Article Analysis Essay on Moped Enabled Mobile Phone Snatches

Introduction

Professionals in all fields need to identify the best current practices. One of the techniques that is commonly leveraged is to conduct a research critique of previously done studies. The process involves a step by step evaluation of a research study, with the focus being to identify its strengths and limitations. Markedly, this is achieved through relating the study with the standard research reports. To this point, this paper critically analyses research conducted by Brown et al. (2019) named Moped Enabled mobile Phone Snatches.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Research Question

The title of the study is brief, and it includes the phenomenon of interest to the researcher. Importantly, it also highlights the setting (case study) of the study. According to Richardson (2014), the research problem should be brief while at the same time, reflect as much as possible what the study entails. Moreover, it does not validate or invalidate the study. Nonetheless, it has some shortcomings that are easy to note. For instance, there is some repetition in the wordings (i.e., name mobile is repeated), which should not be the case. Thus, although it is brief, it is not clear as most of the readers will not quickly get to know what the study is all about in the first glimpse. Again, it is notable that the population being investigated is not clearly defined.

Aim and Objectives

Although the researcher's aim in the paper is outlined, it is notable that it does not explicitly state what the researcher hopes to achieve. In this case, the research aim is to "Mobile-enabled Mobile Phone Snatches: A tale from two London boroughs." As indicated, the research aim is not specific whether the study seeks to examine the impacts of this issue, the history, or even how such incidences can be curbed. Notably, the research aim endeavors to provide an answer to the research question. Sometimes, it is referred to as the broad objective.

On the other hand, the research objectives are not stated. Notably, research objectives seek to subdivide the research aim into several distinct parts, albeit related to the overall aim. Thus, each research objective addresses a specific part of the study aim separately. Richardson (2014) adds that research objectives educate readers on how the overall study aim will be achieved. They should be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-constrained (SMART). Consequently, this means that the information presented in the literature review and study findings only covers the broader part of the research aim.

Literature Review

Firstly, the research paper incorporates both old and news sources. This means that the researcher conducted a comprehensive review of existing literature that is pertinent to the topic of study. Markedly, the issue of mobile robbery is not relatively new since the gadgets have been in use for quite a long time-over two decades. Moreover, it is also notable that the sources used in the study provide insightful information concerning the issue being researched.

The other strength of this study is that it uses both primary sources and secondary. The former sources provide raw and first-hand evidence (Torraco, 2015). An example includes the statistics provided by the Europol-an agency mandated by the European Union to ensure cooperation in law enforcement. In 2014, the agency's operation resulted to the seizure of over 2,400 mobile phones as well as over 200 arrests. On the other hand, the latter sources comprise of research summaries recorded in books, journals, magazines, and newspapers. The author used several secondary sources, including an article published by Butler and Rucki (2017). Thus, the researcher reviewed information recorded in primary sources as well as secondary sources, which is a major strength to justify the reliability and credibility of this study.

Moreover, the literature review is well organized since it flows logically, from more general information to more specific information that relates to the topic under investigation. In particular, it commences with discussing incidences of mobile phone snatching as a common street robbery phenomenon to describing the modus operandi of theft of mobile phones using a moped. Next, it extends to reviewing previous instances of similar cases as well as a theory related to the same. It then concludes by exploration measures that have been taken to combat the same. However, it is important to mention that although the review is chronologically done, it fails to include the subheadings, which are instrumental in guiding readers through the review.

The other strength of this study is that it incorporates the theoretical framework part. The researcher used the Cohen and Felson's Routine Activity Theory that focuses on crime incidences rather than the offender. Notably, it is used to explain the trends in crimes as well as propose solutions. The inclusion of the theoretical framework is important since it allows the researcher to conceptualize the issue being investigated in a broader context. Thus, it allows the researcher to connect existing knowledge through relevant theories, which acts as the basis of testing the hypothesis.

Nonetheless, the are limitations that can be cited in this review. Firstly, there is the omission of important reference citations. An example is the fourth sentence in the first paragraph:

"The offenders on their moped will then usually approach the victim from behind, and this allows them to make the best use of the phone user's distraction, then the victim will have their mobile phone snatched from their hands before the offenders escape at speed on their moped whilst the victim is both surprised and disorientated by the sudden sequence of events."

Markedly, the literature review section should chiefly review existing information that relates to the topic of study. On the contrary, the sentence afore-highlighted appears to be explicitly stated by the researcher. This should not be the case unless it is the concluding sentence. Torraco (2015) notes that it is important to credit and acknowledge other researcher's ideas.

Again, the study does not outline the gaps in the knowledge of the problem being studied. The research gap in the literature review highlights the area that is underexplored or is yet to be investigated (Richardson, 2014). This is an important part that cannot be overlooked in the literature review section.

In addition, the researcher has not endeavored to critic the information reviewed. Critical analysis of the literature review section is vital since it allows the researcher to avoid overgeneralization, identify any bias, or challenge his or her assumptions (Richardson, 2014). Comparing different studies in this section is essential since it allows the researcher to understand the problem in-depth, consequently allowing him to develop a focused research approach.

Finally, the part lacks an introduction and also the summary. While the latter explains areas that will be covered in this section, the latter summarizes all major findings established in the literature review part.

Research Methodology

The research design in this study is clearly defined. In particular, the mixed research method design was adopted, and the researcher gave a clear explanation of why this technique was adopted (Kumar, 2019). The method allowed the researcher to use both quantitative and qualitative methods to collect and analyze data. The use of the quantitative research design was applicable in this design since it helped the researcher to gather quantifiable data (Lowhorn, 2017). Importantly, it allowed easy extraction of data from the Crime Reporting Investigation System (CRIS). Further, the technique enabled the gathered data to be analyzed statistically. Consequently, this aided the study to be done in an objective and unbiased manner.

Correspondingly, the use of a qualitative technique was pertinent in this study since it enabled the researcher to use semi-structured interviews to gather the views of police response officers from the two boroughs. According to Abell and Garrett (2016), a qualitative research technique is the best method to use when the researcher wants to gain deep insight and understanding of the topic of research. As such, the use of a mixed research method was appropriate in this study since it allowed the researcher to gather quantifiable data from CRIS, and also aided in collecting the views of the police officers who have a first-hand experience of mobile phone robbery in the boroughs. Data Gathering Methods

The techniques used to gather data are well defined. Both primary and secondary methods of collecting data were adopted. Notably, the former techniques are used to gather first-hand information, and they include interviews, questionnaires, surveys, and direct observation. The latter technique is used to collect secondary data from sources such as books, journals, magazines, newspapers, and the internet.

In the context of the study being critiqued, the primary method of data collection used was semi-structured interviews. Importantly, this technique allowed the researcher to collect first-hand data from police officers who have vast experience in cases related to the theft of mobile phones in London. On the other hand, secondary data was collected from the Crime Reporting Investigation System. According to Richardson (2014), the use of both primary and secondary data sources allows the researcher to compare the findings, and hence increasing the reliability of the study's results.

Research Ethics

No suggestion in the paper indicates that the researcher adhered to the basic ethical codes when conducting the study. Smith (2019) observes that it is important to ensure conformance with the ethical requirement throughout the research. This includes ensuring non-discrimination, respect for the study's participants, acknowledging other people's ideas, the confidentiality of personal information, and openness when conducting the study (Smith, 2019).

Data Analysis

The technique used to analyze the gathered data is not clearly stated. This is one of the most crucial parts of the study since it helps in summarizing the collected data. Different methods are used to analyze data. For instance, the thematic analysis method is used to analyze qualitative data while, on the other hand, quantitative data is mostly analyzed using statistical tools such as SPSS. Overall, the process helps in interpreting the gathered data through the use of analytical tools to determine relationships, patterns, or trends.

Data Findings and Discussions

There is no comprehensive reporting of the findings of the study. For instance, concerning the quantitative data, the researcher analyzed data for only 12 months ending in December 2018. The findings do not suggest the trend of mobile phone theft throughout the months. Similarly, qualitative data does not indicate the pattern of the participants' responses. Notably, this should mostly be represented in percentages. Moreover, it is important to use visual representation tools such as graphs, pie charts, tables, or figures.

Smith (2019) notes that the core function of the data findings section is to present the results of the study as derived from the methods used to gather and analyze information. The part does not include the interpretation of the results and should be done in a logical manner without any form of bias using illustrative tools. Moreover, the results should provide answers to the research question.

On the other hand, the discussion part is well structured. This is affirmed by the fact that the researcher interpreted and described the study's findings...