Annotated Bibliography on Police Suicide

Question

Student Learning Outcomes

 Read academic literature to build understanding of selected topic

 Summarize key research for later incorporation in your literature review

Annotated Bibliography

The annotated bibliography is a well-organized list of references & article notes/summaries used to build and

organize research literature relevant to the researcher’s project. The annotated bibliography is a way to

critically consider the research relating to your topic/research question, including the methods, findings, and

limitations of previous research. Additionally, it is also an opportunity to continue understanding how various

previous studies are linked and contribute to understanding the topic of investigation. You can think of the

annotated bibliography as the next step of your Literature Search Assignment and as preparation for your

Literature Review Assignment.

Please see this helpful resource from the Libraries of the University of Southern California for important further

discussion on the annotated bibliography.

Annotated Bibliography Assignment Guidelines

The annotated bibliography is basically the next step of your Literature Search Assignment and preparation for

your Literature Review Assignment. It provides necessary reflection and communicates further details about

the articles in your Literature Search Assignment. While drafting the annotated bibliography, you should also

keep in mind how articles are linked and may be organized to provide a strong discussion of research relevant

to your topic. Please follow these guidelines when drafting your Annotated Bibliography Assignment…

Your annotated bibliography should include at least 5 peer reviewed and/or government research

publications. Each of these 5 article summaries should include: 1) Reference Entry formatted in ASA

or APA style, 2) Article Summary summarizing the article by answering key questions, and 3) Proper

Formatting & Writing. See each of these in detail:

1) REFERENCE ENTRY: ASA or APA Formatted Bibliographic Entry – Each entry in the annotated

bibliography begins with a properly formatted (APA or ASA) bibliographic citation. Be sure to

order bibliographic references alphabetically.

a. Helpful resource for proper ASA or APA formatting: https://libguides.usc.edu/citation

2) ARTICLE SUMMARY: Paragraph summarizing article – Following each properly formatted

bibliographic entry, you should write a short summary paragraph that includes well-supported

answers to the following questions:

a. What did the researchers attempt to find out?

i. 2-3 sentences detailing the primary research question/problem of the study.

1. Describe the substantive research question or problem investigated by the study.

2. Identify and explain whether study was descriptive, exploratory, or explanatory

(see Babbie Ch.4).

b. How did the researchers choose to answer their question/problem?

i. 3-4 sentences describing the methods used by researchers.

1. Identify any important contextual details – study area, unit of analysis, research

design of study (cross-sectional, longitudinal?)

2. Discuss the application of theory utilized in the study.

3. Describe the method employed in the study (e.g. quantitative/qualitative/mix-

methods? Survey, interviews, content analysis?)

c. What did the study find?

i. 3-5 sentences detailing the substantive findings of the study.

1. Discuss the meaningful findings from the study.

2. Explain what these findings mean for understanding the topic at hand.

d. What are the limitations of this research?

i. 2-3 sentences describing the limitations of the study.

1. Explain any limitations of the study (e.g. external validity/generalizability, sample

size, context, etc.)

e. How/why is this article relevant to your topic or question?

i. 3-5 sentences about the relevance of this study to your research topic.

1. Describe the contribution the study makes to your understanding of the topic.

2. Discuss why this study is important to your review of literature.

3) FORMAT & WRITING: Format guidelines

a. A minimum of 5 entries from quality sources – may or may not be from the Literature Search

Assignment

b. ASA or APA formatting

c. 12 pt font (Times New Roman or some other common font)

d. Single-spaced paragraphs

e. Complete sentences

f. Edited thoroughly for writing errors – i.e. grammar, spelling, sentence structure, punctuation,

clarity of communication, etc.

g. Refrain from using too many quotes from the article. The summary should be in your own

words. If you do use a quote, refrain from lengthy (longer than 2 lines) quotes since these are

such short summaries. In other words, your discussion shouldn’t be just a copy/paste of the

study’s abstract.

Rubric per Entry

0 – No entry present

1 – Entry present, but almost no information and/or with major errors throughout

2 – Entry incomplete and/or with a several major errors

3 – Entry mostly complete, but missing minor information and/or several minor errors

4 – Entry complete with a few minor errors

5 – Entry complete with minimal errors

Example Entry

Below is an example annotated bibliography entry. This entry is related to a study on the correlation between

bullying and suicidal ideation among adolescents in South Dakota. This is a good example of an extensive

annotated entry. Notice that it could reasonably be shared among colleagues collaborating on a study, which

is another benefit of annotated bibliographies.

1) Henry, Kimberly L., Peter J. Lovegrove, Michael F. Steger, Peter Y. Chen, Konstantin P. Cigularov, and

Rocco

G. Tomoazic. 2014. “The Potential Role of Meaning in Life in the Relationship Between Bullying

Victimization and Suicidal Ideation.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43:221-232. Retrieved

September 15, 2017 (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10964-013-9960-2)

In their explanatory study, Henry et al. (2014) tested the hypothesis that adolescents’ meaning

of life is a predictor and mediator of suicidal ideation among adolescent bullying victims. Authors

defined meaning of life as “referring to people’s judgements that their lives are coherent, make sense,

and are endowed with a sense of overarching purpose” (Henry et al. 2014:222). Specifically, the

authors hypothesized that adolescents who reported a higher prevalence of bullying victimization would

report significantly lower meaning of life and that a lower reported meaning of life. Authors also

hypothesized that feeling a higher meaning of life would mediate the relationship between bullying and

suicidal ideation – adolescents experiencing bullying victimization and higher meaning of life would

have lower levels of suicidal ideation when compared with those who had lower meaning of life. Henry

et al. (2014) tested their hypotheses through an online survey of students from socioeconomically and

racially/ethnically diverse middle schools and a high school in a Northeastern U.S. school district.

Authors considered a variety of control variables that may otherwise predict bullying victimization and

suicidal ideation. Henry et al. (2014) found that bullying victimization and perpetration were positively

correlated. More frequent bullying victimization was significantly associated with lower meaning of life

and more frequent suicidal ideation. Weaker meaning in life was also associated with more frequent

suicidal ideation. Among males, the authors’ hypothesis that meaning of life was a moderating role

between bullying victimization and suicidal ideation was confirmed – males with high bullying

victimization and higher meaning of life exhibited less frequent suicidal ideation. However, bullying

victimization did not appear to mediate meaning of life among males. Among adolescent females,

meaning of life did not significantly moderate bullying victimization and suicidal ideation. However,

weaker meaning of life was associated with higher bullying victimization. Findings suggest possible

gender differences in the role of meaning of life in bullying victimization and suicidal ideation. Authors

suggest gender differences in the role of bullying as a potential contributor to differences. This study

provides a good overview of theoretical explanations the relationship between bullying victimization and

suicidal ideation. The findings also add to the understanding of how meaning of life may interact with

bullying victimization and suicidal ideation. Finally, the findings also help to further our understanding

of gender differences in the reasons and impacts of bullying victimization (including meaning of life and

suicidal ideation). The study is limited in that it was conducted primarily in an urban area of the

Northeastern United States, which translates to potential problems with external validity. The study is

also cross-sectional and the authors point out that meaning of life may very well proceed bullying

victimization and suicidal ideation. Thus low meaning of life may predict bullying victimization and

suicidal ideation prior to the occurrence of either experience. Longitudinal research could help more

firmly establish time order and the moderating and mediating effects of meaning of life.