed the extent that investigative characteristics mentioned in case files were associated with the odds that the case was cleared by arrest.

Findings

The findings from this study indicate that investigative case files as a data source are exceedingly unreliable. Investigators do not consistently document investigative practices and intelligence. And those that are consistently documented are a part of institutionalized practices that are unique to their corresponding police department.

Originality/value

This study is original in that it uses a social artifact framework to sharpen the focus on the role that the effective documentation of critical evidence plays in leading to arrests in gun violence cases.

中文翻译：

---

检查社会工件、可解决性因素和案例结果之间的联系

目的

本文的目的是为越来越多的关于案件清除水平的研究文献做出贡献。通过社会工件框架，作者试图了解调查报告中关键可解决因素的记录在塑造案件清理结果中所发挥的作用。

设计/方法论/途径

在本研究中，从当地中型城市警察局获取了 166 个非致命枪击调查案件档案，并对其进行了编码，以评估调查人员是否确定了非致命枪击事件的关键可解决特征。作者使用逻辑回归评估了案件卷宗中提到的调查特征与逮捕后案件结案的可能性之间的关联程度。

发现

这项研究的结果表明，作为数据来源的调查案件档案极其不可靠。调查人员并没有一致地记录调查实践和情报。那些被一致记录的做法是其相应警察部门独有的制度化做法的一部分。

原创性/价值

这项研究的原创性在于它使用社会工件框架来加强对关键证据的有效记录在导致枪支暴力案件逮捕中所发挥的作用的关注。