dc.contributor.author	Rice, Brian Lee
dc.coverage.spatial	United States	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2020-12-18T14:51:29Z
dc.date.available	2020-12-18T14:51:29Z
dc.date.issued	2020-12
dc.identifier.other	C74B7EAB-2FEA-4108-B436-88429659818D	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	https://hdl.handle.net/10428/4606
dc.description.abstract	Law enforcement agencies have used police canines for many years to help combat the flow of illegal narcotics across the United States. In many cases, narcotics detection canines can give the necessary probable cause needed to perform a search without a warrant. Case law has repeatedly approved the use of canines for this purpose if they are properly trained and certified, but defense attorneys still attack the accuracy of canines in an attempt to win their cases. Only a few studies have been completed that address the accuracy of narcotics detection canines and the results have varied widely. Studies conducted with narcotics detection canines focused on factors such as breed, sex, level of training, type of narcotics to be searched, and the area to be searched. None of the studies looked at any possible accuracy differences between single-purpose and dual-purpose narcotics detection canines. Single purpose canines are only used for narcotics detection whereas dual-purpose canines are used for multiple tasks. This research involved the testing of 40 narcotics detection canines, 20 single-purpose and 20 dual-purpose, to determine if there were any differences in accuracy. This study looked at overall accuracy and false alert rates from canines during the testing procedure. The results indicated that there were no statistically significant differences in the accuracy rates or false alert rates of single-purpose and dual-purpose narcotics detection canines. Keywords: detection canine accuracy, canine false alert rate, single-purpose canine, dual-purpose canine	en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents	Chapter I: Introduction 1 -- Study Overview 1 -- Need for Study 2 -- Summary 3 -- Chapter II: Literature Review 6 -- Problem Statement and Overview 6 -- Social Contract, Legitimacy and Procedural Fairness 7 -- Case Law 11 -- Identifying Bias in Scent Detection Canine Testing 17 -- Study on New Training Aids 20 -- Study on Breeds and Accuracy 23 -- Behavioral Characteristics and Canine Selection 26 -- Match to Sample Human Scent Identification 30 -- Effect of Handler’s Beliefs on Canine Accuracy 34 -- Bed Bug Detection Study 36 -- Cadaver Canine Accuracy Study 40 -- Study of Canine Detection of Prostate Cancer 43 -- Detection Canines and Effects of Exhaustion 44 -- Summary 46 -- Chapter III: Methodology 50 -- Case Study 50 -- Handler/Canine Teams 51 -- Materials and Methods 52 -- Hypotheses 56 -- Study Limitations 57 -- Chapter IV: Results 61 -- Descriptive Statistics 61 -- Testing of the Research Questions and Hypotheses 65 -- Chapter V: Discussion 71 -- Overview 71 -- Summary of Findings 71 -- Discussion 72 -- Theoretical Implications 77 -- Recommendations for Future Research 79 -- Summary 85 -- References 88 -- Appendix A: IRB Protocol Exemption Report 95 -- Appendix B: Canine Handler Informed Consent Form 97 -- Appendix C: Canine Handler Questionnaire 100	en_US
dc.format.extent	1 electronic document, 115 pages	en_US
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	en_US
dc.language.iso	en_US	en_US
dc.rights	This dissertation is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, revised in 1976). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgement. Use of the materials for financial gain with the author's expressed written permissions is not allowed.	en_US
dc.subject	Case studies	en_US
dc.subject	Detector dogs	en_US
dc.subject	Dissertations, Academic--United States	en_US
dc.subject	Drug control	en_US
dc.subject	False alarms	en_US
dc.subject	Police dogs	en_US
dc.title	A Study of Potential Accuracy Differences in Single and Dual-Purpose Narcotics Detection Canines	en_US
dc.type	Dissertation	en_US
dc.contributor.department	Department of Political Science of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences	en_US
dc.description.advisor	Stanford, Leigh
dc.description.committee	McIntyre, Neal
dc.description.committee	Robinson, Deborah
dc.description.degree	D.P.A	en_US
dc.description.major	Public Administration	en_US