009) examined and discussed the complex relationship between research and practice that concerned D.A.R.E., a national crime prevention program that focused on training police officers, who educated the youth about the negative effects of drugs and how to resist its temptation. In “Cognitive Bias in Forensic Science,” Gianelli (2010) explored the effects of cognitive bias on forensic analysis. Cohen and Smith (2010) studied the racial factors of death penalty in America in “The Racial Geography of the Federal Death Penalty.” They recommended possible solutions that could reduce racial bias in handing out federal death penalty verdicts.
These are problems are similar, nevertheless, because they call attention to the role of the right research method in attaining credible research results. Bergman and Fox (2009) asserted that studies on D.A.R.E. cannot fully analyze and understand the complexity of the development of drug abuse attitudes and habits among the youth. Cohen and Smith (2010) used different cases and statistics to support their finding that place and jury race shape death penalty decisions. They indicated that through their analysis, they were able to broaden the examination of the causes of racial disparities among death penalty inmates. Gianelli (2010) was concerned that experimental studies revealed widespread cognitive bias among forensic experts. These authors agree that choosing the right research methods is critical in answering pertinent research questions.
The participants of these studies were directly involved in the procedures or programs under scrutiny. For Gianelli (2010), the participants of his review were forensic analysts, although he did not conduct the experiments. Instead, he used the quasi-experimental studies of others. Bergman and Fox (2009) reviewed more than thirty studies that evaluated the effectiveness of D.A.R.E. In other words, they used the studies of others to provide a synthesis of the directions of existing