Pathways to Attrition: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Justifications for Police Designations of Sexual Assault Complaints

Authors

Danielle M. Soulliere, University of WindsorFollow

Abstract

The present analysis is a reframing of an earlier study conducted by the author to compensate for perceived deficiencies in previous studies on police decisions in sexual assault complaints. Specifically, qualitative comparative analysis was employed at the micro-social level to reveal justification scenarios, employed by investigating officers, which resulted in attrition at the police level. It was found that police employed the legal model in justifying “unfounded” designations while police employed both legal and extralegal models in justifying designations of “departmental discretion.” Further rese arch, expanding the database through interview s and participant observation, is necessary to fully explore justification scenarios for police designations of sexual assault complaints

Keywords

Qualitative Comparative Analysis, QCA, Sexual Assault, and Police Decision-Making

Publication Date

9-1-2005

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.

DOI

10.46743/2160-3715/2005.1836

Recommended APA Citation

Soulliere, D. M. (2005). Pathways to Attrition: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Justifications for Police Designations of Sexual Assault Complaints. The Qualitative Report, 10(3), 416-438. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2005.1836