You are to critically appraise a nursing research study using Jean Watson’s Human Caring theory. The critical appraisal which you will be doing will require that you do the following to determine the legitimacy and value of the articles you are choosing to review: 1. Title of the article and the journal; Author and Date of publication – has to be within the past 5 years to be used as evidence: Type of article published: systematic review, meta-analysis, random clinical trials, cohort studies, etc. EBP pyramid level of evidence (Ranks are levels I – VII): Was the study appropriate and valuable to improve health: Who were the participants, how many, was a power analysis done to determine if statistical analysis should be performed: Was randomization or volunteer, or specific sample selection used: If a systematic review or meta-analysis, how did the authors determine what articles to choose to review? What was the intervention? Were the instruments used to analyze the data valid and reliable: What were the results? This includes the stats findings: What were the strengths and weaknesses of the published article? This includes the EBP pyramid, the instruments reliability/validity, sample size, type of analysis done, results, limitations, etc: Did the strengths or weaknesses predominate and should the article be used to support your project and practice change? The grade will be based on accuracy, level of content and structure of the document.
Sutherland’s definition includes corporations as recidivist offenders, with privilege instigating the learning processes that lead to crime (Ruggiero, 2015). Despite the difficulties and ambiguities in its conception and definition, crimes of the powerful have merit in considering structural power theories of crime. Hagan and Thio assert that those with power and privilege have stronger motivations, more opportunities, and weaker social controls, and are therefore more likely to commit crime (Friedrichs, 2010). Other advantages of theories of crimes of the powerful include explanations of how those in power get away with crimes, how certain acts are or are not considered criminal, and the importance of national conversation and punishments when dealing with these crimes (Anello & Glaser, 2016; Olejarz, 2016). Aside from the definitional and conceptual issues, there are a few other disadvantages to these theories as well. The ambiguity of definitions of these crimes has made this topic difficult to study empirically (Nash, 2017). The definitions that are in place do not really make a distinction between crimes of the individual and crimes of the organization as a whole (Maguire et al., 1994; Reurink, 2016). Penalties and theories of control do not apply to these crimes like they do to others, since one cannot imprison a corporation (Gottschalk, 2016). Finally, deterrence and punishment rely on the idea that people are ashamed of crime, and research shows that powerful offenders typically do not feel shame for their offenses as ordinary citizens might (Braithwaite & Drahos, 2002). Contributions Criminology. Due to the ambiguous definitions and wide scope of crimes of the powerful, the contributions that will be discussed will focus on white collar crime, as that seems to be where more of the research focuses. The term “white collar crime” was coined by Sutherland in 1939, which he defined as a “phenomenon of lawbreaking by respectable persons of the upper reaches of society” (Reurink, 2016, p. 387). These are crimes of convenience rather than passion, with the powerful using their position to save time and effort to reach their greedy ends (Gottschalk, 2016). Theoretical contributions to white collar crime conceptualization have been drawn from sociology and psychology, starting with Freud and his discussions of conflict of desires and needs that cause people to commit crime (Friedrichs, >GET ANSWER