Understanding the Research Process Lesson 1 The IDEA ◼ Brainstorming ◼ A topic that interests you! ◼ Something you want to know more about.. ◼ Extension of previous research Review of the Literature ◼ Once you’ve come up with some idea of what you want to study, you need to do some research to see what’s already out there on your topic. ◼ WHY? ◼ You don’t need to reinvent the wheel! ◼ Understand what we already know about the topic. ◼ See what problems other researchers had… Review of the Literature ◼ Look for similarities in findings, differences in findings, how you can expand current literature, look at sources used, look at study limitations. ◼ Once you’ve started to review the literature on your topic, you’ll begin to get a better understanding of what you want to do. Your idea begins to take shape. Now you know what other researchers have done on your topic, what they found, problems they had, etc. Proposed Research • You will need to propose what you will do and how your research will contribute to the literature in your area of study. • How will your research fill the gaps? Hypotheses/Research Questions ◼ An expectation about the nature of things derived from theory/empirical research. ◼ Specific in nature (quantitative); more openended (qualitative) ◼ Concepts to operational definitions Ex. Concept: prior record; Operational definition: number of times a person has been convicted of a crime. Research Design and Sampling ◼ Who are you studying? (group, population) ◼ When are you studying? (time frame) ◼ Where are you studying? (police department, courts, prison, college) ◼ You must come up with a research design: a framework for your study. You must select a sample for your study because you can’t study everything and everyone! Data Collection ◼ Methods of collection (survey, field research, secondary data) ◼ Complications (problems with collection and analysis) ◼ Ethics (human subjects, IRB) ◼ Methods of analysis (statistical, descriptive, content) Collecting the Data ◼ Now, you’ve proposed your research, described how you will collect the data, how you’ll analyze it, etc. Now, go get it! ◼ It will take time to collect the data, depending on your research strategy. Analysis and Results ◼ Once you’ve collected your data, you must then analyze what you’ve collected. ◼ Quantitative analysis: statistics ◼ Qualitative analysis: themes, content ◼ What did you find (not why or why not!) ◼ Support/no support for hypotheses/previous research Discussion ◼ You’ve stated your results, now you must interpret them. What do they mean? Do they support your hypotheses? Why or why not? ◼ Your discussion serves as an explanation of what you found; it is an expansion of your results. Conclusions ◼ So- what now? You’ve conducted analyses, stated your results, described what you found and why but the question remains, SO WHAT? ◼ What does it all mean? What purpose does your research serve? ◼ Policy implications, future research, practical implications MAXFIELD • BABBIE RESEARCH METHODS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE & CRIMINOLOGY Visit www.cengagebrain.com and search for your textbook to find discounted print and digital tools. BASICS OF RESEARCH METHODS Get the best grade in the shortest time possible! BASICS OF 3E 3E ISBN-13: 978-1-111-34691-1 ISBN-10: 1-111-34691-7 90000 To learn more about Wadsworth, visit www.cengage.com/wadsworth Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our preferred online store www.cengagebrain.com 9 781111 346911 MICHAEL G. MAXFIELD • EARL R. BABBIE Distribution of Chi Square Probability df .99 3 .98 3 .95 .90 .80 .70 .50 .0642 .148 .455 1 .0 157 .0 628 .00393 .0158 2 .0201 .0404 .103 .211 .446 .713 1.386 3 .115 .185 .352 .584 1.005 1.424 2.366 4 .297 .429 .711 1.064 1.649 2.195 3.357 5 .554 .752 1.145 1.610 2.343 3.000 4.351 6 .872 1.134 1.635 2.204 3.070 3.828 5.348 7 1.239 1.564 2.167 2.833 3.822 4.671 6.346 8 1.646 2.032 2.733 3.490 4.594 5.528 7.344 9 2.088 2.532 3.325 4.168 5.380 6.393 8.343 10 2.558 3.059 3.940 4.865 6.179 7.267 9.342 11 3.053 3.609 4.575 5.578 6.989 8.148 10.341 12 3.571 4.178 5.226 6.304 7.807 9.034 11.340 13 4.107 4.765 5.892 7.042 8.634 9.926 12.340 14 4.660 5.368 6.571 7.790 9.467 10.821 13.339 15 5.229 5.985 7.261 8.547 10.307 11.721 14.339 16 5.812 6.614 7.962 9.312 11.152 12.624 15.338 17 6.408 7.255 8.672 10.085 12.002 13.531 16.338 18 7.015 7.906 9.390 10.865 12.857 14.440 17.338 19 7.633 8.567 10.117 11.651 13.716 15.352 18.338 20 8.260 9.237 10.851 12.443 14.578 16.266 19.337 21 8.897 9.915 11.591 13.240 15.445 17.182 20.337 22 9.542 10.600 12.338 14.041 16.314 18.101 21.337 23 10.196 11.293 13.091 14.848 17.187 19.021 22.337 24 10.856 11.992 13.848 15.659 18.062 19.943 23.337 25 11.524 12.697 14.611 16.473 18.940 20.867 24.337 26 12.198 13.409 15.379 17.292 19.820 21.792 25.336 27 12.879 14.125 16.151 18.114 20.703 22.719 26.336 28 13.565 14.847 16.928 18.939 21.588 23.647 27.336 29 14.256 15.574 17.708 19.768 22.475 24.577 28.336 30 14.953 16.306 18.493 20.599 23.364 25.508 29.336 For larger values of df, the expression √22 − √2df − 1 may be used as a normal deviate with unit variance, remembering that the probability of 2 corresponds with that of a single tail of the normal curve. continued on the inside back cover Basics of Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology THIRD EDITION MICHAEL G. MAXFIELD John Jay College, City University of New York EARL R. BABBIE Chapman University Australia • Brazil • Japan • Korea • Mexico • Singapore • Spain • United Kingdom • United States Basics of Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology, Third Edition Michael G. Maxfield and Earl R. Babbie Senior Acquisitions Editor: Carolyn Henderson Meier Senior Assistant Editor: Erin Abney Editorial Assistant: Virginette Acacio © 2012, 2009 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored, or used in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, Web distribution, information networks, or information storage and retrieval systems, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Media Editor: Ting Jian Yap Senior Marketing Manager: Michelle Williams Marketing Assistant: Jack Ward Senior Marketing Communications Manager: Heather Baxley For product information and technology assistance, contact us at Cengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706. For permission to use material from this text or product, submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions. Further permissions questions can be e-mailed to permissionrequest@cengage.com. Senior Content Project Manager: Christy A. Frame Creative Director: Rob Hugel Library of Congress Control Number: 2011925887 Senior Art Director: Maria Epes Student Edition: Senior Print Buyer: Karen Hunt Rights Acquisitions Account Manager, Text and Images: Roberta Broyer Production Service: Anne Talvacchio, Cenveo Publisher Services Copy Editor: Susan Zorn Cover Designer: Riezebos Holzbaur Design Group Cover Image: Getty Images/Superstudio Compositor: Cenveo Publisher Services ISBN-13: 978-1-111-34691-1 ISBN-10: 1-111-34691-7 Wadsworth 20 Davis Drive Belmont, CA 94002-3098 USA Cengage Learning is a leading provider of customized learning solutions with office locations around the globe, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Brazil, and Japan. Locate your local office at www.cengage.com/global. Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd. To learn more about Wadsworth, visit www.cengage.com/wadsworth. Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our preferred online store www.cengagebrain.com. Printed in the United States of America 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 15 14 13 12 11 To Max Jacob Fauth and Laine Ellen Fauth To Evelyn and Henry Babbie Brief Contents PREFACE xv A BO U T T H E A U T HO RS PART PART PART PART 1 2 3 4 x xv An Introduction to Criminal Justice Inquiry 1 Criminal Justice and Scientific Inquiry 2 Ethics and Criminal Justice Research 2 24 Structuring Criminal Justice Inquiry 45 3 General Issues in Research Design 4 Concepts, Operationalization, and Measurement 5 Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs Modes of Observation 1 46 74 104 131 6 Sampling 132 7 Survey Research and Other Ways of Asking Questions 8 Field Research 9 Agency Records, Content Analysis, and Secondary Data 187 Application and Analysis 239 10 Evaluation Research and Problem Analysis 11 Interpreting Data GLOSSARY REFERENCES 300 309 A U T HO R I N D E X SUBJECT INDEX 160 326 330 iv 274 240 217 Contents PREFACE xv AB OU T THE AU THOR S PART 1 xxv An Introduction to Criminal Justice Inquiry Chapter 1 Criminal Justice and Scientific Inquiry Introduction 3 What Is This Book About? 3 HOME DETENTION 4 Two Realities 4 The Role of Science 5 Personal Human Inquiry 6 Tradition 6 Authority 6 ARREST 1 AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE Errors in Personal Human Inquiry Inaccurate Observation 8 Overgeneralization 8 Selective Observation 8 Illogical Reasoning 9 Ideology and Politics 9 To Err Is Human 9 v 7 8 2 vi CONTENTS Purposes of Research 10 Exploration 10 Description 10 Explanation 11 Application 11 How to Design a Research Project The Research Process Getting Started 12 12 Conceptualization 14 Choice of Research Method Operationalization 12 14 15 Population and Sampling Observations 15 15 Analysis 15 Application 16 Thinking about Research Problems Reviewing the Literature 17 General Strategies 16 17 GETTING IDEAS ABOUT RESEARCH TOPICS How to Read Scholarly Research 19 The Research Proposal 20 Elements of a Research Proposal 18 20 Knowing through Experience: Summing Up and Looking Ahead 21 2 Ethics and Criminal Justice Research 24 Introduction 24 Ethical Issues in Criminal Justice Research 25 No Harm to Participants 25 ETHICS AND EXTREME FIELD RESEARCH Voluntary Participation 28 Anonymity and Confidentiality Deceiving Subjects 30 Analysis and Reporting Legal Liability 31 Special Problems 32 30 29 27 CONTENTS Promoting Compliance with Ethical Principles Codes of Professional Ethics Institutional Review Boards 34 34 35 Institutional Review Board Requirements and Researcher Rights 37 ETHICS AND JUVENILE GANG MEMBERS 38 Ethical Controversies 39 The Stanford Prison Experiment Discussion Examples PART 2 39 41 Structuring Criminal Justice Inquiry 3 General Issues in Research Design Introduction 45 46 47 Foundations of Social Science 47 Theory, Not Philosophy or Belief 47 Regularities 50 What about Exceptions? 50 Aggregates, Not Individuals A Variable Language 50 Variables and Attributes 50 51 Variables and Relationships 54 Differing Avenues for Inquiry 54 Idiographic and Nomothetic Explanations Inductive and Deductive Reasoning 56 Quantitative and Qualitative Data Causation in the Social Sciences Criteria for Causality 58 55 56 57 Validity and Causal Inference 58 Does Drug Use Cause Crime? 59 Introducing Scientific Realism 60 CAUSATION AND DECLINING CRIME IN NEW YORK CITY Units of Analysis 62 Individuals 62 Groups 62 Organizations 63 Social Artifacts 63 61 vii CONTENTS The Ecological Fallacy 64 Units of Analysis in Review 64 UNITS OF ANALYSIS IN THE NATIONAL YOUTH GANG SURVEY The Time Dimension 66 Cross-Sectional Studies 66 Longitudinal Studies 67 Approximating Longitudinal Studies 67 The Time Dimension Summarized 69 4 Concepts, Operationalization, and Measurement Introduction 75 Conceptions and Concepts Conceptualization 76 75 Indicators and Dimensions 77 Creating Conceptual Order 77 Operationalization Choices 78 WHAT IS RECIDIVISM ? 79 Measurement as Scoring 80 JAIL STAY 81 Exhaustive and Exclusive Measurement Levels of Measurement 81 82 Implications of Levels of Measurement 83 Criteria for Measurement Quality 85 Reliability 85 Validity 87 IF. Measuring Crime 88 General Issues in Measuring Crime .. N viii TH E 89 Measures Based on Crimes Known to Police 90 UNITS OF ANALYSIS AND MEASURING CRIME Victim Surveys 94 91 Surveys of Offending 95 Measuring Crime Summary 96 Composite Measures 96 THEORY AND MEASUREMENT 97 Typologies 98 An Index of Disorder 99 Measurement Summary 100 74 65 CONTENTS 5 Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs Introduction 105 The Classical Experiment 104 105 Independent and Dependent Variables Pretesting and Posttesting 106 Experimental and Control Groups Double-Blind Experiments Selecting Subjects 108 105 106 108 Randomization 108 Experiments and Causal Inference 109 Experiments and Threats to Validity 110 Threats to Internal Validity 110 Ruling Out Threats to Internal Validity 112 Generalizability and Threats to Validity 112 Threats to Statistical Conclusion Validity 114 Variations in the Classical Experimental Design Quasi-Experimental Designs 116 Nonequivalent-Groups Designs 114 116 Cohort Designs 119 Time-Series Designs 119 .. N IF. Variations in Time-Series Designs 123 Variable-Oriented Research, Case Studies, and Scientific Realism 124 TH PART 3 E THEORY AND DESIGN 125 Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs Summarized Modes of Observation 6 131 Sampling 132 Introduction 133 The Logic of Probability Sampling 133 Conscious and Unconscious Sampling Bias 134 Representativeness and Probability of Selection 136 Probability Theory and Sampling Distribution 136 The Sampling Distribution of 10 Cases 137 From Sampling Distribution to Parameter Estimate Estimating Sampling Error 142 139 127 ix CONTENTS Confidence Levels and Confidence Intervals 143 Probability Theory and Sampling Distribution Summed Up Probability Sampling 144 Populations and Sampling Frames 144 Simple Random Sampling 145 Systematic Sampling 146 Stratified Sampling 146 Disproportionate Stratified Sampling 147 IF. Multistage Cluster Sampling 148 Multistage Cluster Sampling with Stratification .. N x TH E THEORY AND SAMPLING 149 151 Illustration: Two National Crime Surveys 151 The National Crime Victimization Survey 151 The British Crime Survey 152 Probability Sampling in Review 153 Nonprobability Sampling 153 Purposive Sampling 153 Quota Sampling 154 Reliance on Available Subjects Snowball Sampling 156 155 Nonprobability Sampling in Review 7 157 Survey Research and Other Ways of Asking Questions 160 Introduction 161 Topics Appropriate to Survey Research 161 Counting Crime 161 Self-Reports 161 Perceptions and Attitudes 162 Targeted Victim Surveys 162 Other Evaluation Uses 163 Guidelines for Asking Questions 163 Open-Ended and Closed-Ended Questions Questions and Statements Make Items Clear 164 164 Short Items Are Best 164 Avoid Negative Items 165 163 143 CONTENTS Biased Items and Terms 165 Designing Self-Report Items 166 Questionnaire Construction 167 General Questionnaire Format 167 Contingency Questions 167 Matrix Questions 168 Ordering Items in a Questionnaire 170 DON’T START FROM SCRATCH! 171 Self-Administered Questionnaires 171 Mail Distribution and Return 172 Warning Mailings and Cover Letters 172 Follow-Up Mailings 173 Acceptable Response Rates 173 Computer-Based Self-Administration In-Person Interview Surveys 175 173 The Role of the Interviewer 175 Coordination and Control 176 Computer-Assisted In-Person Interviews Telephone Surveys 178 Comparison of the Three Methods 176 180 Strengths and Weaknesses of Survey Research Other Ways of Asking Questions 182 Specialized Interviewing Focus Groups 8 182 183 Field Research 187 Introduction 188 Topics Appropriate to Field Research 189 PORT OPERATIONS AND STOLEN VEHICLES The Various Roles of the Observer 191 Asking Questions 193 Gaining Access to Subjects .. N IF. 181 TH E 190 194 THEORY AND QUALITATIVE RESEARCH 195 Gaining Access to Formal Organizations 195 Gaining Access to Subcultures 197 Selecting Cases for Observation 198 Purposive Sampling in Field Research 200 xi CONTENTS Recording Observations 201 Cameras and Voice Recorders Field Notes 202 Structured Observations 202 203 Linking Field Observations and Other Data CONDUCTING A SAFETY AUDIT 207 204 Illustrations of Field Research 208 Field Research on Racial Profiling, Speeding, and Traffic Enforcement 208 Bars and Violence 209 Strengths and Weaknesses of Field Research 211 Validity 212 Reliability 213 Generalizability 9 213 Agency Records, Content Analysis, and Secondary Data 217 Introduction 218 Topics Appropriate for Agency Records and Content Analysis 218 Types of Agency Records 219 Published Statistics 220 Nonpublic Agency Records 222 New Data Collected by Agency Staff IMPROVING POLICE RECORDS Reliability and Validity 226 OF 224 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 225 Sources of Reliability and Validity Problems 227 HOW MANY PAROLE VIOLATORS WERE THERE LAST MONTH? Content Analysis 230 Coding in Content Analysis 230 Illustrations of Content Analysis 231 IF. TERRORIST RECRUITMENT .. N xii TH E 233 THEORY AND DATA COLLECTION AGENCY RECORDS 234 Secondary Analysis FROM 234 Sources of Secondary Data 235 Advantages and Disadvantages of Secondary Data 236 229 CONTENTS Application and Analysis 239 10 Evaluation Research and Problem Analysis Introduction 241 240 Topics Appropriate for Evaluation Research and Problem Analysis 241 The Policy Process 241 Linking the Process to Evaluation Getting Started 245 Evaluability Assessment Problem Formulation Measurement 249 243 246 247 Designs for Program Evaluation 251 Randomized Evaluation Designs 251 Home Detention: Two Randomized Studies Quasi-Experimental Designs 256 Other Types of Evaluation Studies 254 258 EVALUATING VEHICLE SECURITY 259 Problem Analysis and Scientific Realism 260 Problem-Oriented Policing 260 Auto Theft in Chula Vista 261 Other Applications of Problem Analysis 262 Space- and Time-Based Analysis 263 Scientific Realism and Applied Research 266 IF. 4 .. N PART TH E THEORY AND APPLIED RESEARCH 268 The Political Context of Applied Research 268 Evaluation and Stakeholders 268 Politics and Objectivity 269 WHEN POLITICS ACCOMODATES FACTS 11 Interpreting Data Introduction 270 274 274 Univariate Description Distributions 275 275 Measures of Central Tendency Measures of Dispersion 278 276 Comparing Measures of Dispersion and Central Tendency Computing Rates 282 280 xiii CONTENTS IDENTITY THEFT 283 Describing Two or More Variables Bivariate Analysis 284 Multivariate Analysis IF. MURDER .. N xiv TH E ON THE JOB THEORY AND DATA ANALYSIS 284 287 288 291 Inferential Statistics 291 Univariate Inferences 291 Tests of Statistical Significance 292 Visualizing Statistical Significance Chi Square 295 293 Cautions in Interpreting Statistical Significance GLOSSARY REFERE NCES 300 309 A U T H O R I ND E X S U B J E C T IN D E X 326 330 296 Preface S ince the first edition of Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology (RMCJC) was published in 1995, we have been delighted to hear comments from instructors who have used the text—and from a few who do not use it! Although it is always gratifying to learn of positive reactions, we have also listened to suggestions for revising the book through its six editions. Some colleagues suggested trimming the text substantially to focus on the most important principles of research methods in criminal justice. Students and instructors are also increasingly sensitive to the cost of college texts. As a result, we introduced Basics of Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology about six years ago. Our objective in producing that text was fivefold: (1) retain the key elements of the parent text; (2) concentrate on fundamental principles of research design; (3) appeal to a broad variety of teaching and learning styles; (4) retain salient examples that illustrate various methods; and (5) reduce less-central points of elaboration and the examples used to illustrate them. That proved to be more challenging than we initially thought. At one point we were tempted to do something simple like drop two chapters, wrap the result in a soft cover, and declare what was left to be the basics. Fortunately that sentiment was reined in and we pursued a more deliberate approach that involved planning from the ground up. Basics is shorter, more concise, and focused on what we believe is the most central material for introductory courses in research methods. Rather than simply offering a truncated version of the full text, Basics has been crafted to appeal to those seeking a more economical alternative while retaining the big book’s highly successful formula. Many instructors teaching shorter courses, or courses where students are better served by concentrating on basic principles of criminal justice research, have used the Basics edition. Others, especially instructors teaching introductory graduate courses, prefer the more extensive coverage offered in RMCJC. xv xvi PREFACE Goals and Objectives Criminal justice has always been a fascinating topic for students, partly because it is the stuff of news stories, fiction, and much popular entertainment. Criminal justice research goes behind and beyond the headlines to address important questions of who, what, why, and how. Who is involved as offender, victim, and justice professional? What is the nature and frequency of different kinds of crime and disorder problems, and what new problems are emerging? Why are incidents happening in particular places, and why are offenders involved in particular patterns of behavior? How are different kinds of offenses committed? How should justice agencies prevent and respond to problems of crime and safety? Our primary goal in writing this edition is unchanged: to help students learn how to conduct research to answer these and related questions. Toward that end, certain principles have guided our revision of each edition of the text. Our intent is to: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ provide a careful description of the varied options for doing research in criminal justice. clarify and demystify what is traditionally a difficult subject for students at all levels. illustrate research methods with examples that are informative and interesting. incorporate new approaches that reflect methodological developments in the field. emphasize the application of criminal justice research to real-world problems and justice policy examples. bridge the gap between authors, instructors, and students by drawing on examples of our own research, especially research conducted with student colleagues. Organization of the Text The third edition of Basics of Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology has 11 chapters: ■ ■ ■ Chapter 1, “Criminal Justice and Scientific Inquiry,” introduces research methods. Material in this chapter describes how social scientific inquiry differs from other ways of learning things. This chapter also advises students on how to select research topics, conduct a literature review, and write a research proposal. Chapter 2, “Ethics and Criminal Justice Research,” examines how research has the potential to harm subjects, and the obligations of researchers to minimize the risk of such harm. Examples illustrate the range of ethical issues in justice research and the steps researchers take to address them. Chapter 3, “General Issues in Research Design,” describes basic features of all research studies that have to be considered when planning a research project. These include causation, the time dimension, and different fundamental avenues for criminal justice inquiry. PREFACE ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Chapter 4, “Concepts, Operationalization, and Measurement,” considers these central topics. All research requires some sort of measurement, and this chapter examines its key elements. As an in-depth example of measurement, we describe different approaches to measuring crime—a fundamental dependent and independent variable in criminal justice research. Chapter 5, “Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs,” examines how to plan research that has explanatory purposes. Research design involves a collection of building blocks that can be combined in different ways. We emphasize the flexibility of research designs, drawing on interesting and creative examples. Chapter 6, “Sampling,” describes approaches to selecting subjects for research. We cover the two general categories of probability and nonprobability sampling, describing different subtypes in each category. The basics of probability theory are introduced as key principles underlying sampling and statistical significance. Chapter 7, “Survey Research and Other Ways of Asking Questions,” explores traditional survey research and other types of interviewing. Changes in technology continue to affect how surveys are conducted. Focus groups are described as tools for developing surveys or drawing detail from survey responses. Chapter 8, “Field Research,” includes discussion of qualitative approaches as well as more structured environmental surveys. Examples illustrate the use of different approaches. Chapter 9, “Agency Records, Content Analysis, and Secondary Data,” covers data extracted from administrative records as well as data series regularly collected by researchers and government agencies. Examples illustrate the wide range of research opportunities supported by data from different secondary sources. Chapter 10, “Evaluation Research and Problem Analysis,” focuses on applied research that aims to improve criminal justice policy. The chapter describes how problem analysis is increasingly used in justice agencies to reduce crime and related problems. Chapter 11, “Interpreting Data,” introduces data analysis techniques widely used in criminal justice research. Descriptive and explanatory approaches are explained and illustrated with examples. What’s New in This Edition In preparing this third edition, we stayed with what has proved to be a popular formula. But we have also responded to suggestions from reviewers, colleagues, and instructors who used earlier editions. Theory Pull-Outs To underscore the importance of theory in all phases of research, we have added special types of examples to several chapters. Some of these are drawn from articles recently published in the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency (JRCD), xvii xviii PREFACE which I have edited for the past three years. Scholars sometimes write to ask whether their work might be suitable for publication, and I always respond: “JRCD publishes theory-based empirical research….” The theory-based examples in this edition of Basics illustrate this in different ways. Expanded Examples of Student Research Reviewers and colleagues have often commented positively on the use of examples from student research in earlier editions and in the larger text. As a result, we have included more of these throughout the book, many in featured boxes. Highlighting student research serves different purposes. First, it amplifies what some colleagues call the “over-the-shoulder” tone of the text, in which readers feel they are experiencing more than just words on a printed page. Second, student research examples embody the kind of collaborative supervision that exists between students and faculty. Third, we have great familiarity with the details of work by our students. Such details are rarely described in published articles, and being able to report them adds behind-the-scenes information not readily available elsewhere. Finally, Earl and I believe the examples presented here are topical and inherently interesting to readers. Among the new examples in this edition are projects that address terrorism, human trafficking, sex offenders, and crime at bus stops. The first three are well-known topics, while the last is an example of a seemingly humble problem that will be meaningful to most people living in large urban areas. We have also made the following specific changes in each chapter: ■ Chapter 1 has been extensively revised to provide an overview of criminal justice research the way it is commonly taught. On the advice of reviewers, basic principles of social science research have been revised and moved to Chapter 3. Chapter 1 now presents material on how to plan research, and how to write a research proposal. This includes guidance on how to conduct a literature review. The revised opening chapter better reflects what most instructors do in the first class or two. ■ Chapter 2 includes new material on the institutional review boards that oversee the protection of human subjects in social science research. The chapter also describes important new research on the question of crime displacement, something that is usually overstated as an ethical problem in applied research. ■ Chapter 3 now presents an expanded discussion of social science research foundations, with content formerly in Chapter 1. We have streamlined discussion of validity threats by moving some of this important material to Chapter 5 where it can be more clearly linked to topics in research design. ■ Chapter 4 reorganizes some discussion on conceptualization in response to comments from reviewers and colleagues who have used earlier editions of the book. ■ Chapter 5 clarifies some discussion of experiments. Material on threats to validity formerly in Chapter 3 has been selectively added here, reducing the potential for repetition that some users perceived in earlier editions. ■ Chapter 6 clarifies basic sampling concepts. We describe new examples of creative approaches to nonprobability sampling. Sections on probability sampling PREFACE ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ have been consolidated. To beef up our discussion of qualitative field research, we added a simple table to illustrate the systematic field sampling of available subjects in a public place. Chapter 7 adds information on the continually evolving climate for survey research, partly drawing on a book I co-edited in 2007, Surveying Crime in the 21st Century. New examples link survey and sampling technology. Material on aging telephone survey technology has been cut to make room for our discussion of newer directions in survey research. Chapter 8 expands discussion of qualitative approaches to field research, including a new example based on student research. Galma Jahic combined archival data and field interviews with public officials in Bosnia and Herzegovina to study human trafficking for her dissertation research at Rutgers University. Another new example describes how former colleague Ron Clarke and I learned about seaport operations in the post-9/11 era. Our field observations of container handling at a huge port helped us understand the problem of vehicle theft for export. This chapter also presents brief descriptions of qualitative field research on corrections and policing. Finally, we draw on recent books by Dina Perrone and Ko-lin Chin to illustrate field research on drug use in dance clubs, and drug production in the Golden Triangle of Southeast Asia. Chapter 9 features a more concise discussion of content analysis. A new box illustrates the use of agency records and content analysis to examine recruitment by terrorist organizations in Turkey. This is another example of student research, in this case a dissertation by a Rutgers student who is now a police chief in the Turkish National Police. A hypothetical example of new data collection has been replaced by a discussion of how researchers worked with Pennsylvania State Police to collect new data on traffic stops. Chapter 10 includes incremental updates to the section on problem analysis that was introduced in the previous edition. A new example describes an evaluation of a time-series study of auto theft in Australia. This evaluation illustrates how the timing of different policy initiatives makes it possible to use time-series designs for evaluation. Chapter 11 updates crime data in certain examples. A new example draws on a hot-button topic—identity theft. We describe data from the National Crime Victimization Survey to estimate identity theft victimization. Univariate and bivariate examples are presented. Learning Tools The Research Writer for Criminal Justice CD-ROM Included as a CD-ROM, this new version of the Research Writer for Criminal Justice helps students tackle the task of writing research reports by taking some of the mystery out of the endeavor. It provides a template that guides students through the process of writing a research report, from the beginning idea to the documentation of the last source. Moreover, students can access helpful hints xix xx PREFACE and tips as they write with just a click of a button. They can also e-mail their work at any stage of the process to their instructor, and they can even export their work to Microsoft Word where the document will be formatted in a style consistent with standard research projects. We hope students find this CD-ROM exciting and helpful. Ancillary Materials To access additional course materials, please visit www.cengagebrain.com. At the CengageBrain.com home page, search for the ISBN of your title (from the back cover of your book) using the search box at the top of the page. This will take you to the product page where these resources can be found. A number of supplements are provided by Cengage Learning to help instructors use Basics of Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology in their courses and to aid students in preparing for exams. Supplements are available to qualified adopters. Please consult your local sales representative for details. For the Instructor Instructor’s Resource Manual with Test Bank An improved and completely updated Instructor’s Resource Manual with Test Bank has been developed for this text. The manual includes key terms, detailed chapter outlines, chapter summaries, activities and assignments, and internet resources. Each chapter’s test bank contains questions in multiple-choice, true–false, fill-in-the-blank, and essay formats, with a full answer key. The test bank includes the page numbers in the main text where the answers can be found. Finally, each question in the test bank has been carefully reviewed by experienced criminal justice instructors for quality, accuracy, and content coverage. Our “Instructor Approved” seal, which appears on the front cover, is our assurance that you are working with an assessment and grading resource of the highest caliber. ExamView® Computerized Testing The comprehensive Instructor’s Resource Manual described above is backed up by ExamView, a computerized test bank available for PC and Macintosh computers. With ExamView you can create, deliver, and customize tests and study guides (both print and online) in minutes. You can easily edit and import your own questions and graphics, change test layouts, and reorganize questions. Using ExamView’s complete wordprocessing capabilities, you can enter an unlimited number of new questions or edit existing questions. PowerPoint Slides Handy Microsoft PowerPoint slides outline the chapters of the main text in a classroom-ready presentation to help you make your lectures engaging and to reach your visually oriented students. The presentations are available for download on the password-protected website and can also be obtained by e-mailing your local Cengage Learning representative. The Wadsworth Criminal Justice Video Library So many exciting new videos— so many great ways to enrich your lectures and spark discussion of the material in PREFACE this text! Your Cengage Learning representative will be happy to provide details on our video policy by adoption size. The library includes these selections and many others. ■ ■ ■ ABC® Videos. ABC videos feature short, high-interest clips from current news events as well as historic raw footage going back 40 years. Perfect for discussion starters or to enrich your lectures and spark interest in the material in the text, these brief videos provide students with a new lens through which to view the past and present, one that will greatly enhance their knowledge and understanding of significant events and open up to them new dimensions in learning. Clips are drawn from such programs as World News Tonight, Good Morning America, This Week, PrimeTime Live, 20/20, and Nightline, as well as numerous ABC News specials and material from the Associated Press Television News and British Movietone News collections. Cengage Learning’s “Introduction to Criminal Justice Video Series” features videos supplied by the BBC Motion Gallery. These short, highinterest clips from CBS and BBC news programs—everything from nightly news broadcasts and specials to CBS News Special Reports, CBS Sunday Morning, 60 Minutes, and more—offer additional classroom enrichment. Films for the Humanities. Choose from nearly 200 videos on a variety of topics such as elder abuse, supermax prisons, suicide and the police officer, the making of an FBI agent, and domestic violence. Criminal Justice Media Library Cengage Learning’s Criminal Justice Media Library includes nearly 300 media assets on the topics you cover in your courses. Available to stream from any web-enabled computer, the Criminal Justice Media Library’s assets include such valuable resources as Career Profile Videos featuring interviews with criminal justice professionals from a range of roles and locations, simulations that allow students to step into various roles and practice their decision-making skills, video clips on current topics from ABC® and other sources, animations that illustrate key concepts, interactive learning modules that help students check their knowledge of important topics, and Reality Check exercises that compare expectations and preconceived notions against the real-life thoughts and experiences of criminal justice professionals. The Criminal Justice Media Library can be uploaded and used within many popular learning management systems. You can also customize it with your own course material. You can also purchase an institutional site license. Please contact your Cengage Learning representative for ordering and pricing information. For the Student Careers in Criminal Justice Website (available bundled with this text at no additional charge) Featuring plenty of self-exploration and profiling activities, the interactive Careers in Criminal Justice Website helps students investigate and focus on the criminal justice career choices that are right for them. Includes interest xxi xxii PREFACE assessment, video testimonials from career professionals, resumé and interview tips, and links for reference. CLeBook CLeBook allows students to access Cengage Learning textbooks in an easy-to-use online format. Highlight, take notes, bookmark, search your text, and, in some titles, link directly into multimedia. CLeBook combines the best aspects of paper books and ebooks in one package. Current Perspectives: Readings from InfoTrac® College Edition These readers, designed to give students a closer look at special topics in criminal justice, include free access to InfoTrac College Edition. The timely articles are selected by experts in each topic from within InfoTrac College Edition. They are available free when bundled with the text and include the following titles: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Cyber Crime Victimology Juvenile Justice Racial Profiling White-Collar Crime Terrorism and Homeland Security Public Policy and Criminal Justice Technology and Criminal Justice Ethics in Criminal Justice Forensics and Criminal Investigation Corrections Law and Courts Policy in Criminal Justice PREFACE Acknowledgments Several reviewers made perceptive and useful comments on various drafts of the book. We are especially grateful to them for their insights and suggestions: Michael Birzer, Wichita State University Jason Clark-Miller, Texas Christian University Angela West Crews, Marshall University Deborah Eckberg, Metropolitan State University Melissa Fenwick, Western Connecticut State University Aric Frazier, Vincennes University Kathy Johnson, University of West Florida Kent R. Kerley, University of Alabama at Birmingham Satenik Margaryan, Montclair State University Jerome McKean, Ball State University Heidee McMillin, Lewis-Clark State College Michael Montgomery, Tennessee State University Kathy Oborn, Pierce College Denny Powers, South University–Columbia Bradford W. Reyns, Southern Utah University Marc Riedel, Southeastern Louisiana University Melinda Schlager, Texas A&M University–Commerce Benjamin Steiner, University of South Carolina Quanda Stevenson, University of Alabama PJ Verrecchia, York College of Pennsylvania Brenda Vose, University of North Florida Hsiao-Ming Wang, University of Houston–Downtown As usual, a number of students at the Rutgers University School of Criminal Justice offered advice, feedback, and contributions for this and earlier editions. I thank: Dr. Carsten Andresen (Travis County Department of Community Corrections and Supervision); Dr. Gisela Bichler (California State University–San Bernardino); Stephen Block; Dr. Sharon Chamard (University of Alaska); Dr. Niyazi Ekici (Turkish National Police); Shuryo Fujita; Dr. Galma Jahic (Istanbul Bilgi University, Turkey); Dr. Jarret Lovell (California State University– Fullerton); Nerea Marteache; Dr. Marie Mele; Dr. Nancy Merritt (National Institute of Justice); Dr. Melanie-Angela Neuilly (Washington State University); Dr. Dina Perrone (California State University–Long Beach); Gohar Petrossian; Stephen Pires (Florida International University); Dr. James Roberts (University of Scranton); Dr. William Sousa (University of Nevada–Las Vegas); Dr. Christopher Sullivan (University of Cincinnati); and Dr. Sung-suk Violet Yu ( John Jay College of Criminal Justice). xxiii xxiv PREFACE I’m also pleased to thank my new students at John Jay College for their contributions: Kevin Barnes-Ceeney, Katharine Boyd, Cory Feldman, Brittany Hayes, Amber Horning, Karen Pepper, and Cyann Zoller. Finally, Earl and I are very grateful for the patient, professional assistance from project manager Anne Talvacchio at Cenveo Publisher Services and the people at Cengage: Carolyn Henderson Meier, Michelle Williams, Christy Frame, Erin Abney, Virginette Acacio, and the entire book team. Mike Maxfield About the Authors Michael G. Maxfield is Professor of Criminal Justice at John Jay College, City University of New York. He is the author of numerous articles and books on a variety of topics, including victimization, policing, homicide, community corrections, and long-term consequences of child abuse and neglect. He has served as editor of the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency since 2008. Maxfield received his PhD in political science from Northwestern University. Earl R. Babbie graduated from Harvard University before enlisting in the U.S. Marine Corps. He received his PhD from the University of California–Berkeley, and began teaching shortly thereafter. Credited with defining research methods for the social sciences, Dr. Babbie has written several texts, including the bestselling The Practice of Social Research. xxv PART 1 An Introduction to Criminal Justice Inquiry W Part One lays the groundwork for the rest of the book by examining the fundamental characteristics and issues that make science different from other ways of knowing things. Chapter 1 begins with a look at native human inquiry, the sort of thing all of us have been doing all our lives. We’ll also consider research purposes and the basics of how to design a research project. Chapter 2 deals with the ethics of social science research. The study of crime and criminal justice often presents special challenges with regard to ethics. We’ll see that most ethical questions are rooted in two fundamental principles: (1) research subjects should not be harmed, and (2) their participation must be voluntary. The overall purpose of Part One, therefore, is to construct a backdrop against which to view more specific aspects of research design and execution. By the time you complete the chapters in Part One, you will be ready to look at some of the more concrete aspects of criminal justice research. hat comes to mind when you encounter the word science? What do you think of when we describe criminal justice as a social science? For some people, science is mathematics; for others, it is white coats and laboratories. Some confuse it with technology or equate it with difficult courses in high school or college. Science is, of course, none of these things per se, but it is difficult to specify exactly what science is. Scientists, in fact, disagree on the proper definition. Some object to the whole idea of social science; others question more specifically whether criminal justice can be a social science. For the purposes of this book, we view science as a method of inquiry—a way of learning and knowing things about the world around us. Like other ways of learning and knowing about the world, science has some special characteristics. We’ll examine these traits in this opening set of chapters. We’ll also see how the scientific method of inquiry can be applied to the study of crime and criminal justice. 1 CHAPTER 1 Criminal Justice and Scientific Inquiry People learn about their world through a variety of methods, and they often make mistakes along the way. Science is different from other ways of learning and knowing. We’ll consider errors people commonly make and how science tries to avoid them, different purposes of research, and principles for designing a research project. Introduction Purposes of Research 3 What Is This Book About? HOME DETENTION Two Realities 3 4 4 The Role of Science 5 Personal Human Inquiry Exploration 10 Description 10 Explanation 11 Application 11 How to Design a Research Project 12 6 Tradition 6 The Research Process Authority 6 Getting Started Operationalization Illogical Reasoning Analysis Application 8 15 15 15 16 Thinking about Research Problems 16 9 Ideology and Politics To Err Is Human Observations 8 14 15 Population and Sampling 8 Selective Observation 14 Choice of Research Method Errors in Personal Human Inquiry 8 Overgeneralization 12 12 Conceptualization ARREST AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 7 Inaccurate Observation 10 9 9 (continued) 2 CHAPTER 1 Reviewing the Literature General Strategies CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY The Research Proposal 17 20 Knowing through Experience: Summing Up and Looking Ahead 21 GETTING IDEAS ABOUT RESEARCH TOPICS 18 How to Read Scholarly Research 20 Elements of a Research Proposal 17 3 19 INTRODUCTION Criminal justice professionals are both consumers and producers of research. Spending a semester studying criminal justice research methodology may not be high on your list of “Fun Things to Do.” Perhaps you are, or plan to be, a criminal justice professional, and you are thinking, “Why do I have to study research methods? When I graduate, I’ll be working in probation (or law enforcement, or corrections, or court services), not conducting research! I would benefit more from learning about probation counseling (or police management, or corrections policy, or court administration).” Fair enough. But as a criminal justice professional, you will need to be a consumer of research. One objective of this book is to help you become an informed consumer of research. For example, findings from a pioneering experimental study of policing, the Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment, appeared to contradict a fundamental belief that a visible police patrol force prevents crime. Acting as a consumer of research findings, a police officer, supervisor, or executive should be able to understand how that research was conducted and how the study’s findings might apply in his or her department. Most criminal justice professionals, especially those in supervisory roles, routinely review various performance reports and statistical tabulations. A continually growing number of research reports may now be found on the Internet. For example, the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) was established to archive and distribute research reports to criminal justice professionals and researchers around the world. Many such reports are prepared specifically to keep the criminal justice community informed about new research developments and may be downloaded from the NCJRS website (www.ncjrs.gov). An understanding of research methods can help decision makers critically evaluate such reports and recognize when methods are properly and improperly applied. The box titled “Home Detention” describes an example of how knowledge of research methods can help policy makers avoid mistakes. Another objective of this book is to help you produce research. In other courses you take or in your job, you may become a producer of research. Probation officers sometimes test new approaches to supervising or counseling clients, and police officers try new methods of dealing with recurring problems. Many cities and states have a compelling need to evaluate services provided to offenders released from prison or jail. Determining whether changes or existing programs are effective is an example of applied research. A problem-solving approach, rooted in systematic research, is being used in more and more police departments and in many other criminal justice agencies as well. Therefore, criminal justice professionals need to know not only how to interpret research accurately, but also how to produce accurate research. WHAT IS THIS BOOK ABOUT? This book focuses on how we know what we know. This book focuses on how we learn. Although you will come away from the book knowing many things you don’t know right now, our primary 4 PART 1 H O M E D AN INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE INQUIRY E T E N T I O N Home detention with electronic monitoring (ELMO) was widely adopted as an alternative punishment in the United States in the 1980s. The technology for this new sanction was made possible by advances in telecommunications and computer systems. Prompted by growing prison and jail populations, not to mention sales pitches by equipment manufacturers, criminal justice officials embraced ELMO. Questions about the effectiveness of these programs quickly emerged, however, and led to research to determine whether the technology worked. Comprehensive evaluations were conducted in Marion County (Indianapolis), Indiana. Selected findings from these studies illustrate the importance of understanding research methods in general and the meaning of various ways to measure program success in particular. ELMO programs directed at three groups of people were studied: (1) convicted adult offenders, (2) adults charged with a crime and awaiting trial, and (3) juveniles convicted of burglary or theft. People in each of the three groups were assigned to home detention for a specified time. They could complete the program in one of three ways: (1) successful release after serving their term, (2) removal due to rule violations, such as being arrested again or violating program rules, or (3) running away or absconding. The agencies that administered each program were required to submit regular reports to county officials on how many individuals in each category completed their homedetention terms. The accompanying table summarizes the program-completion types during the evaluation study. Convicted Adults (%) Pretrial Adults (%) Juveniles (%) Success 81 73 99 Rule violation 14 13 1 5 14 0 Abscond purpose is to help you look at how you know things, not what you know. Two Realities Ultimately, we live in a world of two realities. Part of what we know could be called our experiential reality—the things we know from direct experience. If you dive into a glacial stream flowing down through the Canadian Rockies, you don’t need These percentages, reported by agencies to county officials, indicate that the juvenile program was a big success; virtually all juveniles were successfully released. Now consider some additional information on each program collected by the evaluation team. Data were gathered on new arrests of program participants and on the number of successful computerized telephone calls to participants’ homes. Convicted Adults (%) New arrest Successful calls Pretrial Adults (%) Juveniles (%) 5 1 11 53 52 17 As the table shows, many more juveniles were arrested, and juveniles successfully answered a much lower percentage of telephone calls to their homes. What happened? The simple answer is that the staff responsible for administering the juvenile program were not keeping track of offenders. The ELMO equipment was not maintained properly, and police were not visiting the homes of juveniles as planned. Because staff were not keeping track of program participants, they were not aware that many juveniles were violating the conditions of home detention. And because they did not detect violations, they naturally reported that the vast majority of young burglars and thieves completed their home detention successfully. A county official who relied on only agency reports of program success would have made a big mistake in judging the juvenile program to be 99 percent successful. In contrast, an informed consumer of such reports would have been skeptical of a 99 percent success rate and searched for more information. Source: Adapted from Maxfield and Baumer (1991) and Baumer, Maxfield, and Mendelsohn (1993). anyone to tell you the water is cold; you notice that all by yourself. And if you step on a piece of broken glass, you know it hurts without anyone telling you. These are things you experience. The other part of what we know could be called our agreement reality—the things we consider real because we’ve been told they’re real, and everyone else seems to agree they are real. A big part of growing up in any society, in fact, is learning to accept what everybody around us “knows” to be CHAPTER 1 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY true. If we don’t know those same things, we can’t really be a part of society. Ideas about gender, race, religion, and different nations that you learned as you were growing up would fit in this category. We may test a few of these truths on our own, but we simply accept the great majority of them. These are the things that “everybody knows.” To illustrate the difference between agreement and experiential realities, consider preventive police patrol. The term preventive implies that when police patrol their assigned beats they prevent crime. Police do not prevent all crime, of course, but it is a commonsense belief that a visible, mobile police force will prevent some crimes. In fact, the value of patrol in preventing crime was a fundamental principle of police operations for many years. A 1967 report on policing for President Lyndon Johnson by the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (p. 1) stated that “the heart of the police effort against crime is patrol.… The object of patrol is to disperse policemen in a way that will eliminate or reduce the opportunity for misconduct and to increase the probability that a criminal will be apprehended while he is committing a crime or immediately thereafter.” Seven years later, the Police Foundation, a private research organization, published results from an experimental study that presented a dramatic challenge to the conventional wisdom on police patrol. Known as the Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment, this study compared police beats with three levels of preventive patrol: (1) control beats, with one car per beat; (2) proactive beats, with two or three cars per beat; and (3) reactive beats, with no routine preventive patrol. After almost one year, researchers examined data from the three types of beats and found no differences in crime rates, citizen satisfaction with police, fear of crime, or other measures of police performance (Kelling et al. 1974). Additional studies conducted in the 1970s cast doubt on other fundamental assumptions about police practices. A quick response to crime reports 1. Words set in boldface are defined in the glossary at the end of the book. 5 made no difference in arrests, according to a research study in Kansas City (Van Kirk 1977). And criminal investigation by police detectives rarely resulted in an arrest (Greenwood 1975). We mention these examples not to attack routine law enforcement practices but to show that systematic research on policing has illustrated how traditional beliefs—as examples of agreement reality—can be misleading. Simply increasing the number of police officers on patrol does not reduce crime because police patrol often lacks direction. Faster response time to calls for police assistance does not increase arrests because there is often a long delay between the time when a crime occurs and when it is reported to police. Clever detective work seldom solves crimes because investigators get most of their information from reports prepared by patrol officers, who in turn get their information from victims and witnesses. Traditional beliefs about patrol effectiveness, response time, and detective work are examples of agreement reality, a “reality” that a surprising number of people still embrace. In contrast, the research projects that produced alternative views about each law enforcement practice represent experiential reality. These studies are examples of empirical1 research, the production of knowledge based on experience or observation. In each case, researchers conducted studies of police practices and based their conclusions on observations and experience. Empirical research is a way of learning about crime and criminal justice, and explaining how to conduct empirical research is the purpose of this book. The Role of Science Science offers an approach to both agreement reality and experiential reality. Scientists have certain criteria that must be met before they will agree on the reality of something they haven’t personally experienced. In general, an assertion must have both logical and empirical support: it must make sense, and it must agree with actual observations. 6 PART 1 AN INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE INQUIRY For example, why do earthbound scientists accept the assertion that it’s cold on the dark side of the moon? First, it makes sense because the surface heat of the moon comes from the sun’s rays. Second, scientific measurements made on the moon’s dark side confirm this logical explanation. So scientists accept the reality of things they don’t personally experience—they accept an agreement reality— but they have special standards for doing so. More to the point of this book, however, is that science offers a special approach to the discovery of reality through personal experience. Epistemology is the science of knowing; methodology (a subfield of epistemology) might be called the science of finding out. This book focuses on criminal justice methodology—how social scientific methods can be used to better understand crime and criminal justice policy. To understand scientific inquiry, let’s first look at the kinds of inquiry we all do each day. PERSONAL HUMAN INQUIRY Everyday human inquiry draws on personal experience and secondhand authority. Most of us would like to be able to predict how things are going to be for us in the future. We seem quite willing, moreover, to undertake this task using causal and probabilistic reasoning. First, we generally recognize that future circumstances are somehow caused or conditioned by present ones. For example, we learn that getting an education will affect what kind of job we have later in life, and that running stoplights may result in an unhappy encounter with an alert traffic officer. As students, we learn that studying hard will result in better examination grades. Second, we recognize that such patterns of cause and effect are probabilistic in nature: the effects occur more often when the causes occur than when the causes are absent—but not always. Thus, as students, we learn that studying hard produces good grades in most instances, but not every time. We recognize the danger of ignoring stoplights without believing that every such violation will produce a traffic ticket. The concepts of causality and probability play a prominent role in this book. Science makes causality and probability more explicit and provides techniques for dealing with them more rigorously than does casual human inquiry. However, our attempts to learn about the world are only partly linked to personal inquiry and direct experience. Another, much larger, part comes from the agreed-on knowledge that others give us. This agreement reality both assists and hinders our attempts to find out things for ourselves. Two important sources of agreement reality— tradition and authority—deserve brief consideration here. Tradition Each of us is born into and inherits a culture made up, in part, of firmly accepted knowledge about the workings of the world and the values that guide our participation in it. We may learn from others that planting corn in the spring will result in the greatest assistance from the gods, that the circumference of a circle is approximately 3.14 times its diameter, or that driving on the left side of the road (in the United States) is dangerous. Tradition, in this sense, has some clear advantages for human inquiry. By accepting what everybody knows, we are spared the overwhelming task of starting from scratch in our search for regularities and understanding. Knowledge is cumulative, and an inherited body of information and understanding is the jumping-off point for the development of more knowledge. Authority Despite the power of tradition, new knowledge appears every day. Throughout life we learn about new discoveries and understandings from others. However, our acceptance of this new knowledge often depends on the status of the discoverer. For example, you are more likely to believe a judge who declares that your next traffic violation will result in a suspension of your driver’s license than your parents when they say the same thing. CHAPTER 1 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY Like tradition, authority can both help and hinder human inquiry. We do well to trust the judgment of individuals who have special training, expertise, and credentials in a matter, especially in the face of contradictory arguments on a given question. At the same time, inquiry can be greatly hindered by the legitimate authorities who err within their own special province. Biologists, after all, do make mistakes in the field of biology, and biological knowledge changes over time. Criminal justice research sometimes yields mistaken results, and we are wise to accept research findings with caution even if they come from experts. The box A R R E S T A N D D O M E S T I C V titled “Arrest and Domestic Violence” illustrates the problems that can result when criminal justice policy makers accept too quickly the results from criminal justice research. Inquiry is also hindered when we depend on the authority of experts speaking outside their realm of expertise. Consider a political or religious leader, lacking any biochemical expertise, who declares marijuana to be a dangerous drug. The advertising industry plays heavily on this misleading use of authority by having popular athletes discuss the value of various sports drinks and having movie stars evaluate the performance of automobiles. I O L E N C E In 1983, preliminary results were released from a study on the deterrent effects of arrest in cases of domestic violence. The study reported that male abusers who were arrested were less likely to commit future assaults than offenders who were not arrested. Conducted by researchers from the Police Foundation, the study used rigorous experimental methods adapted from the natural sciences. Criminal justice scholars generally agreed that the research was well designed and executed. Public officials were quick to embrace the study’s findings that arresting domestic violence offenders deterred them from future violence. Here, at last, was empirical evidence to support an effective policy in combating domestic assaults. Results of the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment were widely disseminated, in part because of aggressive efforts by the researchers to publicize their findings (Sherman and Cohn 1989). The attorney general of the United States recommended that police departments make arrests in all cases of misdemeanor domestic violence. Within five years, more than 80 percent of law enforcement agencies in U.S. cities adopted arrest as the preferred way of responding to domestic assaults (Sherman 1992, 2). Several things contributed to the rapid adoption of arrest policies to deter domestic violence. First, the experimental study was conducted carefully by highly respected researchers. Second, results were widely publicized in newspapers, in professional journals, and on television programs. Third, officials could understand the study, and most believed that its findings made sense. Finally, mandating arrest in less serious cases of domestic violence was a straightforward and politically attractive approach to a growing problem. 7 Sherman and Berk (1984), however, urged caution in uncritically embracing the results of their study. Others urged that similar research be conducted in other cities to check on the Minneapolis findings (Lempert 1984). Recognizing the need for more research, the U.S. National Institute of Justice sponsored more experiments—known as replications—in six other cities. Not everyone was happy about the new studies. For example, a feminist group in Milwaukee opposed the replication in that city because it believed that the effectiveness of arrest had already been proved (Sherman and Cohn 1989, 138). Results from the replication studies brought into question the effectiveness of arrest policies. In three cities, no deterrent effect was found in police records of domestic violence. In other cities, there was no evidence of deterrence for longer periods (6 to 12 months), and in three cities, researchers found that violence actually escalated when offenders were arrested (Sherman 1992, 30). For example, Sherman and associates (1992, 167) report that in Milwaukee “the initial deterrent effects observed for up to thirty days quickly disappear. By one year later [arrests] produce an escalation effect.” Arrest works in some cases but not in others. In responding to domestic assaults, as in many other cases, it’s important to carefully consider the characteristics of offenders and the nature of the relationship between offender and victim. After police departments throughout the country embraced arrest policies following the Minneapolis study, researchers were faced with the difficult task of explaining why initial results must be qualified. Arrest seemed to make sense; officials and the general public believed what they read in the papers and saw on television. Changing their minds by reporting complex findings was more difficult. 8 PART 1 AN INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE INQUIRY Both tradition and authority, then, are doubleedged swords in the search for knowledge about the world. Simply put, they provide us with a starting point for our own inquiry, but they may lead us to start at the wrong point or push us in the wrong direction. ERRORS IN PERSONAL HUMAN INQUIRY Everyday personal human inquiry reveals a number of potential biases. Aside from the potential dangers of relying on tradition and authority, we often stumble when we set out to learn for ourselves. Let’s consider some of the common errors we make in our own casual inquiries and then look at the ways science provides safeguards against those errors. Inaccurate Observation The keystone of inquiry is observation. But quite frequently we fail to observe things right in front of us or mistakenly observe things that aren’t so. Do you recall what your instructor was wearing on the first day of this class? If you had to guess now, what are the chances you would be right? In contrast to casual human inquiry, scientific observation is a conscious activity. Simply making observations in a more deliberate way helps to reduce error. If you had gone to the first class meeting with a conscious plan to observe and record what your instructor was wearing, you would have increased your chances of accuracy. In many cases, using both simple and complex measurement devices helps to guard against inaccurate observations. Suppose that you had taken photographs of your instructor on the first day. The photos would have added a degree of precision well beyond that provided by unassisted human memory. Overgeneralization When we look for patterns among the specific things we observe around us, we often assume that a few similar events are evidence of a general pattern. The tendency to overgeneralize is probably greatest when there is pressure to reach a general understanding, yet overgeneralization also occurs in the absence of pressure. Whenever overgeneralization does occur, it can misdirect or impede inquiry. Imagine you are a rookie police officer newly assigned to foot patrol in an urban neighborhood. Your sergeant wants to meet with you at the end of your shift to discuss what you think are the major law enforcement problems on the beat. Eager to earn favor with your supervisor, you interview the manager of a convenience store in a small shopping area. If the manager mentions vandalism as the biggest concern, you might report that vandalism is the main problem on your beat, even though other business owners and area residents believe that drug dealing contributes to the neighborhood problems of burglary, street robbery, and vandalism. Overgeneralization leads to misrepresentation and simplification of the problems on your beat. Criminal justice researchers guard against overgeneralization by committing themselves in advance to a sufficiently large sample of observations and by being attentive to how representative those observations are. The replication of inquiry provides another safeguard. Replication means repeating a study, checking to see whether similar results are obtained each time. The study may also be repeated under slightly different conditions or in different locations. The box titled “Arrest and Domestic Violence” describes an example of why replication can be especially important in applied research. Selective Observation Another danger of overgeneralization is that it may lead to selective observation. Once we have concluded that a particular pattern exists and have developed a general understanding of why, we will be tempted to pay attention to future events and situations that correspond with the pattern and to ignore those that do not. Racial, ethnic, and other prejudices are reinforced by selective observation. Research plans often specify in advance the number and kind of observations to be made as a CHAPTER 1 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY basis for reaching a conclusion. For example, if we wanted to learn whether women are more likely than men to support long prison sentences for sex offenders, we would plan to make a specified number of observations on that question. We might select a thousand people to be interviewed. Even if the first 10 women supported long sentences and the first 10 men opposed them, we would continue to interview everyone selected for the study and record each observation. We would base our conclusion on an analysis of all the observations, not just those first 20 respondents. Illogical Reasoning People have various ways of handling observations that contradict their judgments about the way things are. Surely one of the most remarkable creations of the human mind is the maxim about the exception that proves the rule, an idea that makes no sense at all. An exception can draw attention to a rule or to a supposed rule, but in no system of logic can it prove the rule it contradicts. Yet we often use this pithy saying to brush away contradictions with a simple stroke of illogic. What statisticians call the gambler’s fallacy is another illustration of illogic in day-to-day reasoning. According to this fallacy, a consistent run of good or bad luck is presumed to foreshadow its opposite. An evening of bad luck at poker may kindle the belief that a winning hand is just around the corner; many a poker player has stayed in a game too long because of that mistaken belief. Conversely, an extended period of good weather may lead us to worry that it is certain to rain on our weekend picnic. Ideology and Politics Crime is, of course, an important social problem, and a great deal of controversy surrounds policies for dealing with crime. Many people feel strongly one way or another about the death penalty, gun control, and long prison terms for drug users as approaches to reducing crime. There is ongoing concern about racial bias in police practices and sentencing policies. Being tougher on sex offenders 9 seems to be a favorite topic of state legislatures. Ideological or political views on such issues can undermine objectivity in the research process. Criminal justice professionals may have particular difficulty separating ideology and politics from a more detached, scientific study of crime. Criminologist Samuel Walker (1994, 16) compares ideological bias in criminal justice research to theology: “The basic problem … is that faith triumphs over facts. For both liberals and conservatives, certain ideas are unchallenged articles of faith, almost like religious beliefs that remain unshaken by empirical facts.” Most of us have our own beliefs about public policy, including policies for dealing with crime. The danger lies in allowing such beliefs to distort how research problems are defined and how research results are interpreted. The scientific approach to the study of crime and criminal justice policy guards against, but does not prevent, ideology and theology from coloring the research process. In empirical research, so-called articles of faith are compared with experience. To Err Is Human We have seen some of the ways that we can go astray in our attempts to know and understand the world and some of the ways that science protects its inquiries from these pitfalls. Social science differs from our casual, day-to-day inquiry in two important respects. First, social scientific inquiry is a conscious activity. Although we engage in continual observation in daily life, much of it is unconscious or semiconscious. In social scientific inquiry, we make a conscious decision to observe, and we stay alert while we do it. Second, social scientific inquiry is a more careful process than our casual efforts. We are more wary of making mistakes and take special precautions to avoid doing so. Do social scientific research methods offer total protection against the errors that people commit in personal inquiry? No. Not only do individuals make every kind of error we’ve looked at, but social scientists as a group also succumb to the pitfalls and stay trapped for long periods. 10 PART 1 AN INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE INQUIRY PURPOSES OF RESEARCH We conduct criminal justice research to serve various purposes. Criminal justice research, of course, serves many purposes. Explaining associations between things like police patrol and crime levels is one of those purposes; others include exploration, description, and application. Although a given study can have several purposes, it is useful to examine them separately because each has different implications for how we structure research. Exploration Much research in criminal justice is conducted to explore a specific problem, known as exploratory research. A researcher or official may be interested in a crime or criminal justice policy issue about which little is known. Or perhaps an innovative approach to policing, court management, or corrections has been tried in some jurisdiction, and the researcher wishes to determine how common such practices are in other cities or states. An exploratory project might collect data on a measure to establish a baseline with which future changes will be compared. For example, heightened concern over drug use might prompt efforts to estimate the level of drug abuse in the United States. How many people are arrested for drug sales or possession each year? How many high school seniors report using marijuana in the past week or in the past month? How many hours per day do drug dealers work, and how much money do they make? These are examples of research questions intended to explore different aspects of the problem of drug abuse. Exploratory questions may also be formulated in connection with criminal justice responses to drug problems. How many cities have created special police or prosecutor task forces to crack down on drug sales? What sentences are imposed on major dealers or on casual users? How much money is spent on treatment for drug users? What options exist for treating different types of addiction? Exploratory research in criminal justice can be simple or complex, using a variety of methods. A mayor who is anxious to learn about drug arrests in his or her city might simply phone the police chief and request a report. Estimating how many high school seniors have used marijuana requires more sophisticated survey methods. Since the early 1970s, the National Institute on Drug Abuse has supported nationwide surveys of students regarding drug use. Description A key purpose of many criminal justice studies is to describe the scope of the crime problem or policy responses to the problem. In descriptive research, a researcher or public official observes and then describes what was observed. Criminal justice observation and description, methods grounded in the social sciences, tend to be more accurate than the casual observations people may make about how much crime there is or how violent teenagers are today. Descriptive studies are often concerned with counting or documenting observations; exploratory studies focus more on developing a preliminary understanding about a new or unusual problem. Descriptive studies are frequently conducted in criminal justice. The FBI has compiled Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) since 1930. UCR data are routinely reported in newspapers and widely interpreted as accurately describing crime in the United States. For example, 2008 UCR figures (Federal Bureau of Investigation 2009) showed that Nevada had the highest rate of auto theft (611.6 thefts per 100,000 residents) in the nation and Maine had the lowest (89.3 per 100,000 residents). Descriptive studies in criminal justice have other uses. A researcher may attend meetings of neighborhood anticrime groups and observe their efforts to organize block watch committees. These observations form the basis for a case study that describes the activities of neighborhood anticrime groups. Such a descriptive study might present information that officials and residents of other cities can use to promote such organizations themselves. Or consider research by Bruce Jacobs and associates (Jacobs, Topalli, and Wright 2003) in which they describe the motivations for carjacking, CHAPTER 1 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY how offenders select targets, and how carjacking differs from other types of robbery. Explanation A third general purpose of criminal justice research is to explain things. Reporting that urban residents have generally favorable attitudes toward police is a descriptive activity, but reporting why some people believe that police are doing a good job while other people do not is an example of explanatory research. Similarly, reporting why Nevada has the highest auto-theft rate in the nation is explanation; simply reporting auto-theft rates for different states is description. A researcher has an explanatory purpose if he or she wishes to know why the number of 14-year-olds involved in gangs has increased, as opposed to simply describing changes in gang membership. Application Researchers also conduct criminal justice studies of an applied nature. Applied research stems from a need for facts and findings with specific policy implications. Another purpose of criminal justice research, therefore, is its application to public policy. We can distinguish two types of applied research: evaluation and policy/problem analysis. Applied research is often used to evaluate the effects of specific criminal justice programs. Determining whether a program designed to reduce burglary actually had the intended effect is an example of evaluation. In its most basic form, evaluation involves comparing the goals of a program with the results. If one goal of increased police foot patrol is to reduce fear of crime, then an evaluation of foot patrol might compare levels of fear before and after increasing the number of police officers on the beat on foot. In most cases, evaluation research uses social scientific methods to test the results of a program or policy change. The second type of applied research is the analysis of general justice policies and more specific problems. What would happen to court backlogs if we designated a judge and prosecutor who would 11 handle only drug-dealing cases? How many new police officers would have to be hired if a department shifted to community policing? These are examples of what-if questions addressed by policy analysis. Policy analysis is different from other forms of criminal justice research primarily in its focus on future events. Rather than observing and analyzing current or past behavior, policy analysis tries to anticipate the future consequences of alternative actions. Similarly, justice organizations are increasingly using techniques of problem analysis to study patterns of cases and devise appropriate responses. Problem-oriented policing is perhaps the bestknown example, in which crime analysts work with police and other organizations to examine recurring problems. Ron Clarke and John Eck (2005) have prepared a comprehensive guide for this type of applied research. Our brief discussion of distinct research purposes is not intended to imply that research purposes are mutually exclusive. Many criminal justice studies have elements of more than one purpose. Suppose you want to examine the problem of bicycle theft at your university. First, you need some information that describes the problem of bicycle theft on campus. Let’s assume your research finds that thefts from some campus locations have declined but that there was an increase in bikes stolen from racks outside dormitories. You might explain these findings by noting that bicycles parked outside dorms tend to be unused for longer periods of time and that there is more coming and going among bikes parked near classrooms. One option to further reduce thefts would be to purchase more secure bicycle racks. A policy analysis might compare the costs of installing the racks with the predicted savings resulting from a reduction in bike theft. Incidentally, the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing has published an extremely useful guide on the problem of bicycle theft (Johnson, Sidebottom, and Thorpe 2008). In addition to its substantive value, this guide is an example of applied research that can be conducted and used by justice professionals. Visit the website www.popcenter.org for more information and examples. 12 PART 1 HOW TO AN INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE INQUIRY DESIGN A RESEARCH PROJECT Designing research requires planning several stages, but the stages do not always occur in the same sequence. We’ve now seen how casual human inquiry can set us up for making mistakes, and we have summarized basic research purposes. But what if you were to undertake a research project yourself? Where would you start? Then where would you go? How would you begin planning your research? College courses on research methods in criminal justice often require students to design a research project. The rest of this chapter covers the basics of planning research and writing a proposal. Every project has a starting point, but it is important to think through later stages, even at the beginning. Figure 1.1 presents a schematic view of the social scientific research process. Think of this as a sort of map that provides an overview of the whole process before we launch into the details of particular components of research. The Research Process At the top of the diagram in Figure 1.1 are interests, ideas, theories, and new programs—the possible beginning points for a line of research. The letters (A, B, X, Y, and so forth) represent concepts such as deterrence or burglary. Thus, you might have a general interest in finding out why the threat of punishment deters some but not all people from committing crimes, or you might want to investigate how burglars select their targets. Question marks in the diagram indicate that you aren’t sure things are the way you suspect they are. We have represented a theory as a complex set of relationships among several concepts (A, B, E, and F). The research process might also begin with an idea for a new program. Imagine that you are the director of a probation services department and you want to introduce weekly drug tests for people on probation. Because you have taken a course on criminal justice research methods, you decide to design an evaluation of the new program before trying it out. The research process begins with your idea for the new drug-testing program. Notice the movement back and forth among these several possible beginnings, represented by the arrows between the top boxes. An initial interest may lead to the formulation of an idea, which may fit into a larger theory, and the theory may produce new ideas and create new interests. Or your understanding of some theory may encourage you to consider new policies. To make this discussion more concrete, let’s take a specific research example. Suppose you are concerned about the problem of crime on your campus and you have a special interest in learning more about how other students view the issue and what they think should be done about it. Going a step further, let’s say you have the impression that students are especially concerned about violent crimes such as assault and robbery, and that many students feel the university should be doing more to prevent violent crime. The source of this idea might be your own interest after being a student for a couple of years. You might develop the idea while reading about theories of crime in a course you are taking. Perhaps you recently read stories about a crime wave on campus. Or maybe some combination of things makes you want to learn more about campus crime. Considering the research purposes discussed earlier in this chapter, your research will be mainly exploratory. You probably have descriptive and explanatory interests as well: How much of a problem is violent crime on campus? Are students especially concerned about crime in certain areas? Why are some students more worried about crime than others? What do students think would be effective changes to reduce campus crime problems? Getting Started To begin pursuing your interest in student concerns about violent crime, you undoubtedly will want to read something about the issue. You might CHAPTER 1 INTEREST ? Y CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IDEA X CONCEPTUALIZATION Specify the meaning of the concepts to be studied OPERATIONALIZATION ? THEORY A Y B E CHOICE OF RESEARCH METHOD Experiments Survey research Field research Content analysis Existing data research Comparative research Evaluation research 13 NEW PROGRAM F Drug tests Probation violations POPULATION AND SAMPLING Whom do we want to be able to draw conclusions about? Who will be observed for that purpose? How will we actually measure the variables under study? OBSERVATIONS Collecting data for analysis and interpretation ANALYSIS Analyzing data and drawing conclusions APPLICATION Reporting results and assessing their implications F I G U R E 1.1 The Research Process begin by finding out what research has been done on fear of crime and on the sorts of crime that concern people most. Items posted on a campus website might provide information about violent crimes that occurred recently. In addition, you will probably want to talk to people, such as other students or campus police officers. These activities will prepare you to handle various decisions about research design. As you review the research literature, you should make note of how other 14 PART 1 AN INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE INQUIRY researchers approached the problem and consider whether the same designs will meet your research objective. What is your objective, by the way? It’s important that you are clear about that before you design your study. Do you plan to write a paper based on your research to satisfy a course requirement or as an honors thesis? Is your purpose to gain information that will support an argument for more police protection or better lighting on campus? Do you want to write an article for the campus newspaper or blog? Usually, your objective for undertaking research can be expressed in a report. The website for this book includes information that will help you with the organization of research reports. We recommend that you make an outline of such a report as the first step in the design of any project. You should be clear about the kinds of statements you will want to make when the research is complete. Here are two examples of such statements: “X percentage of State U students believe that sexual assault is a big problem on campus,” and “Female students living off campus are more likely than females living in dorms to feel that emergency phones should be installed near buildings where evening classes are held.” Although your final report may not look much like your initial image of it, outlining the planned report will help you make better decisions about research design. Conceptualization We often talk casually about criminal justice concepts such as deterrence, recidivism, crime prevention, community policing, and child abuse; but it is necessary to specify what we mean by these concepts to do research on them. Chapter 4 will examine this process of conceptualization in depth. For now, let’s see what it might involve in our hypothetical example. If you are going to study student concerns about violent crime, you must first specify what you mean by concern about violent crime. This ambiguous phrase can mean different things to different people. Campus police officers are concerned about violent crime because that is part of their job. Students may have two kinds of concerns. On the one hand, they might be concerned about crime in much the same way they are concerned about other social problems, such as immigration, health care, and the global economy. They recognize these issues as problems society must deal with, but they don’t feel that the issues affect them directly; we could specify this concept as general concern about violent crime. On the other hand, students may feel that the threat of violent crime does affect them directly, and they express some fear about the possibility of being a victim; let’s call this fear for personal safety. Of course, you need to specify all the concepts you wish to study. If you want to study the possible effect of concern about crime on student behavior, you’ll have to decide whether you want to limit your focus to specific precautionary behavior such as keeping doors locked or general behavior such as going to classes, parties, and football games. Choice of Research Method A variety of methods are available to the criminal justice researcher. Each method has strengths and weaknesses, and certain concepts are more appropriately studied by some methods than by others. A survey is the most appropriate method for studying both general concern and fear for personal safety. You might interview students directly or ask them to fill out an e-mailed questionnaire. As we’ll see in Chapter 7, surveys are especially well suited to the study of individuals’ attitudes and opinions. Thus, if you wish to examine whether students who are afraid of crime are more likely to believe that campus lighting should be improved than students who are not afraid, then a survey is a good method. Other methods described in Part Three may be appropriate. Through content analysis (discussed in Chapter 9), you might examine postings on a campus blog and analyze what the writers believe should be done to improve campus safety. Field research (see Chapter 8), in which you observe whether students tend to avoid dark areas of the campus, will help you understand student behavior in avoiding certain areas of the campus at night. Or CHAPTER 1 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY you might study official complaints made to police and college administrators about crime problems on campus. As you read Part Three, you’ll see how other research methods might be used to study this topic. Usually the best study design is one that uses more than one research method, taking advantage of their different strengths. Operationalization Having specified the concepts to be studied and chosen the research method, you now must develop specific measurement procedures. Operationalization, discussed in Chapter 4, refers to the concrete steps, or operations, used to measure specific concepts. If you decide to use a survey to study concern about violent crime, your operationalization will take the form of questionnaire items. You might operationalize fear for personal safety with the question: “How safe do you feel alone on the campus after dark?” This could be followed by boxes indicating the possible answers “Safe” and “Unsafe.” Student attitudes about ways of improving campus safety could be operationalized with the item “Listed below are different actions that might be taken to reduce violent crime on campus. Beside each description, indicate whether you favor or oppose the actions described.” This could be followed by several different actions, with “Favor” and “Oppose” boxes beside each. 15 In the study of concern about violent crime, the relevant population is the student population of your college. As you’ll discover in Chapter 6, however, selecting a sample requires you to be more specific than that. Will you include part-time as well as fulltime students? Students who live on campus, off campus, or both? Many such questions must be answered in terms of your research purpose. If your purpose is to study concern about sexual assault, you might consider limiting your population to female students. If hate crimes are of special interest, you will want to be sure that your study population includes minorities and others who are thought to be particularly targeted by hate crimes. Observations Having decided what to study, among whom, and by what method, you are ready to make observations—to collect empirical data. The chapters of Part Three, which describe various research methods, discuss the different observation methods appropriate to each. For a survey of concern about violent crime, you might prepare an electronic questionnaire and e-mail it to a sample selected from the student body, or you could have a team of interviewers conduct the survey over the telephone. The relative advantages and disadvantages of these and other possibilities are discussed in Chapter 7. Analysis Population and Sampling In addition to refining concepts and measurements, decisions must be made about whom or what to study. The population for a study is that group about whom we want to be able to draw conclusions. Groups are usually made up of people, but we may wish to study a group of drug rehabilitation clinics. We are almost never able to study all the members of the population that interests us, so we often sample subjects for study. Chapter 6 describes methods for selecting samples that adequately reflect the whole population that interests us. Notice in Figure 1.1 that decisions about population and sampling are related to decisions about the research method to be used. We manipulate the collected data for the purpose of drawing conclusions that reflect on the interests, ideas, and theories that initiated the inquiry. Chapter 11 describes a few of the many options available to you in analyzing data. Notice in Figure 1.1 that the results of your analyses feed back into your initial interests, ideas, and theories. In practice, this feedback may initiate another cycle of inquiry. In the study of student concern about violent crime, the analysis phase will have both descriptive and explanatory purposes. You might begin by calculating the percentage of students who feel afraid to use specific parking facilities after dark and the percentage who favor or oppose each of the different things 16 PART 1 AN INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE INQUIRY that might be done to improve campus safety. Together, these percentages will provide a good picture of student opinion on the issue. Moving beyond simple description, you might examine the opinions of different subsets of the student body: men versus women; freshmen, sophomores, juniors, seniors, and graduate students; and students who live in dorms versus off-campus apartments. You might then conduct some explanatory analysis to make the point that students who are enrolled in classes that meet in the evening hours are most in favor of improved campus lighting. Application The final stage of the research process involves using the research you’ve conducted and the conclusions you’ve reached. To start, you will probably want to communicate your findings so that others will know what you’ve learned. You will usually prepare some kind of written report. Perhaps you will make oral presentations in class or at a professional meeting. Or you might create a web page that presents your results. Other students will be interested in hearing what you have learned about their concerns about violent crime on campus. Your study might also be used to actually do something about campus safety. If you find that a large proportion of students you interviewed believe that a parking lot near the library is poorly lighted, university administrators could add more lights or campus police might patrol the area more frequently. Crime preven...
Purchase answer to see full attachment