AMBER Alert Effectiveness Reexamined

• DOI: 10.1177/08874034211026366
• Date: 01 February 2022
• Published date: 01 February 2022
• Author: Joshua H. Williams,Colleen Kadleck,Timothy Griffin
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034211026366

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2022, Vol. 33(1) 23 –44

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/08874034211026366

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Article

AMBER Alert Effectiveness

Reexamined

Timothy Griffin1, Joshua H. Williams2,

and Colleen Kadleck3

Abstract

Prior research based on limited datasets has suggested AMBER Alerts do little to

prevent harm to child abduction victims. However, to investigate the possibility of

recent improvements in AMBER Alert performance, the authors examine a sample

of 472 AMBER Alerts issued over a 3-year period from 2012 to 2015, using available

media accounts to code for relevant case information. The findings are consistent

with prior research questioning AMBER Alert effectiveness: The crucial variable

predicting Alert outcomes is abductor relationship to the victim, not AMBER

Alert “performance.” Furthermore, cases involving “successful” AMBER Alerts

are comparable on measurable factors to AMBER Alert cases where the child was

recovered safely but the Alert played no role, suggesting both categories of cases

involved little real risk. Implications for interpreting the viability of the AMBER

Alert concept, public discourse regarding its contribution to child safety, and larger

implications for crime control policy are discussed.

Keywords

AMBER Alert, child abduction, criminal justice policy

Introduction

The AMBER Alert child recovery system was inspired by the abduction and murder of

Amber Hagerman in Arlington, Texas, in 1996 (Griffin et al., 2007). Public dismay at

the brutality of the murder and inability of law enforcement to appeal for public

1University of Nevada, Reno, USA

2VK Strategies, London, UK

3University of Nebraska Omaha, USA

Corresponding Author:

Timothy Griffin, University of Nevada, Reno, 1664 N. Virginia Street, Reno, NV 89557, USA.

Email: tgriffin@unr.edu

1026366CJPXXX10.1177/08874034211026366Criminal Justice Policy ReviewGrin et al.

research-article2021

24 Criminal Justice Policy Review 33(1)

assistance in the search for the missing child inspired the creation of the first “Amber

Plan” in Texas in 1996. The system was eventually expanded, federalized, and unified

across the United States under the PROTECT Act of 2003, and at the time this article’s

completion, the U.S. Department of Justice reports, “1064 children [have been] res-

cued specifically because of AMBER Alert [and] 92 children have been rescued

because of Wireless Emergency Alerts.” (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice

Programs, 2021a, emphasis added). AMBER Alerts are issued when authorized law

enforcement personnel, upon learning of a missing child case, assess the circumstances

to determine if there is enough evidence of threat and useable information to issue an

AMBER Alert to solicit the public’s assistance in searching for the child. AMBER

Alerts can then be publicized through television, news websites, electronic road signs,

radio announcements, and social media in an effort to elicit the public to quickly assist

law enforcement (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 2021b).

Although AMBER Alert system operators, advocates, and members of the public

have expressed enthusiasm for the system’s achievements, prior research has sug-

gested these claims are exaggerated. The children recovered because of AMBER Alert

are rarely “rescued” rapidly, which is a crucial consideration in light of research

showing that most child abduction-murders end within hours of their initiation (see

Brown et al., 2006). Furthermore, there are little evidence abductors in AMBER Alert

“success” cases posed serious threats to the children recovered (see Griffin, 2010;

Griffin et al., 2007, 2016). The crucial variable determining “safe recovery” in

AMBER Alerts (what happens to the abducted children, which is not the same as

whether the Alerts had any “effect”—a crucial distinction which will be revisited)

appears to be the identity and apparent nature of the abductors and their likely inten-

tions. AMBER Alert “failures,” however, were simply tragedies for which there was

likely no possible intervention. Prior research has also suggested the AMBER Alert

concept is inherently problematic, as it requires too many improbable things to work

perfectly in short time frames when information is scant and suspect (Griffin & Miller,

2008). Nonetheless, prior research questioning the system’s ability to prevent harm

has generally relied on incomplete sampling frames and earlier data (see Griffin, 2010;

Griffin et al., 2007, 2016), which theoretically could miss AMBER Alert effective-

ness. It is also at least plausible issuing authorities’ increased familiarity with the

system, along with broader public awareness, possibly brought about in part by its

expansion into social media, has improved AMBER Alert outcomes.1

In this paper, using the case attributes provided by media accounts of 472 AMBER

alerts issued in the United States and Canada from 2012 to 2015, we evaluate these

possibilities by providing logistic regression models to tap the apparent predictors of

“safe recovery” (children recovered alive and/or unharmed) in AMBER Alert cases.

We also statistically compare “success” cases (where the Alert had some effect leading

to safe recovery) to “safe-recovery-no-effect” cases (where the child[ren] were recov-

ered unharmed but the Alert had no effect) along known with measurable variables to

gain insight into the level of “threat” actually posed in cases where AMBER Alert

“succeeded.” These analyses can shed light on whether any potential significant