descriptive research examples in criminal justice

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Criminal Justice

IResearchNet

Academic Writing Services

Quantitative criminology.

The foundation of a sound quantitative criminology is a solid base of descriptive information. Descriptive inference in criminology turns out to be quite challenging. Criminal offending is covert activity, and exclusive reliance on official records leads to highly deficient inferences. Despite important challenges in descriptive analysis, researchers and policymakers still strive to reach a better understanding of the effects of interventions, policies, and life experiences on criminal behavior. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

1. Introduction

2. quantitative data sources, 3. logical and inferential issues, 3.1. time horizon, 3.2. unit of analysis, 3.3. sampling, 3.4. target population, 3.5. concepts and variables, 3.6. descriptive and causal inference, 3.7. validity, 3.8. reliability, 3.9. relationship between reliability and validity, 3.10. estimates and estimators, 3.11. estimator properties: bias, efficiency, and consistency, 4. assessing evidence, 5. methods for descriptive inference, 5.1. measures of central tendency, 5.2. measures of dispersion, 5.3. criminal careers, 5.4. recidivism rates, 5.5. trajectories and developmental pathways, 6. analytic methods for causal inference, 6.1. independent variables and outcomes, 6.2. contingency tables, 6.3. measures of association, 6.4. chi-square, t tests, and analysis of variance, 6.5. linear regression, 6.6. regression for qualitative and counted outcomes, 6.7. structural equation models, 6.8. interrupted time series analysis, 6.9. models for hierarchical and panel data, 6.10. counterfactual reasoning and treatment effects, 6.11. randomized experiments, 6.12. natural experiments and instrumental variable estimators, 6.13. matching, 7. conclusion.

Since its inception as a field of scientific inquiry, criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) researchers have used quantitative data to describe and explain criminal behavior and social responses to criminal behavior. Although other types of data have been used to make important contributions to criminological thought, the analysis of quantitative data has always played an important role in the development of knowledge about crime. This research paper discusses the various types of quantitative data typically encountered by CCJ researchers. Then, some of the logical and inferential issues that arise when researchers work with quantitative data are described. Next, the research paper considers different analytic frameworks for evaluating evidence, testing hypotheses, and answering research questions. Finally, a discussion of the range of methodological approaches used by contemporary CCJ researchers is provided.

CCJ researchers commonly work with data collected for official recordkeeping by government or quasi-government agencies. Such data often include records of criminal events, offender and victim characteristics, and information about how cases are handled or disposed. Detailed information about crimes known to the police and crimes cleared by arrest are available in the UniformCrime Reports (UCR) and the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS). In addition, for purposes of specific research projects, criminal justice agencies often make their administrative records available to criminologists—provided that appropriate steps are taken to protect individual identities. For example, the Bureau of Justice Statistics has conducted two major studies of recidivism rates for prisoners returning to the community in multiple states. Such projects require coordinated use of state correctional databases and access to criminal records, including arrests, convictions, and reincarceration.

More recently, researchers have also relied on information collected through direct interviews and surveys with various populations. In these surveys, respondents are asked about their involvement in offending activities, victimization experiences, background characteristics, perceptions, and life circumstances. Analyses from data collected through the National Crime Victimization Survey; the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring program; the RAND inmate survey; the National Youth Survey; the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth; the Adolescent Health Study; Monitoring the Future (MTF); Research on Pathways to Desistance, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s longitudinal youth studies in Rochester, New York, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Denver, Colorado, have all made important contributions to criminological thought and public policy.

Researchers have also attempted, in some studies, to collect detailed quantitative databases composed of information from both administrative and direct surveys on the same individuals. Among other findings, this research has consistently shown that most crime victimizations are not reported to the police and that most offending activities do not result in an arrest.

The analysis of quantitative crime-related data, like any other type of analysis, depends primarily on the question one is asking and the capabilities of the data available. This section briefly discusses some of the most prominent issues that crime researchers consider when analyzing quantitative data.

Regardless of the data source, research projects using quantitative data can generally be characterized as crosssectional or longitudinal. Cross-sectional studies examine individuals or populations at a single point in time, whereas longitudinal studies follow the same individuals or populations over a period of time. Among longitudinal studies, an important consideration is whether the data will be collected prospectively or retrospectively. In prospective studies, individuals are enrolled in the study and then followed to see what happens to them. In retrospective studies, individuals are enrolled in the study, and researchers then examine historical information about them. Some studies include both prospective and retrospective elements. For example, the Research on Pathways to Desistance study enrolled adolescent offenders in Phoenix, Arizona, and Philadelphia to see how these offenders adapt to the transition from adolescence to adulthood. In that sense, the study is prospective; however, historical information about the individuals included in the study is available and has been collected retrospectively as well.

In most studies, it is clear whether the project is crosssectional or longitudinal, but there are exceptions. For example, the MTF study repeatedly surveys nationally representative samples of high school seniors. This study can be viewed as cross-sectional because it does not survey the same individuals repeatedly, but it can also be viewed as longitudinal because the same methodology for drawing the sample and analyzing the data is repeated over time. Similar issues arise with UCR and NIBRS data. Often, specific studies using a repeated cross-sectional data source, such as MTF, UCR, or NIBRS, will tend to emphasize either crosssectional or longitudinal features of the data.

It is also useful to think about research projects in terms of the basic source of variation to be studied. For example, some studies focus on variation in crime between communities, whereas other studies examine variation in criminality between individual persons. Still other studies attempt to describe and explain variation in behavior over time for the same community or individual. In some studies, the unit of analysis is unambiguous, whereas in other instances, there may be multiple logical analysis units (e.g., multiple observations on the same person and multiple persons per community). These studies are generally referred to as hierarchical or multilevel analyses. An important issue arising in these analyses is lack of independence among observations belonging to a logical higher-order group. For example, individuals who live in the same community or who attend the same school are not likely to be truly independent of each other.

The list of all cases that are eligible to be included in a study is called the sampling frame. The sample included in the study will either be identical to the sampling frame or it will be a subset of the sampling frame. In some instances, the sampling frame is explicitly defined; at other times, the sampling frame is vague. Researchers generally describe the manner in which the sample was selected from the sampling frame in terms of probability or nonprobability sampling. In probability sampling, each case in the sampling frame has a known, non-zero probability of being selected for the sample. Samples selected in any other way are called nonprobability samples. The most basic form of probability sampling is simple random sampling, when each member of the sampling frame has an equal probability of being selected for the sample. More complicated forms of probability sampling, such as stratified random sampling, cluster sampling, and stratified multistage cluster sampling, are all commonly used in CCJ research.

The use of probability sampling allows researchers to make clear statements about the generalizability of their results. Although this is a desirable feature of probability samples, much CCJ research is based on nonprobability samples. The 1945 and 1958 Philadelphia birth cohort studies conducted by Marvin Wolfgang and his colleagues (Wolfgang, Figlio, & Sellin, 1972) focused on an entire population of individuals rather than a sample. Still, one can view the choice of the years 1945 and 1958 as a means of sampling. In fact, when populations are studied, there is almost always a way to conceive of them as nonprobability samples. In other studies, a researcher may survey all children in attendance at a school on a particular day. The resulting sample would be called a convenience or availability sample. Still other research projects rely on the purposive selection of certain numbers of people meeting particular criteria to ensure representation of people from different groups (i.e., males, females, blacks, whites, etc.). These samples are usually called quota samples.A key feature of nonprobability samples is that one is not able to make explicit probabilistic statements about quantities in the population based on what one observes in the sample. Nevertheless, nonprobability samples are quite useful and necessary for addressing many interesting research and policy questions that arise in CCJ research.

A key aspect of any scientific work is the identification of empirical regularities that transcend specific individuals, places, or times. Thus, the population to which the results of a study generalize is of considerable importance. In general, researchers tend to prefer studies that identify the target population and discuss how well the results are likely to generalize to that population. But the target population is sometimes ambiguous. If one studies all individuals in attendance at a particular school on a given day, one could argue that the sample is synonymous with the target population. The research community, however, is not likely to be interested in what is occurring at that individual school unless it somehow relates to what is occurring at other schools in other locations and at other times. This ambiguity means that one cannot make precise statements about the generalizability of the results to other settings. Thus, clear statements about the composition and boundaries of the target population are often the exception rather than the rule.

Scientific theories describe relationships between concepts. In this sense, concepts represent the key elements of a well-developed theory. Concepts are verbal cues or symbols that sometimes refer to simple or complicated sources of variation. Sex (male vs. female), for example, refers to a simple, objective source of variation, whereas the meaning of concepts such as delinquency or socioeconomic status is potentially quite complicated. Still, reference to concepts for purposes of theory and hypothesis development can be sufficient. For purposes of conducting empirical tests of theories and hypotheses, however, more rigor and specificity are required.

Variables are the language of actual empirical work. A researcher’s description of a variable explicitly defines how the concept in question is to be measured for purposes of an actual research project. An operational description or definition of a variable attends to how the variable was measured and what values the variable can take on. Variables such as sex and race are categorical, whereas variables such as age and income are quantitative. Categorical variables can be nominal (unordered categories) or ordinal (ordered categories, but the distance between categories is not well-defined). Quantitative variables can be interval (equal distance between categories) or ratio (existence of a true zero). Still another type of variable, of particular interest to criminologists, is a count of events. Event-count variables represent the number of times an event occurs within some period of time. One way to think of an event-count variable is to consider a two-category variable: Either an event occurs or does not occur within some small time interval. If one adds up the number of times an event occurs over many of these small time intervals, one gets a total count of events.

Some concepts are too broad to be measured effectively with a single variable. Socioeconomic status, for example, is often linked to a combination of at least three subordinate concepts: (1) educational attainment, (2) income, and (3) occupational prestige. Often, variables associated with closely related subordinate concepts can be combined into a scale or index that measures the conceptual variation of interest. There are different ways to form scales and indexes. Some are driven by mathematical decision rules based on correlations between the items comprising the scale or index, and others are based on conceptual considerations.

Still another important feature of any quantitative study is whether it emphasizes description or the identification of cause–effect relationships. Descriptive inference is a characterization or summary of important features of a population. For example, the main objective of the 1993 Bureau of Justice Statistics recidivism study was to estimate the percentage of offenders released from prison in 1993 who experienced subsequent involvement with the criminal justice system within 3 years of their release. No effort was made to explain variation in the recidivism rate; instead, the goal was pure description.

Causal inference is the process of distinguishing between a correlation or statistical association between two or more variables and a cause–effect relationship between those variables. In order for a variable x to be considered a cause of variable y, three criteria must be satisfied: (1) x precedes y in time, (2) x and y are statistically associated, and (3) the statistical association between x and y is not spurious (i.e., there is no other variable that can account for or explain the statistical association between x and y). It turns out that establishing the first two criteria is reasonably straightforward. Convincingly demonstrating nonspuriousness, however, is much more difficult. This issue is discussed in more detail in the “Analytic Methods for Causal Inference” section.

The word validity is often used in two broad contexts in CCJ research. It may be used to indicate whether (or to what extent) a specific measure is an accurate characterization of the concept being studied. For example, one might ask whether an IQ test is a valid measure of intelligence. The word validity is also used as a way of characterizing a study or particular methodological approach. In this case, the concern is whether the study or method is likely to faithfully present the world as it really operates or whether it will distort the phenomena under study in some important way. As an example of this usage, one might consider whether a study with a pretest outcome measurement followed by an intervention and then a posttest outcome measurement but no control group (a group that does not experience the intervention) is a valid study.

A number of different types of validity appear in the CCJ literature. A few common types are discussed here. Assessments of face validity are subjective judgments about whether a measurement or methodology is likely to yield accurate results. If a measure successfully predicts variation in a logically linked outcome, one can say that it rates high on criterion or predictive validity. For example, if one has a parole risk assessment instrument that is designed to predict likelihood of recidivism and the instrument, in fact, does do a good job of recidivism prediction, then one can say that it exhibits criterion validity. Measures with good construct validity are correlated with wellestablished indicators of the phenomenon in question. Such measures should also be independent of indicators that are not relevant to the phenomenon in question.

Studies with high internal validity take convincing steps to ensure that the logic of the study as applied to the individuals actually being studied is sound. External validity, on the other hand, refers to the generalizability of the study’s results to individuals other than those actually included in the study. Internal validity tends to be maximized when the researcher is able to exert a great deal of control over the study and the environment in which the study is conducted (i.e., a laboratory setting). Unfortunately, when the researcher exerts great control, the conditions of the study sometimes become more artificial and less realistic. This raises questions about how well the study results will generalize to other cases. To the extent that the researcher attempts to allow for more realistic study environments (and greater external validity), this will often lead to less control over the study, which produces threats to internal validity. Researchers desire studies that maximize both internal and external validity, but this is often difficult to achieve.

Reliability refers to the consistency, stability, or repeatability of results when a particular measurement procedure or instrument is used. Researchers aspire to the use of instruments and procedures that will produce consistent results (provided that the phenomena under study have not changed). There are different ways of assessing and quantifying reliability. One approach is to take a measurement at a particular point in time and then repeat that same measurement at a later point in time. The correlation between the two measurements is called test–retest reliability. Another approach is to conduct multiple measurements with some variation in the precise measurement method; for example, multiple questionnaires with variations in the wording of various items can be administered to the same individuals. The correlation between the various instruments is called parallel forms reliability.

In some instances, researchers need to code various pieces of information into quantitative research data. A concern often arises about whether the coding rules are written in such a way that multiple properly trained coders will reach the same coding decisions. Interrater reliability is considered to be high when there is a high correlation between the decisions of multiple coders who have reviewed the same information.

Reliability can also be assessed by examining correlations between multiple indicators of the same underlying concept. Assume, for example, that a researcher believes that a key influence on criminal behavior is an individual’s level of self-control. Because there is no single definitive measure of self-control, the researcher might measure many indicators and characteristics of individuals that he believes to be manifestations of one’s level of self-control (i.e., time spent on homework each day, grades in school, time spent watching television, etc.). One way of assessing the reliability of a scale or index that combines this information is to calculate the correlations between all of the indicators, which can then be used to calculate internal-consistency reliability. High levels of internal-consistency reliability imply that the various characteristics and indicators being studied are closely related to each other.

Measures or procedures for capturing measurements can be highly reliable but also invalid. It is possible, for example, to obtain consistent but wrong or misleading measurements. Measures or procedures can also be both unreliable and invalid. In general, however, if a measure is valid it must also, by definition, be reliable.

An estimate is a person’s guess about the value of some interesting quantity or parameter for a target population. Researchers obtain an estimate by applying a formula or estimator to observed data that can be used to develop inferences about the target population. The most straightforward case is when one studies observed data from a simple random sample drawn from a well-defined target population. The goal is to infer the value of a parameter or quantity in the population on the basis of what one observes in the sample. A researcher plugs the observed data into an estimator and then uses the estimator, or formula, to calculate an estimate of the quantity of interest in the population.

In the case of a probability sample drawn from a welldefined population, there is a true population parameter or quantity that researchers seek to estimate on the basis of what they see in the sample.An important issue is whether the estimator applied to the sample will—over the course of drawing many, many probability samples—on average lead to the correct inference about the population parameter. If the average of the parameter estimates is different from the true population parameter, one says that the estimator is biased.

Sometimes there are different unbiased estimators or formulas that could be used to estimate a population quantity. An important question is how to choose one estimator over another. Generally speaking, in this situation researchers would prefer the unbiased estimator that exhibits the least amount of variation in the estimates generated over many samples drawn from the same population. The estimator that exhibits the minimum amount of sample-to-sample variation in the estimates is the most efficient estimator. For example, the sample mean, the sample median, and the sample mode (see “Measures of Central Tendency” section) are both valid estimators for the population mean of a normally distributed variable. The sample mean, however, is a more efficient estimator than the sample median, which is itself more efficient than the sample mode.

In some circumstances, an unbiased estimator is not available. When this happens, researchers typically try to use a consistent estimator. A consistent estimator is biased in small samples, but the bias decreases as the size of the sample increases. Many commonly used estimators in the social sciences, such as logistic regression (discussed later in this research paper), are consistent rather than unbiased.

A statistical model is a description of a process that explains (or fails to explain) the distribution of the observed data. A problem that arises in quantitative CCJ research is how to consider the extent to which a particular statistical model is consistent with the observed data. This section describes several common frameworks for thinking about this correspondence.

4.1. Relative Frequency

In quantitative crime research, decisions about whether to reject or fail to reject a particular hypothesis are often of central importance. For example, a hypothesis may assert that there is no statistical association between two variables in the target population. A test of this hypothesis amounts to asking the following question: What is the probability of observing a statistical association at least as large (either in absolute value or in a single direction) as the one observed in this sample if the true statistical association in the target population is equal to zero? Put another way, assume that there is a target population in which the statistical association is truly equal to zero. If a researcher drew many simple random samples from that population and calculated the statistical association in each of those samples, he or she she would have a sampling distribution of the statistical association parameter estimates. This theoretical sampling distribution could be used to indicate what percentage of the time the statistical association would be at least as large as the association the researcher observed in the original random sample.

Generally speaking, if the percentage is sufficiently low (often, less than 5%), one would reject the hypothesis of no statistical association in the target population. A concern that arises in these kinds of tests is that the hypothesis to be tested is usually very specific (i.e., the statistical association in the target population is equal to zero). With a very large sample size it becomes quite likely that the so-called test statistic will lead a person to reject the hypothesis even if it is only slightly wrong. With a very small sample size, the test statistic is less likely to lead one to reject the hypothesis even if it is very wrong. With this in mind, it is important for researchers to remember that hypothesis tests based on the relative frequency approach are not tests of whether the statistical association in question is large or substantively meaningful. It is also important to keep in mind that the interpretation of statistical tests outside of the framework of well-defined target populations and probability samples is much more ambiguous and controversial.

4.2. Bayesian Methods

Researchers often find the relative frequency framework to be technically easy to use but conceptually difficult to interpret. In fact, researchers and policymakers are not necessarily so concerned with the truth or falsehood of a specific hypothesis (e.g., that a population parameter is equal to zero) as they are with the probability distribution of that parameter. For example, it might be of more interest to estimate the probability that a parameter is greater than zero rather than the probability that a sample test statistic could be as least as large as it is if the population parameter is equal to zero. Analysis conducted in the Bayesian tradition (named after the Rev. Thomas Bayes, who developed the well-known conditional probability theorem) places most of its emphasis on the estimation of the full probability distribution of the parameter(s) of interest. In general, Bayesian methods tend not to be as widely used as relative frequency (or frequentist) methods in CCJ research. This is probably due to the training received by most criminologists, which tends to underemphasize Bayesian analysis. Because Bayesian analyses can often be presented in terms that are easier for policy and lay audiences to understand, it is likely that Bayesian methods will become more prominent in the years ahead.

4.3. Parameter Estimation and Model Selection

CCJ researchers typically rely on quantitative criteria to estimate parameters and select statistical models. Common criteria for parameter estimation include least squares (LS) and maximum likelihood (ML). LS estimators minimize the sum of the squared deviations between the predicted and actual values of the outcome variable. ML estimators produce estimates that maximize the probability of the data looking the way they do. Provided the necessary assumptions are met, LS estimators are unbiased and exhibit minimum sampling variation (efficiency). ML estimators, on the other hand, are typically consistent, and they become efficient as the sample size grows (asymptotic efficiency).

Model selection involves the choice of one model from a comparison of two or more models (i.e., a model space). The most prominent model selection tools include F tests (selection based on explained variation) and likelihoodratio tests (selection based on likelihood comparisons). An important issue with these tests is that they typically require that one model be a special case of the other models in the model space. For these approaches, tests are therefore limited to comparisons of models that are closely related to each other. Increasingly, model selection problems require researchers to make comparisons between models that are not special cases of each other. In recent years, two more general model selection criteria have become more widely used: (1) the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and (2) the Bayesian information criterion (BIC). These criteria can be used to compare both nested and non-nested models provided the outcome data being used for the comparison are the same. Like F tests and likelihood-ratio tests, AIC and BIC penalize for the number of parameters being estimated. The logic for penalizing is that, all other things equal, we expect a model with more parameters to be more consistent with the observed data. In addition to penalizing for parameters, the BIC also penalizes for increasing sample size. This provides a counterweight to tests of statistical significance, such as the F test and the likelihood-ratio test, which are more likely to select more complicated models when the sample size is large. As modeling choices continue to proliferate, it seems likely that use of AIC and BIC will continue to increase.

This section briefly considers some descriptive parameters often studied in CCJ research. The first two subsections deal with parameters that are usually of interest to all social scientists. The final three subsections emphasize issues of particular importance for CCJ research.

Central tendency measures provide researchers with information about what is typical for the cases involved in a study for a particular variable. The mean or arithmetic average (i.e., the sum of the variable scores divided by the number of scores) is a common measure of central tendency for quantitative variables. The mean has an advantage in that each case’s numerical value has a direct effect on the estimate; thus, the mean uses all of the information in the scores to describe the “typical” case. A problem with the mean is that cases with extreme scores can cause the mean to be much higher or much lower than what is typical for the cases in the study. In situations where the mean is affected by extreme scores, researchers often prefer to use the median as a measure of central tendency. The median is the middle score of the distribution; half of the cases have scores above the median, and the other half have scores below the median. The median can also be viewed as the 50th percentile of the distribution. Unlike the mean, the median does not use all of the information in the data, but it is also not susceptible to the influence of extreme scores. For categorical variables, the mode (i.e., the most frequently occurring category) is often used as a measure of central tendency. For dichotomous or two-category variables, the most commonly used measure of central tendency is the proportion of cases in one of the categories.

In addition to summarizing what is typical for the cases in a study, researchers usually consider the amount of variation as well. Several common summaries of variation, or dispersion, are commonly reported in the literature. The most common measure of dispersion for quantitative variables is the variance and/or its square root, the standard deviation. Many interesting social science variables are either normally or approximately normally distributed (i.e., the distribution looks like a bell-shaped curve). In these types of distributions, approximately two thirds of the cases fall within 1 standard deviation of the mean, and about 95% of the cases fall within 2 standard deviations of the mean. Thus, for variables with a bell-shaped distribution, the standard deviation has a very clear interpretation. This is particularly important because sampling distributions are often assumed to have normal distributions. Thus, the standard error calculation that appears in much quantitative CCJ research is actually an estimate of the standard deviation of the sampling distribution. It can be used to form confidence intervals and other measures of uncertainty for parameter estimates in the relative frequency framework.

For qualitative or categorical variables, a common measure of dispersion is the diversity index, which measures the probability that cases come from different categories. Some CCJ researchers have used the diversity index to study offending specialization and ethnic–racial heterogeneity in communities and neighborhoods. A generalized version of the diversity index that adjusts for the number of categories is the index of qualitative variation, which indicates the extent to which individuals are clustered within the same category or distributed across multiple categories.

Over the past three to four decades, criminologists have developed the concept of the criminal career. According to researchers who study criminal career issues, within any given time period the population can be divided into two groups: (1) active offenders and (2) everyone else. The percentage of the population in the active offender category is the crime participation rate. Within that same time period, active offenders vary in several respects: (a) the number of offenses committed, (b) the seriousness of the offenses committed, and (c) the length of time the offender is actively involved in criminal activity. A key idea within the criminal career framework is that the causes of participation may not be the same as the causes of offense frequency, seriousness, or the length of time the offender is active.

There is an extensive body of research devoted to estimating these parameters for general and higher-risk populations, and more recent research has treated these criminal career dimensions as outcomes in their own right. For example, a large amount of research has been devoted to the study of offense frequency distributions. This literature shows that in both general and high-risk populations offense frequency distributions tend to be highly skewed, with most individuals exhibiting low frequencies and a relatively small number of individuals exhibiting high frequencies. Among the most prominent findings in the field came from Wolfgang et al.’s (1972) study of the 1945 Philadelphia male birth cohort, which showed that about 6% of the boys in the cohort were responsible for over 50% of the police contacts for the entire cohort.

A particularly important parameter for criminal justice policy is the rate at which individuals who have offended in the past commit new crimes in the future (the recidivism or reoffending rate). Recidivism rates are based on three key pieces of information: (1) the size of the population of prior offenders at risk to recidivate in the future, (2) the number of individuals who actually do reoffend by whatever measure is used (i.e., self-report of new criminal activity, rearrest, reconviction, return to prison), and (3) a known follow-up period or length of time that individuals will be followed. Recidivism is also sometimes studied in terms of the length of time that lapses between one’s entry into the population of offenders at risk to recidivate and the timing of one’s first recidivism incident.

With the advent of a large number of longitudinal studies of criminal and precriminal antisocial and aggressive behaviors, researchers have become increasingly interested in the developmental course of criminality as people age. To aid in the discovery of developmental trends and patterns, criminologists have turned to several types of statistical models that provide helpful lenses through which to view behavior change. The most prominent of these models are growth curve models, semiparametric trajectory models, and growth curve mixture models. These all assume that there is important variation in longitudinal patterns of offending. Some individuals begin offending early and continue at a sustained high rate of offending throughout their lives, whereas others who begin offending early seem to stop offending during adolescence and early adulthood. Some individuals avoid offending at all, whereas others offend in fairly unsystematic ways over time. Growth and trajectory models provide ways of summarizing and describing variation in the development of criminal behavior as individuals move through the life span.

The foundation of a sound quantitative criminology is a solid base of descriptive information. Descriptive inference in criminology turns out to be quite challenging. Criminal offending is covert activity, and exclusive reliance on official records leads to highly deficient inferences. Despite important challenges in descriptive analysis, researchers and policymakers still strive to reach a better understanding of the effects of interventions, policies, and life experiences on criminal behavior. Much of the CCJ literature is therefore focused on efforts to develop valid causal inferences. This section discusses some of the most prominent analytic methods used for studying cause and effect in CCJ research.

CCJ researchers typically distinguish between independent variables and dependent or outcome variables. In general, researchers conceive of dependent or outcome variables as variation that depends on the independent or predictor variables. Thus, independent variables explain variation in dependent or outcome variables. Sometimes researchers use stronger language, suggesting that independent variables cause variation in dependent variables. The burden of proof for use of the word cause is very high, however, and many researchers are careful to qualify their results if they do not think this burden of proof has been met.

Contingency tables are a useful way of presenting frequency distributions for two or three categorical variables at the same time. For example, if a person wanted to create a measure of offending participation (either someone offends in a particular time period or he or she does not) and then compare the distribution of that variable for individuals who are employed and those who are not employed, a contingency table could be constructed to display this information. Several measures of the strength of the statistical association (analogous to a correlation coefficient) have been designed for contingency tables. Although contingency tables are not often used for studying cause–effect relationships (except in randomized experiments), they are quite useful for exploratory data analysis and foundational work for more elaborate statistical models.

Researchers often want to summarize the strength of the statistical association between two variables. Correlation coefficients and other measures of association are used for this purpose. In general, measures of association are arrayed on a scale of – 1 to 1 or 0 to 1, where 0 usually represents no association at all and – 1 or 1 represents a perfect negative or positive association. Measures of association have been developed for categorical and quantitative variables. Some measures of association, such as the relative risk ratio and the odds ratio, are calibrated so that 1 implies no statistical association, whereas numbers close to zero and large positive numbers indicate strong association. Researchers often conduct tests of statistical significance to test the hypothesis of “no association” in the population.

CCJ researchers are able to draw on a wide variety of tools for conducting tests of statistical significance. In a contingency table setting, researchers often are interested in testing the hypothesis that two categorical variables are statistically independent. The chi-square test of independence is frequently used for this purpose. Sometimes, a researcher will want to test the hypothesis that the mean of a continuous variable is the same for two populations. The independent samples t test is most often used to conduct this test. In addition, researchers may need to test the hypothesis that the mean of a continuous variable remains the same at two time points. In this setting, the paired samples t test will most likely be used. Finally, if a researcher wants to test the hypothesis that a continuous variable has the same mean in three or more populations, then analysis of variance will be used. There are many statistical tests for many types of problems. Although these are among the most common applications, many others are available for more complicated situations.

Linear regression models are a class of statistical models summarizing the relationship between a quantitative or continuous outcome variable and one or more independent variables. Careful use of these models requires attention to a number of assumptions about the distribution of the outcome variable, the correctness of the model’s specification, and the independence of the observations in the analysis. If the assumptions underlying the model are valid, then the parameter estimates can provide useful information about the relationship between the independent variable or variables and the outcome variable.

Many outcome variables in CCJ are not continuous or do not meet some of the distributional assumptions required for linear regression. Statistical models for these variables, therefore, do not fit well into the linear regression framework. Examples of this problem include dichotomous and event-count outcomes. For dichotomous outcomes, researchers often estimate logistic or probit regression models; for counted outcomes, specialized models for event counts are usually estimated (i.e., binomial, Poisson, negative binomial).

CCJ researchers sometimes have well-developed ideas about the relationships between a complex system of independent and dependent variables. These ideas are usually based on theories or findings from previous empirical research. Structural equation models can be used to investigate whether the relationships between the variables in the system are in accord with the researcher’s predictions.

A time series analysis is based on the study of a particular cross-sectional unit (e.g., a community or city) over a sustained period of time. Over that period of time, the study takes repeated measurements of the phenomenon of interest (e.g., the number of gun homicides each month). Sometimes, an intervention occurs (e.g., the introduction of a new law restricting access to handguns) and the researcher has access to both the preintervention time series and the postintervention time series. These time series can be combined into a single interrupted time series analysis to study the effect of the intervention on the series. Researchers conducting interrupted time series analysis usually include both a series in which the intervention occurs and a series in which there is no intervention (a control series). If there is an apparent effect of the intervention in the interrupted time series analysis and the effect reflects a genuine causal effect, then there should be no corresponding change in the control series.

As discussed earlier (see the “Unit ofAnalysis” section), some data sets have more than one logical unit of analysis. For example, the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth follows the same individuals repeatedly over a sustained period of time (panel data). Other studies, such as the MTF study, sample schools and then sample multiple individuals within each school. A variety of modeling tools (i.e., fixed effect, random effect, hierarchical, and multilevel models) exist for working these kinds of data. An important feature of all of these tools is that they attend specifically to dependence within higher order units of analysis.

Increasingly, CCJ researchers are thinking about cause and effect in terms of counterfactual reasoning. Ultimately, this is an exercise in observing what actually occurs under a specific set of circumstances and then asking how things might have occurred differently if the circumstances had been different. The hypothetical aspect of the problem is a counterfactual, because it involves speculation about what might have occurred but actually did not occur. Counterfactual reasoning is particularly applicable to the problem of estimating treatment effects. For example, a researcher considers a group of people who received a particular treatment and observes their outcomes. What he would like to know (but cannot know for sure) is what outcomes these same people would have experienced if they had not received the treatment. The difference between the actual, observed outcome and the hypothetical outcome is the treatment effect. CCJ researchers usually look to the experience of a control group to estimate the hypothetical outcome.An important problemin CCJ research is the identification of appropriate control groups.

A randomized experiment is a study in which individuals are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups prior to treatment. They provide a useful framework for estimating valid counterfactuals because random assignment to treatment and control conditions ensures that the groups are statistically comparable to each other prior to treatment. Thus, the experience of the control group provides a very convincing answer to the question of what would happen to the treatment group if the treatment group did not receive treatment.

For a variety of reasons, randomized experiments are not possible in many instances, but sometimes conditions that closely approximate an experiment occur because of a key event or policy change. When researchers recognize these conditions, a natural experiment is possible—even when more conventional studies fail. Consider the problem of estimating the effect of police strength on crime rates. Estimating correlations and conventional regression models cannot help much with this problem. The critical ambiguity is that street crime almost certainly has an effect on police strength and that police strength almost certainly has some effect on street crime. Natural experiments can provide more convincing evidence.A recent study conducted in Washington, D.C., is illustrative (Klick & Tabarrok, 2005). It was based on the insight that changes in terror alert levels lead to meaningful changes in the presence of police on the street. The researchers examined what happened to crime rates when street-level police presence increased and decreased as terror alert levels changed. Researchers sometimes refer to natural experimentally based treatments as instrumental variable estimators, and they can provide a powerful method for estimating treatment effects when randomized experiments cannot be conducted.

Another approach to developing valid counterfactuals is to identify a group of cases that receive treatment and then identify another group of cases—the control group—that are similar to the treatment cases but do not receive treatment. To ensure that the treatment and control groups are similar, researchers match the groups on characteristics that are thought to be important. The direct matching approach guarantees that the treatment and control groups look alike on the matched characteristics.A problem is that the groups may look different from each other on characteristics that were not matched. Thus, in general, counterfactuals produced by the matching approach will not be as convincing as those produced by a randomized or natural experiment. However, in instances where experiments are not possible, direct matching designs can still provide convincing evidence about treatment effects. A generalization of the matching design involves matching on indexes based on combinations of variables. Propensity scores, which increasingly appear in the CCJ literature, are one such index. It can be shown that matching on a properly created index can lead to treatment and control groups that look like each other on many characteristics. It is likely that CCJ researchers will rely more and more heavily on matching designs and propensity scores to study treatment effects, in particular when randomized experiments are not possible.

Some aspects of quantitative CCJ research have remained relatively constant throughout the field’s history. Some CCJ research problems are very much like problems studied in other fields, and some are quite different, yet there has always been a major emphasis on description and learning about how much crime is occurring and what populations are at highest risk of criminal involvement and victimization. Other aspects, such as repeatedly and systematically following the same individuals over time and rigorously measuring the effects of changing policies, are more recent developments. CCJ is an interdisciplinary field that relies on insights from sociology, psychology, economics, political science, and statistics as well as its own rapidly emerging traditions. One thing is certain: Analytic methods in the field will continue to evolve. It is critical that quantitativeCCJ researchers monitor developments in their own field and stay well connected with developments in other allied fields to strengthen their efforts at descriptive and causal inference.

References:

• Bachman, R., & Paternoster, R. (1997). Statistical methods for criminology and criminal justice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Berk, R. A. (1991). Drug use, prostitution and the prevalence of AIDS: An analysis using census tracts. Journal of Sex Research, 27, 607–621.
• Blumstein, A., & Cohen, J. (1987, August 28). Characterizing criminal careers. Science, 237, 985–991.
• Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., Roth, J., & Visher, C. A. (Eds.). (1986). Criminal careers and “career criminals.”Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• Bushway, S. D., Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (2003). Desistance as a developmental process: A comparison of static and dynamic approaches. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19, 129–153.
• Campbell, A., Berk, R. A., & Fyfe, J. J. (1998). Deployment of violence: The Los Angeles Police Department’s use of dogs. Evaluation Review, 22, 535–565.
• Eliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., & Menard, S. (1989). Multiple problem youth: Delinquency, substance use, and mental health problems. New York: Springer-Verlag.
• Ezell, M. E., & Cohen, L. E. (2005). Desisting from crime: Continuity and change in long-term patterns of serious chronic offenders. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Fox, J. A. (Ed.). (1981). Models in quantitative criminology. New York: Academic Press.
• Greenberg, D. F. (1979). Mathematical criminology. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
• Haviland, A. M., & Nagin, D. S. (2005). Causal inferences with group based trajectory models. Psychometrika, 70, 1–22.
• Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2007). Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975–2006. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
• Klick, J., & Tabarrok, A. (2005). Using terror alert levels to estimate the effect of police on crime. Journal of Law and Economics, 48, 267–279.
• Land, K. C. (1992). Models of criminal careers: Some suggestions for moving beyond the current debate. Criminology, 30, 149–155.
• Langan, P. A., & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
• Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2003). Shared beginnings, divergent lives: Delinquent boys to age 70. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Loftin, C., McDowall, D., Wiersema, B., & Cottey, T. J. (1991). Effects of restrictive licensing of handguns on homicide and suicide in the District of Columbia. New England Journal of Medicine, 325, 1615–1620.
• Maltz, M. D. (1984). Recidivism. New York: Academic Press.
• Mulvey, E. P., Steinberg, L. D., Fagan, J., Cauffman, E., Piquero, A. R., Chassin, L., et al. (2004). Theory and research on desistance from antisocial activity among serious adolescent offenders. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 213–236.
• Nagin, D. S. (2005). Group-based modeling of development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Osgood, D. W. (2000). Poisson-based regression analysis of aggregate crime rates. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16, 21–43.
• Osgood, D.W., & Rowe, D. C. (1994). Bridging criminal careers, theory, and policy through latent variable models of individual offending. Criminology, 32, 517–554.
• Piquero, A. R., Farrington, D. P., & Blumstein, A. (2007). Key issues in criminal career research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Rubin, D. B. (2006). Matched sampling for causal effects. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1993). Crime in the making: Pathways and turning points through life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Schmidt, P., & Witte, A. D. (1984). An economic analysis of crime and justice. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
• Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (Eds.). (2003). Taking stock of delinquency: An overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies. New York: Plenum Press.
• Tracy, P., & Kempf-Leonard, K. (1996). Continuity and discontinuity in criminal careers. New York: Plenum Press.
• Widom, C. S. (1989, April 14). The cycle of violence. Science, 244, 160–166.
• Wolfgang, M. E., Figlio, R. M., & Sellin, T. (1972). Delinquency in a birth cohort. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Qualitative Approaches to Criminal Justice Perspectives from the Field

• Mark Pogrebin - University of Colorado at Denver, USA
• Description

The growth in popularity of qualitative research in the social sciences over the last two decades has been nothing short of amazing. Qualitative Approaches to Criminal Justice: Perspectives from the Field reveals some of the reasons for the success and stature of this unique methodological approach.

Exploring the real life experiences of criminal justice professionals, this anthology is the first book to focus solely on the use of qualitative research in various components of the criminal justice system. The collection is organized from two criminal justice perspectives: one qualitatively oriented and the other system oriented, including overviews of each qualitative method and commentaries that analyze the research techniques. Case studies illustrating actual fieldwork practices bring theory vividly to life.

Qualitative Approaches to Criminal Justice: Perspectives from the Field is multi-faceted in both its content and application. Through its investigative techniques, which rely mainly on observations, participant observation, and open-ended interviews, qualitative research reveals parts of the social world that remain hidden to more traditional methodological techniques.

Recommended as a companion to an administration of criminal justice course as well as courses in qualitative research in criminal justice. Also recommended as a supplemental text for any research methods course in a criminal justice degree program including sociology, political science, and legal studies.

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

Excellent book, and while not adopted as the primary text, it was added to the "recommended" list for the course.

• Qualitative research is an area enjoying a rebirth of sorts in criminal justice and criminological research. This is the first book to focus on the use of qualitative research in each component of the criminal justice system.
• The articles selected for this anthology explore the real life experiences of professionals in the criminal justice system.
• The books focus is upon those fieldwork practices that describe and analyze the points in the criminal justice system that directly impact the participants who are part of the occupational cultures that define our formal system of social control.
• Each chapter has a thorough overview of the use of qualitative research in the component of the criminal justice system for which the articles that follow pertain (i.e. in the judicial system or the correctional system), as well as to summarize the articles in the chapter. This gives the student a solid introduction before getting to the individual articles.
• The book is organized from two criminal justice perspectives: one being qualitatively oriented and the other system oriented.

Sample Materials & Chapters

1. Introduction to Fieldwork by William B Saffir and Robert A. Stebbins

For instructors

Select a purchasing option, related products.

• University Libraries
• Criminal Justice Guide for Graduate Students
• Write a Thesis

Criminal Justice Guide for Graduate Students: Write a Thesis

• Introduction
• Select Topic/Find Policy Resources
• Find Articles and Books
• Evaluate Sources
• Find Data/Statistics
• Write a Literature Review
• Write a Reflective Essay
• Use APA Style
• Instructor Teaching and Learning Resources

Search existing theses and dissertations

• UNT Theses and Dissertations in the UNT Digital Library

Thesis Books

Research methods database

• Sage Research Methods SAGE Research Methods is a research methods tool created to help researchers, faculty and students with their research projects. SAGE Research Methods links over 175,000 pages of SAGE’s renowned book, journal and reference content. Researchers can explore methods concepts to help them design research projects, understand particular methods or identify a new method, conduct their research, and write up their findings. Since SAGE Research Methods focuses on methodology rather than disciplines, it can be used across the social sciences, health sciences, and more. Subject coverage includes sociology, health, criminology, education, anthropology, psychology, business, political science, history, economics, among others.

Research Methods Books for Criminal Justice

Statistical Analysis support

The UNT College of Education, Office of Research Consulting supports faculty and graduate students' research and statistical needs. The office serves faculty, doctoral and master students in support of advanced coursework and independent research such as theses and dissertations and preparation for professional publication. You can submit a request for assistance on their website:  https://coe.unt.edu/research/research-consulting 

UNT Writing Center Graduate Tutoring

The UNT Writing Center offers services just for graduate students. Graduate students needing help with course papers, publications, a thesis, or a dissertation may contact graduate tutors at  [email protected]  to set up an appointment. Graduate tutors do more than merely proofread; they teach strategies and techniques to improve writing for the long term. 

• << Previous: Write a Reflective Essay
• Next: Use APA Style >>

Criminology

• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law
• International Relations
• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Cross-Sectional Research Designs in Criminology and Criminal Justice

Introduction, general overviews.

• Causality in Cross-Sectional Research and Developmental Processes
• Repeated Cross-Sectional Studies
• Retrospective Research
• Experimental Vignettes
• Mediation in Cross-Sectional Research
• Examples of Cross-Sectional Research Studies

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Crime Trends
• Criminal Justice Data Sources
• Measuring Crime
• Trajectory Methods in Criminology

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Education Programs in Prison
• Mixed Methods Research in Criminal Justice and Criminology
• Victim Impact Statements
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Cross-Sectional Research Designs in Criminology and Criminal Justice by James V. Ray LAST MODIFIED: 22 April 2020 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195396607-0281

Cross-sectional research allows researchers to study a phenomenon or the relationship between variables at one point in time. In cross-sectional research data are collected once for each case (e.g., individual, neighborhood, city, state) at a single point in time. Cross-sectional research is most appropriate for studies that have descriptive or exploratory aims and in many cases are inadequate to assess causal processes due to an inability for researchers to establish temporal order—a necessary but not sufficient condition for causality. However, in some cases cross-sectional research may be adequate or even preferable to assess mediational models such as when the mediator variable is contemporaneous. Due to the nature of cross-sectional research, it is also not possible to utilize this approach to examine patterns or within-individual change in behavior over time. Alternatively, longitudinal designs typically follow the same cases over time and make observations (e.g., surveys, interviews) for each case at multiple time points. This approach allows for researchers to establish temporal order and assess both between and within-individual change over time. There is an ongoing debate among criminologists, particularly those interested in developmental processes and theories, regarding the worth of cross-sectional designs over longitudinal designs. This debate largely stems from the relationship between age and crime in what is typically referred to as the age-crime curve and the criminal career paradigm. That is, traditional cross-sectional research has found that crime peaks in mid- to late adolescence and then gradually declines across adult age groups. Despite the criticisms waged against cross-sectional research and the benefits of longitudinal research to establish temporal order, cross-sectional research designs still dominate criminology and criminal justice research. This may be due to some of the advantages of cross-sectional research and disadvantages of longitudinal research. For instance, cross-sectional research is relatively quick and affordable to carry out, making it a fairly accessible research design to conduct without funding and enables production of timely findings. Most importantly, researchers have developed unique methods of data collection and statistical analyses to overcome concerns of causality in cross-sectional research including retrospective or life history analyses, experimental survey designs, and repeated cross-sections or trend data. While these “fixes” do not allow researchers to assess within-individual change in outcomes (e.g., behaviors, attitudes, personality), they do address issues of temporal order and nonspuriousness within the cross-sectional design. The following article presents works that address various aspects of cross-sectional research and some examples of research utilizing this design.

Often contrasted with longitudinal research, cross-sectional research examines the prevalence of phenomenon and associations among variables by collecting data at a single point in time. Despite its limitations, cross-sectional research has an important role in criminological research. For instance, Kleck, et al. 2006 provides an empirical account of the most widely used methods in criminological research. This section also includes scholarly works that discuss the benefits and weaknesses of cross-sectional research. Ray 2015 and Sobol 2014 provide general overviews of cross-sectional research that define and describe research using this methodological approach. Cullen, et al. 2019 discusses how the emphasis on longitudinal research is hurting criminology (e.g., publication bias, limited theory-testing, etc.). Farrington 1979 , Gideon 2012 , and Morgan et al. 2012 empirically compare and contrast cross-sectional research and longitudinal research.

Cullen, Francis T., Travis C. Pratt, and Amanda Graham. 2019. Why longitudinal research is hurting criminology. The Criminologist 44.2: 1–7.

Provides commentary on the emphasis in criminology and criminal justice research on longitudinal data at the expense of cross-sectional research. The authors make the case that researchers in criminology and criminal justice are at an unfortunate disadvantage when trying to publish using cross-sectional data. They also point out some of the advantages of cross-sectional research and some of the limitations of longitudinal research that go overlooked.

Farrington, David P. 1979. Longitudinal research on crime and delinquency. Crime and Justice 1:289–348.

Compares the methodological advantages of longitudinal and cross-sectional research for studying criminal careers.

Gideon, Lior. 2012. Handbook of survey methodology for the social sciences . New York: Springer.

A handbook that includes chapters written by various authors on survey methodology. There are several chapters that cover survey designs that only survey respondents one point in time and also methods for estimating longitudinal data (e.g., repeated cross-sectional designs).

Kleck, Gary, Jongyeon Tark, and Jon J. Bellows. 2006. What methods are most frequently used in research in criminology and criminal justice? Journal of Criminal Justice 34.2: 147–152.

Examines the most widely used methods in criminology and criminal justice including the amount of studies that used cross-sectional designs.

Morgan, Rod, Mike Maguire, and Robert Reiner, eds. 2012. The Oxford handbook of criminology . New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

Handbook of entries by various authors that cover different aspects of criminology and research as it pertains to criminology. Includes a chapter on the debates that stem from life-course and developmental criminology regarding longitudinal and cross-sectional research designs.

Ray, James V. 2015. Cross‐sectional research. In The encyclopedia of crime and punishment . Edited by Wesley G. Jennings, George E. Higgins, David N. Khey, and Mildred Maldonado-Molina, 1–5. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

A general overview of cross-sectional research including definitions and purposes of cross-sectional research.

Sobol, James J. 2014. Cross‐sectional research design. In The encyclopedia of criminology and criminal justice . Edited by Jay S. Albanese, 1–4. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

An encyclopedia chapter that serves as a basic overview of cross-sectional research providing definitions, purposes, and limitations.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About Criminology »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Active Offender Research
• Adler, Freda
• Adversarial System of Justice
• Adverse Childhood Experiences
• Aging Prison Population, The
• Airport and Airline Security
• Alcohol and Drug Prohibition
• Alcohol Use, Policy and Crime
• Alt-Right Gangs and White Power Youth Groups
• Animals, Crimes Against
• Back-End Sentencing and Parole Revocation
• Bail and Pretrial Detention
• Batterer Intervention Programs
• Bentham, Jeremy
• Big Data and Communities and Crime
• Biosocial Criminology
• Black's Theory of Law and Social Control
• Blumstein, Alfred
• Boot Camps and Shock Incarceration Programs
• Burglary, Residential
• Bystander Intervention
• Capital Punishment
• Chambliss, William
• Chicago School of Criminology, The
• Child Maltreatment
• Chinese Triad Society
• Civil Protection Orders
• Collateral Consequences of Felony Conviction and Imprisonm...
• Collective Efficacy
• Commercial and Bank Robbery
• Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children
• Communicating Scientific Findings in the Courtroom
• Community Change and Crime
• Community Corrections
• Community Disadvantage and Crime
• Community-Based Justice Systems
• Community-Based Substance Use Prevention
• Comparative Criminal Justice Systems
• CompStat Models of Police Performance Management
• Confessions, False and Coerced
• Conservation Criminology
• Consumer Fraud
• Contextual Analysis of Crime
• Control Balance Theory
• Convict Criminology
• Co-Offending and the Role of Accomplices
• Corporate Crime
• Costs of Crime and Justice
• Courts, Drug
• Courts, Juvenile
• Courts, Mental Health
• Courts, Problem-Solving
• Crime and Justice in Latin America
• Crime, Campus
• Crime Control Policy
• Crime Control, Politics of
• Crime, (In)Security, and Islam
• Crime Prevention, Delinquency and
• Crime Prevention, Situational
• Crime Prevention, Voluntary Organizations and
• Crime Victims' Rights Movement
• Criminal Career Research
• Criminal Decision Making, Emotions in
• Criminal Justice Ethics
• Criminal Justice Fines and Fees
• Criminal Justice Reform, Politics of
• Criminal Justice System, Discretion in the
• Criminal Records
• Criminal Retaliation
• Criminal Talk
• Criminology and Political Science
• Criminology of Genocide, The
• Critical Criminology
• Cross-National Crime
• Cross-Sectional Research Designs in Criminology and Crimin...
• Cultural Criminology
• Cultural Theories
• Cybercrime Investigations and Prosecutions
• Cycle of Violence
• Deadly Force
• Defense Counsel
• Defining "Success" in Corrections and Reentry
• Developmental and Life-Course Criminology
• Digital Piracy
• Driving and Traffic Offenses
• Drug Control
• Drug Trafficking, International
• Drugs and Crime
• Elder Abuse
• Electronically Monitored Home Confinement
• Employee Theft
• Environmental Crime and Justice
• Experimental Criminology
• Family Violence
• Fear of Crime and Perceived Risk
• Felon Disenfranchisement
• Feminist Theories
• Feminist Victimization Theories
• Fencing and Stolen Goods Markets
• Firearms and Violence
• Forensic Science
• For-Profit Private Prisons and the Criminal Justice–Indust...
• Gangs, Peers, and Co-offending
• Gender and Crime
• Gendered Crime Pathways
• General Opportunity Victimization Theories
• Genetics, Environment, and Crime
• Green Criminology
• Halfway Houses
• Harm Reduction and Risky Behaviors
• Hate Crime Legislation
• Healthcare Fraud
• Hirschi, Travis
• History of Crime in the United Kingdom
• History of Criminology
• Homelessness and Crime
• Homicide Victimization
• Honor Cultures and Violence
• Hot Spots Policing
• Human Rights
• Human Trafficking
• Identity Theft
• Immigration, Crime, and Justice
• Incarceration, Mass
• Incarceration, Public Health Effects of
• Income Tax Evasion
• Indigenous Criminology
• Institutional Anomie Theory
• Integrated Theory
• Intermediate Sanctions
• Interpersonal Violence, Historical Patterns of
• Interrogation
• Intimate Partner Violence, Criminological Perspectives on
• Intimate Partner Violence, Police Responses to
• Investigation, Criminal
• Juvenile Delinquency
• Juvenile Justice System, The
• Kornhauser, Ruth Rosner
• Labeling Theory
• Labor Markets and Crime
• Land Use and Crime
• Lead and Crime
• LGBTQ Intimate Partner Violence
• LGBTQ People in Prison
• Life Without Parole Sentencing
• Local Institutions and Neighborhood Crime
• Lombroso, Cesare
• Longitudinal Research in Criminology
• Mandatory Minimum Sentencing
• Mapping and Spatial Analysis of Crime, The
• Mass Media, Crime, and Justice
• Mediation and Dispute Resolution Programs
• Mental Health and Crime
• Merton, Robert K.
• Meta-analysis in Criminology
• Middle-Class Crime and Criminality
• Migrant Detention and Incarceration
• Mixed Methods Research in Criminology
• Money Laundering
• Motor Vehicle Theft
• Multi-Level Marketing Scams
• Murder, Serial
• Narrative Criminology
• National Deviancy Symposia, The
• Nature Versus Nurture
• Neighborhood Disorder
• Neutralization Theory
• New Penology, The
• Offender Decision-Making and Motivation
• Offense Specialization/Expertise
• Organized Crime
• Outlaw Motorcycle Clubs
• Panel Methods in Criminology
• Peacemaking Criminology
• Peer Networks and Delinquency
• Performance Measurement and Accountability Systems
• Personality and Trait Theories of Crime
• Persons with a Mental Illness, Police Encounters with
• Phenomenological Theories of Crime
• Plea Bargaining
• Police Administration
• Police Cooperation, International
• Police Discretion
• Police Effectiveness
• Police History
• Police Militarization
• Police Misconduct
• Police, Race and the
• Police Use of Force
• Police, Violence against the
• Policing and Law Enforcement
• Policing, Body-Worn Cameras and
• Policing, Broken Windows
• Policing, Community and Problem-Oriented
• Policing Cybercrime
• Policing, Evidence-Based
• Policing, Intelligence-Led
• Policing, Privatization of
• Policing, Proactive
• Policing, School
• Policing, Stop-and-Frisk
• Policing, Third Party
• Polyvictimization
• Positivist Criminology
• Pretrial Detention, Alternatives to
• Pretrial Diversion
• Prison Administration
• Prison Classification
• Prison, Disciplinary Segregation in
• Prison Education Exchange Programs
• Prison Gangs and Subculture
• Prison History
• Prison Labor
• Prison Visitation
• Prisoner Reentry
• Prisons and Jails
• Prisons, HIV in
• Private Security
• Probation Revocation
• Procedural Justice
• Property Crime
• Prosecution and Courts
• Prostitution
• Psychiatry, Psychology, and Crime: Historical and Current ...
• Psychology and Crime
• Public Criminology
• Public Opinion, Crime and Justice
• Public Order Crimes
• Public Social Control and Neighborhood Crime
• Punishment Justification and Goals
• Qualitative Methods in Criminology
• Queer Criminology
• Race and Sentencing Research Advancements
• Race, Ethnicity, Crime, and Justice
• Racial Threat Hypothesis
• Racial Profiling
• Rape and Sexual Assault
• Rape, Fear of
• Rational Choice Theories
• Rehabilitation
• Religion and Crime
• Restorative Justice
• Risk Assessment
• Routine Activity Theories
• School Bullying
• School Crime and Violence
• School Safety, Security, and Discipline
• Search Warrants
• Seasonality and Crime
• Self-Control, The General Theory:
• Self-Report Crime Surveys
• Sentencing Enhancements
• Sentencing, Evidence-Based
• Sentencing Guidelines
• Sentencing Policy
• Sex Offender Policies and Legislation
• Sex Trafficking
• Sexual Revictimization
• Situational Action Theory
• Snitching and Use of Criminal Informants
• Social and Intellectual Context of Criminology, The
• Social Construction of Crime, The
• Social Control of Tobacco Use
• Social Control Theory
• Social Disorganization
• Social Ecology of Crime
• Social Learning Theory
• Social Networks
• Social Threat and Social Control
• Solitary Confinement
• South Africa, Crime and Justice in
• Sport Mega-Events Security
• Stalking and Harassment
• State Crime
• State Dependence and Population Heterogeneity in Theories ...
• Strain Theories
• Street Code
• Street Robbery
• Substance Use and Abuse
• Surveillance, Public and Private
• Sutherland, Edwin H.
• Technology and the Criminal Justice System
• Technology, Criminal Use of
• Terrorism and Hate Crime
• Terrorism, Criminological Explanations for
• Testimony, Eyewitness
• Therapeutic Jurisprudence
• Transnational Crime
• Truth-In-Sentencing
• Urban Politics and Crime
• US War on Terrorism, Legal Perspectives on the
• Victimization, Adolescent
• Victimization, Biosocial Theories of
• Victimization Patterns and Trends
• Victimization, Repeat
• Victimization, Vicarious and Related Forms of Secondary Tr...
• Victimless Crime
• Victim-Offender Overlap, The
• Violence Against Women
• Violence, Youth
• Violent Crime
• White-Collar Crime
• White-Collar Crime, The Global Financial Crisis and
• White-Collar Crime, Women and
• Wilson, James Q.
• Wolfgang, Marvin
• Women, Girls, and Reentry
• Wrongful Conviction
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [66.249.64.20|185.80.151.9]
• 185.80.151.9

1 minute read

Criminology and Criminal Justice Research: Methods

Quantitative research methods, threats to validity, qualitative research methods, future of research methods in criminology and criminal justice.

Those interested in the study of criminology and criminal justice have at their disposal a wide range of research methods. Which of the particular research methods to use is entirely contingent upon the question being studied. Research questions typically fall into four categories of research: (1) descriptive, (2) exploratory, (3) explanatory, and (4) evaluative (Schutt). Descriptive research attempts to define and describe the social phenomena under investigation. Exploratory research seeks to identify the underlying meaning behind actions and individual behavior. Explanatory research seeks to identify the cause-(s) and effect(s) of social phenomena. Evaluation research seeks to determine the effects of an intervention on individual behavior. These four areas of research are not mutually exclusive; rather, they are designed to be used interactively in order to gain a deeper understanding of the question under investigation.

With this background, the purpose of this entry will be to introduce the reader to the two major research paradigms and issues that organize the field of criminology and criminal justice: quantitative and qualitative research strategies. After describing the different research methodologies several issues related to internal and external validity are identified that are important to bear in mind when assessing the adequacies of distinct research methodologies. The entry closes by highlighting what appears to be the most promising research strategy for criminology and criminal justice.

A LEX R. P IQUERO

N ICOLE L EEPER P IQUERO

See also C RIMINOLOGY AND C RIMINAL J USTICE R ESEARCH : O RGANIZATION .

Additional topics

• Criminology and Criminal Justice Research: Organization - Government-sponsored Research, Development Of Research Centers, The Federal Impact On Research, Research Tools
• Criminalization and Decriminalization - How The Criminal Law Has Been Used And Abused, Definition Of A "criminal" Sanction
• Criminology and Criminal Justice Research: Methods - Quantitative Research Methods
• Criminology and Criminal Justice Research: Methods - Threats To Validity
• Criminology and Criminal Justice Research: Methods - Qualitative Research Methods
• Criminology and Criminal Justice Research: Methods - Future Of Research Methods In Criminology And Criminal Justice
• Criminology and Criminal Justice Research: Methods - Bibliography
• Other Free Encyclopedias

Law Library - American Law and Legal Information Crime and Criminal Law

• Northeastern University
• College of Social Sciences and Humanities
• School of Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminology and Criminal Justice Theses and Dissertations
• Criminology and Criminal Justice Dissertations

Criminology and Criminal Justice Dissertations Collection

http://hdl.handle.net/2047/D20233343

Affording a meaningful opportunity of release: legal representation of juvenile lifers.

Assessing deterrence in the FBI's Safe Streets gang initiative: a social network approach.

Autistic and at-risk: the public and personal safety of children with autism spectrum disorders.

Background justice: the political context of adolescent legal socialization.

Bureaucracy and law: a study of Chinese criminal courts and social media.

Clearances, cameras, and community violence: police outcomes in an organizational and community context.

College students and the illicit use of prescription drugs: a test of general strain theory.

A comparison of the individual-, county-, and state-level correlates of homicide and mass murder

Contextualizing the political economy of juvenile court decision-making

Crime, place, and networks in the age of the internet: the case of online-promoted illicit massage businesses.

6 Chapter 6: Qualitative Research in Criminal Justice

Case study: exploring the culture of “urban scrounging” 1.

Research Purpose

To describe the culture of urban scrounging, or dumpster diving, and the items that can be found in dumpsters and trash piles.

Methodology

This field study, conducted by Dr. Jeff Ferrell, currently a professor of sociology at Texas Christian University, began in 2002. In December of 2001, after resigning from an academic position in Arizona, Ferrell returned home to Fort Worth, Texas. An avid proponent for and participant in field research throughout his career, he decided to use the next eight months, prior to the 2002 academic year beginning, to explore a culture in which he had always been interested, the urban underground of “scrounging, recycling, and secondhand living” (p. 1). Using the neighborhoods of central Fort Worth as a backdrop, Ferrell embarked, often on his bicycle, into the fife of a dumpster diver. While he was not completely homeless at the time, he did his best to fully embrace the lifestyle of an urban scrounger and survive on what he found. For this study, Ferrell was not only learning how to survive off of the discarded possessions of others, he was systematically recording and describing the contents of the dumpsters and trash piles he found and kept. While in the field, Ferrell was also exploring scrounging as a means of economic survival and the social aspects of this underground existence. A broader theme of Ferrell’s research emerged as he encountered the number and vast array of items he found discarded in trash piles and dumpsters. This theme concerns the “hyperconsumption” and “collective wastefulness” (pp. 5–6) by American citizens and the environmental destruction created by the accumulating and discarding of so many material goods.

Results and Implications

Ferrell’s time spent among the trash piles and dumpsters of Fort Worth resulted in a variety of intriguing yet disturbing realizations regarding not only material excess but also social and personal change. While encounters with others were kept to a minimum, as they generally are for scroungers, Ferrell describes some of the people he met along the way and their conversations. Whether food, clothes, building materials, or scrap metal, the commonality was that scroungers could usually find what they were looking for among the trash heaps and alleyways. Throughout his book, Ferrell often focuses on the material items that he discovered while scrounging. He found so much, he was able to fill and decorate a home with perfectly good items that had been discarded by others, including the bicycle he now rides and a turquoise sink and bathtub. He found books and even old photographs and other mementos meant to document personal history. While discarded, these social artifacts tell the stories of society and often have the chance to find altered meaning when possessed by someone new.

Beyond the things found and people met, Ferrell discusses the boundary shift that has taken urban scrounging from deviant to criminal as lines are often blurred between public access and ownership. Not only do these urban scroungers face the stigma associated with their scrounging activities, those who dive in dumpsters and dig through trash piles can face criminal charges for trespassing. While this makes scrounging more challenging, due to basic survival or interest, the wealth of items and artifacts to be found are often worth the risk. Ultimately, Ferrell’s experiences as an urban scrounger provide not only a description of this subculture but also a critique on American consumption and wastefulness, a theme that becomes more important as Americans and others continue in economically tenuous times.

In This Chapter You Will Learn

To explain what it means for research to be qualitative

To describe the advantages of field research

To explain the challenges of field studies for researchers

To provide examples of field research in the social sciences

To discuss the case study approach

Introduction

In Chapter 2, you read about the differences between quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Whereas methods that are quantitative in nature focus on numerical measurements of phenomena, qualitative methods are focused on developing a deeper understanding regarding groups of people, or subcultures, about which little is known. Using detailed description, findings from qualitative research are generally more sensitizing, providing the research community and the interested public information about these generally elusive groups and their behaviors. A debate rages between criminologists as to which type of research should be achieved and referenced more often. The truth is that both have something valuable to offer regarding the study of deviance, crime, and victimization.

Field Research

Qualitative methodologies involve the use of field research, where researchers are out among these groups collecting information rather than studying participant behavior through surveys or experiments that have been developed in artificial settings. Field research provides some of the most fascinating reading because the researcher is observing closely or acting as part of the group and is therefore able to describe in depth not only the subjects’ behaviors, but also consider the motivations that drive their behaviors. This chapter focuses on the use of qualitative methods in the social sciences, particularly the use of participant observation to study deviant, and sometimes criminal, behaviors. The many challenges as well as advantages of conducting this type of research will be discussed as will well-known examples of past field research and suggestions for conducting this type of research. First, however, it is important to understand what sets qualitative field research apart from the other methodologies discussed in this text.

The Study of Behavior

It is common for criminal justice researchers to rely on survey or interview methodologies to collect data. One advantage of doing so is being able to collect data from many respondents in a short period of time. Technology has created other advantages with survey methodology. For example, Internet surveys are a convenient, quick, and inexpensive way to reach respondents who may or may not reside nearby. Researchers often survey community residents and university students, but may also focus specifically on offender or victim samples. One significant limitation of using survey methodologies is that they rely on the truthfulness of the respondents. If researchers are interested in attitudes and behaviors that may be illegal or otherwise controversial, it could be that respondents will not be truthful in answering the questions placed before them. Survey research has focused on past or current drug use (see the Monitoring the Future Program), past victimization experiences (see the National Criminal Victimization Survey), and prison sexual assault victimization (see the Prison Rape Elimination Act data collection procedures conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics), just to name a few. If a student uses marijuana but does not want anyone to know, they may choose to falsify their survey responses when asked about marijuana use. If a citizen or prison inmate has been sexually assaulted but is too ashamed or afraid to tell anyone, they may be untruthful when asked about such victimization experiences on a survey. The point is, although researchers attempt to better understand the attitudes and behaviors of a certain population through the use of surveys, there is one major drawback to consider: the disjunction between what people say and what they actually do. As mentioned previously, a student may be a drug user but not admit to it. Someone may be a gang member, but say they are not when asked directly about it. Someone may respond that they have never committed a crime or been victimized when in fact they have. In short, people sometimes lie and there are many potential reasons for doing so. Perhaps the offender or drug user has not yet been caught and does not want to be caught. Whatever the reason, this is a hazard of measuring attitudes and behaviors through the use of surveys. One way to overcome the issue of untruthfulness is to conduct research using various forms of actual participation or observation of the behaviors we want to study. By observing someone in their natural environment (or, “the field”), researchers have the ability to observe behaviors firsthand, rather than relying on survey responses. These research strategies are generally known as participant observation methods.

Types of Field Research: A Continuum

Participant observation strategies involve researchers studying groups or individuals in their natural setting. Think of participant observation as a student internship. Students may read about law enforcement in their textbooks and discuss law enforcement issues in class, but only through an internship with a law enforcement agency will a student have a chance to understand how things actually happen from firsthand observation. Field strategies were first developed for social science, and particularly crime, research in the 1920s by researchers working within the University of Chicago’s Department of Sociology. The “Chicago School,” as this group of researchers is commonly known, focused on ethnographic research to study urban crime problems. Emerging from the field of anthropology, ethnographic research relies on field research methodologies to scientifically examine human culture in the natural environment. Significant theoretical developments within the field of criminology, such as social disorganization, which focused on the impact of culture and environment, were advanced at this time. For example, researchers such as Shaw and McKay, Thrasher, and others used field research to study the activities of subcultures, particularly youth gangs, as well as areas of the city that were most impacted by crime. These researchers were not interested in studying these problems from afar. Instead, they were interested in understanding social problems, including the impact of environmental disintegration, from the field.

There are various ways to conduct field research, and these can be placed on a continuum from most to least invasive and also from more qualitative to more quantitative. In attempting to understand phenomena from the standpoint of the actors, a researcher may participate fully in the behaviors of the group or may instead choose to observe from afar as activities unfold. The most invasive, and also most qualitative, form of participant observation is complete participation. The least invasive, and also most quantitative, is complete observation. In between these two are participant as observer and observer as participant. Each of these strategies will now be discussed in more detail.

Complete participation, sometimes referred to as disguised observation, is a method that involves the researcher becoming a full-fledged member of a particular group. For example, if a researcher is interested in understanding the culture of correctional officers, she may apply to be hired on as a correctional officer. Once hired on, the researcher will wear the uniform and obtain firsthand experience working in a prison environment. To study urban gangs, a researcher may attempt to be accepted as a member or associate of the gang. In complete participation, the true identity of the researcher is not known to the members of the group. Therefore, they are ultimately just like any other member of the group under study. Not only will the researcher have the ability to observe the group from the inside, he can also manipulate the direction of group activity through participation or through the use of confederates. This method is considered the most qualitative because, as a complete participant, the researcher will be fully sensitized to what it is like to be a member of the group under study, and will fully participate in the group’s activities. The researcher can then share the information he has gathered on the group’s inner workings, motivations, and activities from the perspective of a group member.

Researchers utilizing the participant as observer method will also participate in the activities of the group under study. The difference between the complete participant strategy and participant as observer strategy is that in the participant as observer method, the researcher reveals herself as a researcher to the group. Her presence as a researcher is known. Accordingly, the researcher does not overtly attempt to influence the direction of group activity. While she does participate, the researcher is more interested in observing the group’s activity and corresponding behaviors as they occur naturally. So, if a researcher wanted to examine life as a homeless person, she might go to where a group of homeless persons congregate. The researcher would introduce herself as such but, if safe, stay one or many days and nights out with the homeless she meets in order to conduct observations and participate in group activities.

The third participant observation strategy is observer as participant. As with the participant as observer method, researchers using the observer as participant method reveal themselves to the group as a researcher. Here again, their presence as a researcher is known. What makes this strategy different from the first two is that the researcher does not participate in the group’s activities. While he may interact with the participants, he does not participate. Instead, the researcher is there only to observe. An example of this method would be a researcher who conducts “ride-alongs” in order to study law enforcement behavior during traffic stops. The researcher will interact with the officers, but he will not participate or even exit the car during the traffic stops being observed.

The least invasive participant observation strategy is complete observation. As you will learn in Chapter 7, this is a totally unobtrusive method; the research subjects are not aware that they are being observed for purposes of research. Think of a law enforcement officer being on a stakeout. These officers generally sit in unmarked vehicles down the street as they observe the movements and activities of a certain person or group of people. Researchers who are complete observers work much the same way. While being the least invasive, complete observation is also the least qualitative. Studying an individual or group from afar means that there is no interaction with that individual. Without this interaction, researchers are unable to gain a more sensitized understanding of the motivations of the group. This strategy is considered to be more quantitative because researchers must rely on counts of activities or movements. For example, if you are a researcher interested in studying how many drivers run a stop sign on campus, you may sit near the intersection and observe driver behavior. In collecting the data, you will count how many drivers make a complete stop, how many come to a rolling stop, and how many run the stop sign altogether. Now, although you may have these counts, you will not know why drivers stopped or not. It could be that one driver had a sick passenger who he was rushing to the hospital and that is why he did not come to a complete stop. As with most quantitative research, as a complete observer, questions of “why?” often go unanswered.

FIGURE 6.1 | Differences among Participant Observation Methods

Advantages and Disadvantages of Field Research by Method

As with any particular research method, there are advantages and disadvantages to conducting field research. Some of these are specific to the type of field research a researcher decides to conduct. One general advantage to participant observation methods is that researchers are able to study “hard to reach” populations. A disadvantage is that these groups may be difficult to study for a number of reasons. It could be that the group is criminal in nature, such as a youth gang, a biker gang, or the Mafia. While perhaps not criminal, the individual or group may be involved in deviant behaviors that they are unwilling to discuss even with people they know. An additional disadvantage is that there could be administrative roadblocks to conducting such research. If a researcher wants to understand the correctional officer culture but the prison will not allow the researcher to conduct the study, she may have to get hired on and conduct the research as a full participant. Examples of research involving each of these situations will be discussed later in this chapter.

Another challenge for field researchers is the ability to maintain objectivity. In Chapter 2, the importance of objectivity for scientific research was discussed. If data gathered is subjective or biased in some way, research findings will be impacted by this subjectivity and will therefore not be reflective of reality. While objectivity would be easier to maintain from afar, the closer a researcher becomes to a group and its members, the easier it may be to lose objectivity. This is true particularly for complete participants. For researchers who participate as members of the group under study, it may become difficult not to begin to identify with the group. When this occurs, and the researcher loses sight of the research goals in favor of group membership, it is called “ going native. ” This is a hazard of field research in which the researcher spends a significant amount of time, perhaps years, within a group. The researcher may begin to see things from the group’s perspective and therefore not be able to objectively complete the intended study. To balance this possible hazard of complete participation is the advantage of not having reactivity. Because the research subjects do not know they are being observed, they will not act any differently than they would under normal circumstances. Researchers therefore avoid the Hawthorne Effect when conducting field research as a complete participant.

There is the possibility that a researcher who incorporates the participant as observer strategy may also go native. Although his presence as a researcher is known, he is interacting with the group and participating in group activities. Therefore, it is possible he may begin to lose objectivity due to an attachment to or identification with the group under study. Whereas complete participants can avoid the Hawthorne Effect, participants as observers do not have this luxury. Even though these researchers may be participating in group activities, because their presence as a researcher is known, it can be expected that the group may in some way alter their behavior because they are being observed. An additional disadvantage to this strategy is that it may take time for a researcher to be accepted by group members who are aware of the researcher’s presence. If certain group members are uncomfortable with the researcher’s presence, they may make it difficult for the researcher to interact with other members or join in group activities.

Researchers on the observing end of the participant observation continuum face some similar and some unique challenges. Those who conduct observer as participant field studies will also face reactivity, or the Hawthorne Effect, because their presence as a researcher is known to the group under study. As in the ride-along example discussed previously, if a patrol officer knows she is being observed, she may alter her behavior in such a way that the researcher is not observing a realistic traffic stop. Additionally, these researchers may face difficulties gaining access or being accepted into the group under study, especially since they are there only to observe and not to participate with the group. In this case, the researcher may be ostracized even further by the group because she is not acting as one of them.

Researchers acting as complete observers to gather data on an individual or group are not limited by reactivity. Because the research subjects are unaware they are being observed, the Hawthorne Effect will not impact study findings. The advantage is that this method is totally unobtrusive, or noninvasive. The main disadvantage here is that the researcher is too far away to truly understand the group and their behaviors. As mentioned previously, at this point, the research becomes quite quantitative because the researcher can only observe and count movements and interactions from afar. Lacking in context, these counts may not be as useful in understanding a group as findings would be from the use of another participant observation method.

Costs One of the more important factors to consider when determining whether field research is the best option is the demand such research may place on a researcher. If you remember from the opening case study, Ferrell spent months in the field to collect information on urban scrounging. Researchers may spend weeks, months, and even years participating with and/or observing study subjects. Due to this, they may experience financial, personal, and sometimes professional costs. Time away from family and friends can take a personal toll on researchers. If the researcher is funding his own research or otherwise not able to earn a salary while undergoing the field study, he may suffer financially. Finally, also due to time away and perhaps due to activities that may be considered unethical, fieldwork can have a negative impact on a researcher’s career. While these demands are very real, past researchers have found ways to successfully navigate the world of field research resulting in fascinating findings and ultimately coming out unscathed from the experience.

Gaining Access Gaining access to populations of interest is also a difficult task to accomplish as these populations are often small, clandestine groups who generally keep out of the public eye. Field research is unlike survey research in that there is not a readily available list of gang members or dumpster divers from which you can draw a random sample. Instead, researchers often rely on the snowball sampling technique. If you remember from Chapter 3, snowball sampling entails a researcher meeting one or a handful of group members and receiving introductions to other group members from the initial members. One member leads you to the next, who then leads you to the next.

When gathering information as an observer as participant, a researcher should be straightforward and announce her intentions to group members immediately. It may be best to give a detailed explanation of her presence and purpose to group leaders or other decision-makers. If this does not happen, when the group does find out a researcher is in their presence, they may feel the researcher was trying to hide something. If the identity of the researcher is known, it is important that the researcher be a researcher, and that she not pretend to be one of the group, as this may also cause problems. It may be disconcerting to group members if an outsider thinks she is closer to the group than members are willing to allow her to be.

While complete participant researchers may be introduced to one or more members, this does not mean that they will be readily accepted as part of the group. This is true even if they are acting as full participants. There are some things researchers can do to increase their chances of being accepted. First, researchers should learn the argot, or language, of the group under study. Study subjects may have a particular way of speaking to one another through the use of slang or other vernacular. If a researcher is familiar with this argot and is able to use it convincingly, he will seem less of an outsider. It is also important to time your approach. A researcher should be aware, as much as possible, about what is happening in the group before gaining access. If a researcher is studying drug dealers and there was just a big drug bust or if a researcher is studying gangs and there was recently a fight between two gangs, it may not be the best time to gain access as members of these groups may be immediately suspicious of people they do not know.

Researchers often must find a gatekeeper in order to join a group. Gatekeepers are those individuals who may or may not know about the researcher’s true identity, who will vouch for the researcher among the other group members and who will inform the researcher about group norms, territory, and the like. Gatekeepers may lobby to have a researcher become a part of the group or to be allowed access to the place where the group gathers. While this is helpful for the researcher, it can be dangerous for the gatekeeper, especially if something goes wrong. If the researcher is attempting to be a full participant but her identity as a researcher is exposed, the gatekeeper may be held responsible for allowing the researcher in. This may be the case even if the gatekeeper was not aware of the researcher’s true identity. If a researcher does not want to enter the group himself, he may find an indigenous observer, or a member of the group who is willing to collect information for him. The researcher may pay or otherwise remunerate this person for her efforts as she will be able to see and hear what the researcher could not. A similar problem may arise, however, if this person is caught. There may be negative consequences to pay if it is found out that she is revealing information about the group. Additionally, the researcher must be careful when analyzing the information provided as it may not be objective, or may not even be factual at all.

Maintaining Objectivity Once a researcher gains access, there is another issue she must face. This is the difficulty of remaining an outsider while becoming an insider. In short, the researcher must guard against going native. Objectivity is necessary for research to be scientific. If a researcher becomes too familiar with the group, she may lose objectivity and may even be able to identify with and/or empathize with the group under study. If this occurs, the research findings will be biased and not an objective reflection of the group, what drives the group, and the activities in which the group members participate. For these reasons, it is not suggested that a researcher conduct field research among a group of which he is a member. If a researcher has been a member of a social organization for many years and is friends, or at least acquaintances, with many of the members, it would be very difficult for her to objectively study the group. The researcher may consider the group and the group’s activities as normal and therefore miss out on interesting relationships and behaviors. This is also why external researchers are often brought in to evaluate agency programs. If employees of that program are tasked with evaluating it, they may—consciously or not—design the study in such a way that findings are sure to be positive. This may be because they feel that a negative evaluation will mean an end to the program and ultimately an end to their jobs. Having such a stake in the findings of research is sure to impact the objectivity of the person tasked with conducting the study. While bringing in external researchers may ensure objectivity, these researchers face their own challenges. Trulson, Marquart, and Mullings 3 offer some tips for breaking in to criminal justice agencies, specifically prisons, as an external researcher. The first two tips pertain to obtaining access through the use of a gatekeeper. The third tip focuses on the development and cultivation of relationships within the agency in order to maintain access. The remaining tips describe how a researcher can make a graceful exit once the research project is completed while still maintaining those relationships, as well as building new ones, for potential future research endeavors.

❑ Tip #1: Get a Contact

❑ Tip #2: Establish Yourself and Your Research

❑ Tip #3: Little Things Count

❑ Tip #4: Make Sense of Agency Data by Keeping Contact

❑ Tip #5: Deliver Competent Readable Reports on Time

❑ Tip #6: Request to Debrief the Agency

❑ Tip#7: Thank Everyone

❑ Tip #8: Deal with Adversity by Planning Ahead

❑ Tip #9: Inform the Agency of Data Use

❑ Tip #10: Maintain Trust by Staying in for the Long Haul (pp. 477–478)

CLASSICS IN CJ RESEARCH

Youth Violence and the Code of the Street

Research Study

Based on his ethnography of African American youth living in poor, inner-city neighborhoods, Elijah Anderson 2 developed a comprehensive theory regarding youth violence and the “code of the street.” Anderson explains that, stemming from a lack of resources, distrust in law enforcement, and an overall lack of hope, aggressive behavior is condoned by the informal street code as a way to resolve conflict and earn respect. Anderson’s detailed description and analysis of this street culture provided much needed awareness regarding the context of African American youth violence. Like other research discussed in this chapter, these populations could not be sent an Internet survey or be surveyed in a classroom. The only way for Anderson to gain this knowledge was to go out to the streets and observe and interact with the youth himself. To do this, he conducted four years of field research in both the inner city and the more suburban areas of Philadelphia. During this time, he conducted lengthy interviews with youth and acted as a direct observer of their activities. Anderson’s research is touted for bringing attention to and understanding of inner-city life. Not only does he describe the “code of the street,” but, in doing so, he provides answers to the problem of urban youth violence.

Documenting the Experience Researchers must also decide how best to document their experiences for later analysis. There is a Chinese Proverb that states, “the palest ink is better than the best memory.” Applied here, researchers are encouraged to document as much as they can, as giving a detailed account of things that have occurred from memory is difficult. When taking notes, it is important for researchers to be as specific as possible when describing individuals and their behaviors. It is also important for researchers not to ignore behaviors that may seem trivial at the time, as these may actually signify something much more meaningful.

Particularly as a complete participant, researchers are not going to have the ability to readily pull out their note pad and begin taking notes on things they have seen and heard. Even careful note taking can be dangerous for a researcher who is trying to hide his identity. If a researcher is found to be documenting what is happening within the group, this may breed distrust and group members may become suspicious of the researcher. This suspicion may cause the group members to act unnaturally around the researcher. Even if research subjects are aware of the researcher’s identity, having someone taking notes while they are having a casual conversation can be disconcerting. This may make subjects nervous and unwilling to participate in group activities while the researcher is present. Luckily, with the advance of technology, documentation does not have to include a pen and a piece of paper. Instead, researchers may opt for audio and/or visual recording devices. In one-party consent states, it is legal for one person to record a conversation they are having with another. Not all states are one-party consent states, however, so researchers must be careful not to break any laws with their plan for documentation.

WHAT RESEARCH SHOWS: IMPACTING CRIMINAL JUSTICE OPERATIONS

Application of Field Research Methods in Undercover Investigations

Participant observation research not only informs criminal justice operations, but police and other investigative agencies use these methods as well. Think about an undercover investigation. While the purpose of going undercover for a law enforcement officer is to collect evidence against a suspect, the officer’s methods mirror those of an academic researcher who joins a group as a full participant. In the 1970s, FBI agent Joe Pistone 4 went undercover to obtain information about the Bonnano family, one of the major Sicilian organized crime families in New York at the time. Assuming the identity of Donnie Brasco, the jewel thief, Pistone infiltrated the Bonnano family for six years. Using many of the techniques discussed here—learning the argot and social mores of the group, finding a gatekeeper, documenting evidence through the use of recording devices—by the early 1980s, Pistone provided the FBI with enough evidence to put over 100 Mafioso in prison for the remainder of their lives. Many of you may recognize his alias, as Pistone’s experiences as an undercover agent were brought to the big screen with the release of Donnie Brasco, starring Johnny Depp. Depp’s portrayal of Pistone showed not only his undercover persona but also the difficulties he had maintaining relationships with his loved ones. Now, more than 30 years later, people are still interested in Pistone’s experiences as Brasco. As recently as 2005, the National Geographic Channel premiered Inside the Mafia, a series focused on Pistone’s experiences as Brasco. While this is a more well-known example of an undercover operation, undercover work goes on all the time. Whether making drug busts, infiltrating gangs or other trafficking organizations, or conducting a sting operation on one of their own, investigators employ many of the same techniques as field researchers rely upon.

Ethical Dilemmas for Field Researchers

As you can tell, field research poses unique complications for researchers to consider prior to and while conducting their studies. Ethical issues posed by field research, particularly field research in which the researcher’s identity is not known to research subjects, include the use of deception, privacy invasion, and the lack of consent. How can a researcher obtain informed consent from research subjects if she doesn’t want anyone to know research is taking place? Is it ethical to include someone in a research study without his or her permission? When the first guidelines for human subjects research were handed down, they caused a huge roadblock for field researchers. Later, however, it was determined that social science poses less risk to human subjects, particularly those being observed in their natural setting. Because it was recognized that the risk for harm was significantly less, field researchers were allowed to conduct their studies without conditions involving informed consent. The debate remains, however, as to whether it is truly ethical to conduct research on individuals without them knowing. A related issue is confidentiality and anonymity. If researchers are living among study subjects, anonymity is impossible. One way field researchers protect their subjects in this regard is through the use of pseudonyms. A pseudonym is a false name given to someone whose identity needs to be kept secret. In writing up their study findings, researchers will use pseudonyms instead of the actual names of study subjects.

Beyond the ethical nature of the research itself, field studies may introduce other ethical dilemmas for the researcher. For example, what if the researcher, as a participating member of a group, is asked to participate in an illegal activity? This may be a nonviolent activity like vandalism or graffiti, or it may be an activity that is more sinister in nature. Researchers, as full participants, have to decide whether they would be willing to commit the crime in question. After all, if caught and arrests are made, “I was just doing research,” will not be a justification the researcher will be able to use for his participation. Even if not a full participant, a researcher may observe some activity that is unlawful. The researcher will then have to decide whether to report this activity or to keep quiet about it. If a researcher is called to testify, there could be consequences for not cooperating. Depending on what kind of group is being studied, these dilemmas may occur more or less frequently. It is important that researchers understand prior to entering the field that they may have to make difficult decisions that like the research itself, could have great costs to them personally and professionally.

RESEARCH IN THE NEWS

Field Research Hits Prime Time

In 2009, CBS aired a new reality television series, Undercover Boss, 5 in which corporate executives go “undercover” to experience life as an employee of their company. Fully disguised, the executives are quickly thrown into the day-to-day operations of their workplaces. From the co-owner of the Chicago Cubs, to the CEO of Norwegian Cruise Line, to the mayor of Cincinnati, these executives conduct field research on camera to gain a better understanding of how their company, or city administration, runs from the bottom up. Often, they find hard-working, talented employees who are deserving of recognition, which is given as the episode comes to a close and the executive reveals himself and his undercover activities to his employees. Other times, they find employees that are not so good for business. Ultimately, the experience provides these executives with awareness they did not have prior to going undercover, and they hope to be able to utilize this knowledge to position their workplaces for continued success. Not only has this show benefited the companies and other workplaces profiled, with millions of viewers each week, it has certainly brought the adventures of field research into prime time.

Examples of Field Research in Criminal Justice

If you recall from Chapter 2, Humphreys’ Tea Room Trade is an example of field research. Humphreys participated to an extent, acting as a “watchqueen” so that he could observe the sexual activities taking place in public restrooms and other public places. Another study exploring clandestine sexual activity was conducted by Styles. 6 Styles was interested in the use of gay baths, places where men seeking to have sexual relationships with other men could have relatively private encounters. While Styles was a gay man attempting to study other gay men, at the outset his intention was to be a nonparticipant observer. Having a friend vouch for him, he easily gained access into the bath and began figuring out how to best observe the scene. After observing and conducting a few interviews, Styles was approached by another man for sexual activity. Although he was resolved to only observe, this time he gave in. From this point on, he began attending another bath and collecting information as a complete participant. Styles’ writing is informative, not only for the description regarding this group’s activity, but also for the discussion he provides about his travels through the world of field research, beginning as an observer and ending as a complete participant. His writing on insider versus outsider research resulted in four main reflections for readers to consider:

There are no privileged positions of knowledge when it comes to scrutinizing human group life;

All research is conditioned by value biases and factual preconceptions about the group being studied;

Fieldwork is a process of building up images from one’s biases, preconceptions, and new information, testing these images against one’s observations and the reports of informants, and accepting, modifying, or discarding these images on the basis of what one observes and what one has been told; and

Insider and outsider researchers will differ in the ways they go about building and testing their images of the group they study. (pp. 148–150)

Reviewing the literature, one finds that field researchers often choose sexual deviance as a topic for their field studies. Tewksbury and colleagues have researched gender differences in sex shop patrons 7 and places where men have been found to have anonymous sexual encounters 8 such as sex shop theaters. 9 Another interesting field study was conducted by Ronai and Ellis. 10 For this study, Ronai acted as a complete participant, drawing from her past as a table dancer and also gaining access as an exotic dancer in a Florida strip bar for the purpose of her master’s thesis research. Building on Ronai’s experiences and her interviews with fellow dancers, the researchers examined the interactional strategies used by dancers, both on the stage and on the floor, to ensure a night where the dancers were well paid for their services. In conducting these studies, these researchers were able to expose places where many are either unwilling or afraid to go, or perhaps afraid to admit they go.

In their study of women who belong to outlaw motorcycle gangs, Hopper and Moore 11 used participant observation methods as well as interviews to better understand the biker culture and where women fit into this culture. Moore provided access, as he was once a member and president of Satan’s Dead, an outlaw biker club in Mississippi. Like Styles, Hopper and Moore discuss the challenges of conducting research among the outlaw biker population. Having to observe quietly while bikers committed acts opposite to their personal values and not being able to ask many questions or give uninvited comments were just some of the hurdles the researchers had to overcome in order to conduct their study. The male bikers were, at the least, distrustful of the researchers, and the women bikers even more so. While these challenges existed, Hopper and Moore were able to ascertain quite a bit about the female experience as relates to their role in or among the outlaw biker culture.

Ferrell has been one of the most active field researchers of our time. He is considered a founder and remains a steadfast proponent of cultural criminology, 12 a subfield of criminology that examines the intersections of cultural activities and crime. Not only did he conduct the ethnography on urban scrounging discussed at the beginning of this chapter, he has spent more than a decade in the field studying subcultural groups who defy social norms. Crossing the United States, and the globe, Ferrell has explored the social and political motivations of urban graffiti artists, 13 anarchist bicycle group activists, and outlaw radio operators, 14 just to name a few. The research conducted by Ferrell, and others discussed here, has been described as edgework, or radical ethnography. This means that, as researchers, Ferrell and others have gone to the “edge,” or the extreme, to collect information on subjects of interest. Ferrell and Hamm 15 have put together a collection of readings based on edgework, as have Miller and Tewksbury. 16 While dangerous and wrought with ethical challenges, their research has shed light on societal groups who, whether by choice or not, often reside in the shadows.

Although ethnographers have spent years studying criminal and other deviant activities, field research has not been limited to those groups. Other researchers have sought to explore what it’s like to work in criminal justice from the inside. In the 1960s, Skolnick 17 conducted field research among police officers to better understand how elements of their occupation impacted their views and behaviors. He wrote extensively about the “working personality” of police officers as shaped by their occupational environment, including the danger and alienation they face from those they are sworn to protect, and the solidarity that builds from shared experiences. Beyond law enforcement, there have also been a variety of studies focused on the prison environment. When Ted Conover, 18 a journalist interested in writing from the correctional officer perspective, was denied permission from the New York Department of Correctional Services to do a report on correctional life, he instead applied and was hired on as an actual correctional officer. In Newjack: Guarding Sing Sing, Conover offers a compelling account of his journalistic field research, which resulted in a one-year stint as a corrections officer. From his time in training until his last days working in the galleries, Conover’s experiences provide the reader a look into the challenges faced by correctional officers, stemming not only from the inmates but the correctional staff as well.

Prior to Conover’s writing, Marquart was also interested in correctional work and strategies utilized by prison guards to ensure control over the inmate population. Specifically, in the 1980s, Marquart 19 examined correctional officials’ use of physical coercion and Marquart and Crouch 20 explored their use of inmate leaders as social control mechanisms. In order to conduct this field study, Marquart, with the warden’s permission, entered a prison unit in Texas and proceeded to work as a guard from June 1981 until January 1983. He was able to work in various posts within the institution so that he could observe how prison guards interacted with inmates. Marquart not only observed the prison’s daily routine, he examined institutional records, conducted interviews, and also developed close relationships with 20 prison guards and inmate leaders, or building tenders, whom he relied on for their insider knowledge of prison life and inmate control. Based on his fieldwork, Marquait shared his findings regarding the intimidation and physical coercion used by prison guards to discipline inmates. This fieldwork also provided a fascinating look into the building tender system that was utilized as a means of social control in the Texas prison system prior to that system being discontinued.

In the early 1990s, Schmid and Jones 21 used a unique strategy to study inmate adaptation from inside the prison walls. Jones, an offender serving a sentence in a prison located in the upper midwestern region of the United States, was given permission to enroll in a graduate sociology course focused on methods of research. This course was being offered by Schmid and led to collaborative work between the two men to study prison culture. They specifically focused on the experiences of first-time, short-term inmates. With Jones acting as the complete participant and Schmid acting as the complete observer, the pair began their research covertly. While they were aware of Jones’s meeting with Schmid for purposes of the research methods course in which he was enrolled, correctional authorities and other inmates perceived Jones to be just another inmate. In the 10 months that followed, Jones kept detailed notes regarding his daily experiences and his personal thoughts about and observations of prison life. Also included in his notes was information about his participation in prison activities and his communications with other similar, first-time, short-term inmates. Once his field notes were prepared, Jones would mail them to Schmid for review. Over the course of these letters, phone calls, and intermittent meetings, new observation strategies and themes began to develop based on the observations made by Jones. Upon his release from prison and their analyzing of the initial data, Jones and Schmid reentered the prison to conduct informed interviews with 20 first-time, short-term inmates. Using these data, Schmid and Jones began to write up their findings, which focused on inmate adaptations over time, identity transformations within the prison environment, 22 and conceptions of prison sexual assault, 23 among other topics. Schmid and Jones discussed how their roles as a complete observer and a complete participant allowed them the advantage of balancing scientific objectivity and intimacy with the group under study. The unfettered access Jones had to other inmates within the prison environment as a complete participant added to the unusual nature of this study yielding valuable insight into the prison experience for this particular subset of inmates.

Case Studies

Beyond field research, case studies provide an additional means of qualitative data. While more often conducted by researchers in other disciplines, such as psychology, or by journalists, criminologists also have a rich history of case study research. In conducting case studies, researchers use in-depth interviews and oral/life history, or autobiographical, approaches to thoroughly examine one or a few illustrative cases. This method often allows individuals, particularly offenders, to tell their own story, and information from these stories, or case studies, may then be extrapolated to the larger group. The advantage is a firsthand, descriptive account of a way of life that is little understood. Disadvantages relate to the ability to generalize from what may be an atypical case and also the bias that may enter as a researcher develops a working relationship with their subject. Most examples of case studies involving criminological subjects were conducted more than 20 years ago, which may be due to criminologists’ general inclination toward more quantitative research during this time period.

The earliest case studies focused on crime topics were conducted in the 1930s. Not only was the Chicago School interested in ethnographic research, these researchers were also among the first to conduct case studies on individuals involved in criminal activities. Shaw’s The Jack Roller (1930) 24 and Sutherland’s The Professional Thief (1937) 25 are not only the oldest but also the most well-known case studies related to delinquent and criminal figures. Focused on environmental influences on behavior, Shaw profiled an inner city delinquent male, “Stanley” the “jack roller,” who explained why he was involved in delinquent behavior, specifically the crime of mugging intoxicated men. Fifty years later, Snodgrass 26 updated Shaw’s work, following up with an elderly “Stanley” at age 70. Sutherland’s case study, resulting in the publication of The Professional Thief, was based on “Chic Conwell’s” account of his personal life and professional experience surviving off of what could be stolen or conned from others. The 1970s and 1980s witnessed numerous publications based on case studies. Researchers examined organized crime figures and families, 27 heroin addicts, 28 thieves, 29 and those who fence stolen property. 30 As with participant observation research, case studies have not been relegated to offenders only. In fact, more recently the case study approach has been applied to law enforcement and correctional agencies. 33 These studies have examined activities of the New York City Police Department, 34 the New Orleans Police Department’s response in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, 35 and Rhode Island’s prison system. 36

As with field research, the case study approach can provide a deeper understanding of individuals or groups of individuals, such as crime families, who live outside of the mainstream. Case studies inform us about the motivations for why individuals or groups behave the way they do and how those experiences or activities were either beneficial or detrimental for them. The same goes for agency research. One department or agency can learn from the experiences of another department or agency. With more recent research utilizing the case study approach, it could be that this methodology will be seen more often in the criminal justice literature.

Making Critical Choices as a Field Researcher

In conducting field studies, researchers often must make decisions that impact the viability of their research. Sometimes, researchers don’t make the best choices. In the 1990s, Dr. Ansley Hamid was an esteemed anthropologist, well-known for his field research focused on the drug subculture. 31 Based on his previous success as a researcher documenting the more significant trends in drug use and addiction, he, through his position as a university professor, was awarded a multimillion-dollar federal research grant to examine heroin use on the streets of New York. It was not long after the grant was awarded, however, that Hamid was accused of misusing the funds provided by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, even going so far as to use the funds to purchase heroin for his own use and the use of his research subjects. While the criminal charges were eventually dismissed, Hamid paid the ultimate professional price for his behavior, particularly his use of the drug, which was documented in his handwritten field notes. 32 As of 2003, the professor was no longer connected to John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York. In fact, Hamid is no longer working in higher education at all due to the accusations and accompanying negative publicity. Instead, he owns a candle shop in a small Brooklyn neighborhood. He does not plan to stop researching and writing though. His book, Ganja Complex: Rastafari and Marijuana, was published in 2002. This case is a prime example of what can happen when researchers cross the boundary of objectivity. Hamid’s brief experience in the shoes of a heroin user led to his ultimate downfall as an objective and respected researcher.

Chapter Summary

Qualitative research strategies allow researchers to enter into groups and places that are often considered off limits to the general public. The methods and studies discussed here provide excellent examples of the use of field research to discover motivations for the development and patterns of behavior within these groups. These qualitative endeavors offer a unique look into the lives of those who may live or work on the fringes of modern society. As it would be nearly impossible to conduct research on these groups using methods such as experiments, surveys, and formal interviews, participant observation techniques extend the ability of researchers to study activities beyond the norm by participating with and observing subjects in their natural environment and later describing in detail their experiences in the field.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. What are the advantages to using a more qualitative research method?

2. Compare and contrast the four different participant observation strategies.

3. What must a researcher consider before conducting field research?

4. What did Styles learn about conducting research as an insider versus an outsider?

5. How has the case study approach been applied to criminal justice research?

case study: In-depth analysis of one or a few illustrative cases

complete observation: A participant observation method that involves the researcher observing an individual or group from afar

complete participation: A participant observation method that involves the researcher becoming a full-fledged member of a particular group; sometimes referred to as disguised observation

confederates: Individuals, who are part of the research team, used to speed up the events of interest when observations are being made

edgework: This refers to researchers going to the “edge,” or the extreme, to collect information on subjects of interest

ethnographic research: Relies on field research methodologies to scientifically examine human culture in the natural environment

field research: Research that involves researchers studying individuals or groups of individuals in their natural environment

gatekeeper: A person within the group under study whom the researcher can use to learn about and access the group

going native: A challenge to field research in which the researcher loses her identity as a researcher and begins to identify more with her role as a member of the group under study

Hawthorne Effect: Based on a study of worker productivity, this term refers to changes in behavior caused by being observed

indigenous observer: A person within the group under study who is willing to collect information about the group for compensation

journalistic field research: Field research conducted by journalists and used to write books or articles about a certain topic of interest

observer as participant: A participant observation strategy in which the researcher is known to the group and is only there to observe

oral/life history: Methods used to conduct case studies; similar to an autobiographical account

participant as observer: A participant observation strategy in which the researcher will participate with the group but his identity as a researcher is known

participant observation strategies: First used for social science in the 1920s, these are research methodologies that involve participation and/or observation with the group under study; there are four such strategies

pseudonym: A false name given to someone whose identity needs to be kept secret

reactivity: The problem of having research subjects change their natural behavior in reaction to being observed or otherwise included in a research study

1 Ferrell, J. (2006). Empire of scrounge: Inside the urban underground of dumpster diving, trash picking, and street scavenging. New York: New York University Press.

2 Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

3 Trulson, C., J. Marquait, & J. Mullings. (2004). “Breaking in: Gaining entry to prisons and other hard-to-access criminal justice organizations.” Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 15(2), 451–478.

4 Lovgren, S. (2005, June 10). “FBI Agent ‘Donnie Brasco’ recalls life in the Mafia.” Retrieved March 7, 2012 from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/pf/34063528 .html.

5 See series website, http://www.cbs.com/shows /undercover_boss/.

6 Styles, J. (1979). “Outsider/insider: Researching gay baths.” Urban Life, 8(2), 135–152.

7 McCleary, R., & R. Tewksbury. (2010). “Female patrons of porn.” Deviant Behavior, 31, 208–223.

8 Tewksbury, R. (2008). “Finding erotic oases: Locating the sites of men’s same-sex anonymous sexual encounters.” Journal of Homosexuality, 55(1), 1–19.

9 Douglas, B., & R. Tewksbury. (2008). “Theaters and sex: An examination of anonymous sexual encounters in an erotic oasis.” Deviant Behavior, 29(1), 1–17.

10 Ronai, C. R., & C. Ellis. (1989). “Turn-ons for money: Interactional strategies of the table dancer.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 18, 271–298.

11 Hopper, C. B., & J. Moore. (1990). “Women in outlaw motorcycle gangs.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 18(4), 363–387.

12 Ferrell, J., & C. Sanders (Eds.). (1995). Cultural criminology. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

13 Ferrell, J. (1996). Crimes of style: Urban graffiti and the politics of criminality. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

14 Ferrell, J. (2002). Tearing down the streets: Adventures in urban anarchy. New York: Palgrave Mcmillan.

15 Ferrell, J., & M. Hamm (Eds.). (1998). Ethnography at the edge: Crime, deviance, and field research. Boston: Northeastern University Press

16 Miller, J., & R. Tewksbury (Eds.). (2001). Extreme methods: Innovative approaches to social science research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

17 Skolnick, J. (1966). Justice without trial: Law enforcement in a democratic society. New York: Wiley & Sons.

18 Conover, T. (2000). Newjack: Guarding Sing Sing. New York: Random House, Inc.

19 Marquart, J. (1986). “Prison guards and the use of physical coercion as a mechanism of prisoner control.” Criminology, 24(2), 347–366.

20 Marquart, J. & B. Crouch. (1984). “Coopting the kept: Using inmates for social control in a southern prison.” Justice Quarterly, 1(4), 491–509.

21 Schmid, T. J., & R. S. Jones. (1993). “Ambivalent actions: Prison adaptation strategies of first-time, short-term inmates.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 21(4), 439–463.

22 Schmid, T. J., & R. S. Jones. (1991). “Suspended identity: Identity transformation in a maximum security prison.” Symbolic Interaction, 14, 415–432.

23 Jones, R. S., & T. J. Schmid. (1989). “Inmates’ conceptions of prison sexual assault.” Prison Journal, 69, 53–61.

24 Shaw, C. (1930). The jack-roller. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

25 Sutherland, E. (1937). The professional thief. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

26 Snodgrass, J. (1982). The jack-roller at seventy: A fifty year follow-up. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.

27 Abadinsky, H. (1983). The criminal elite: Professional and organized crime. Wesport, CT: Greenwood Press.; Anderson, A. (1979). The business of organized crime. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.; Ianni, F., & E. Reuss-Ianni. (1972). A family business: kinship and social control in organized crime. New York: Russell Sage.

28 Agar, M. (1973). Ripping and running: A formal ethnography of urban heroin users. New York: Seminar Press.; Rettig, R., M. Torres, & G. Garrett. (1977). Manny: A criminal addict ’ s story. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

29 Chambliss, W. (1972). Boxman: A professional thief ’ s journal, with Harry King. New York: Harper and Row.; King, H., & W. Chambliss. (1984). Harry King: A professional thief ’ s journal. New York: Wiley.

30 Klockars, C. (1974). The professional fence. New York: Free Press; Steffensmeier, D. (1986). The fence: In the shadow of two worlds. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.

31 Forero, J. (1999, November, 1). “Charges unravel drug-use scholar’s career.” The New York Times Archives. Retrieved March 7, 2012 from http://www.nytimes .com/1999/11/01/nyregion/charges-unravel-drug-use-scholar-s-career.html?pagewanted=print&src=pm.

32 Smallwood, S. (2002, October 25). “Crossing the line: A heroin researcher partakes and pays the price.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved March 7, 2012 from http://chronicle.com/article /Crossing-the-Line/2839.

33 Travis, L. III (1983). “The case study in criminal justice research: Applications to policy analysis.” Criminal Justice Review, 8, 46–51.

34 Eterno, J. (2003). Policing within the law: A case study of the New York City Police Department. Westport, CT: Praeger.

35 Wigginton, M. (2007). “The New Orleans police emergency response to Hurricane Katrina: A case study.” A Dissertation completed for the University of Southern Mississippi.

36 Carroll, L. (1998). Lawful order: A case study of correctional crisis and reform. New York: Garland.

Applied Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology by University of North Texas is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Advertisement

A Content Analysis of Qualitative Research Published in Top Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals from 2010 to 2019

• Published: 01 July 2020
• Volume 45 , pages 1060–1079, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

• Heith Copes 1 ,
• Blake Beaton 1 ,
• David Ayeni 2 ,
• Dean Dabney 2 &
• Richard Tewksbury 3  

2301 Accesses

20 Citations

14 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

With the growth of qualitative research within the fields of criminology and criminal justice (CCJ) it is important to examine discipline standards and expectations of how to collect and analyze qualitative data and to present research findings. Our aim here is to assess qualitative research published in 17 top CCJ journals during the period of 2010 to 2019. We found that the number of qualitative articles published in these years increased over the previous two decades; however, the relative percentage of all articles remained relatively stable. During this period, 11.3% of all articles in the 17 CCJ journals used qualitative methods. In addition, we provide general patterns related to methodology and to presentation of findings. The results give insights into discipline standards and expectations and points to substantive areas that are under-studied (e.g., victims) and to issues relating to methodological transparency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Qualitative Research: Ethical Considerations

Criteria for Good Qualitative Research: A Comprehensive Review

Drishti Yadav

How to use and assess qualitative research methods

Loraine Busetto, Wolfgang Wick & Christoph Gumbinger

For the current analysis we include only articles that used interviews or observations with participants. We exclude content analysis of existing documents (including online forums) and qualitative responses to questionnaires.

Only articles listed as “Research Articles” were included in the total number count. We excluded those listed as Editorials and Policy Responses.

We included only those articles that explicitly addressed crime, victimization, and criminal justice processes or actors in determining the overall article count and total qualitative articles. We excluded articles that focused solely on non-criminal or non-criminal justice topics (e.g., sexual deviance, student cheating, etc.).

We only included articles that appeared in the Criminology, and not the Criminal Law, Comments, or Symposia sections.

We included articles published in general issues as well as special or thematic issues, some of which involved a guest editor. None of the special issues revolved around themes that precluded or prescribed articles based on qualitative data collection.

We make no claim as to whether these articles are “better” or more deserving of this attention. We simply state that because of their high profile they may influence authors more than articles in other journals.

This sampling threshold was chosen to allow for a robust yet manageable number of articles to be included in the analysis.

When determining sample size for focus groups we included the total number of participants who were included in all focus groups.

We only coded an article as not recorded if the authors specifically mentioned that they chose not to record interviews

We recognize that including these five as top tier is an artificial ranking and that others (i.e., criminologists in non-US countries) likely have different assessments of top tier journals.

For victims who experienced both sexual and physical victimization we classified them as “sex crimes.”

Armstrong, E. K. (2020). Political ideology and research: How neoliberalism can explain the paucity of qualitative criminological research. Alternatives : Global, Local, Political doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0304375419899832 .

Boeri, M., & Shukla, R. K. (Eds.). (2019). Inside ethnography: Researchers reflect on the challenges of reaching hidden populations. University of California Press.

Bourke, B. (2014). Positionality: Reflecting on the research process. The Qualitative Report, 19 (33), 1–9.

Google Scholar  

Buckler, K. (2008). The quantitative/qualitative divide revisited: A study of published research, doctoral program curricula, and journal editor perceptions. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19 , 383–403.

Article   Google Scholar  

Clear, T.R. (2006). 2006 Survey Report . http://www.adpccj.com/documents/2006survey.pdf .

Copes, H., Brown, A., & Tewksbury, R. (2011). A content analysis of ethnographic research published in top criminology and criminal justice journals from 2000-2009. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22 , 341–359.

Copes, H., Hochstetler, A., & Brown, A. (2013). Inmates’ retrospective experiences of prison interviews. Field Methods, 25 , 182–196.

Copes, H., & Miller, J. M. (Eds.). (2015). eThe Routledge handbook of qualitative criminology. Routledge.

DeJong, C., & St. George, S. (2018). Measuring journal prestige in criminal justice and criminology. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 29 (2), 290–309.

Kleck, G., Tark, J., & Bellows, J. J. (2006). What methods are most frequently used in research in criminology and criminal justice? Journal of Criminal Justice, 34 , 147–152.

Lane, J., Myers, D.L., Koetzele, D. & Armstrong, G. (2019). Association of Doctoral Programs in Criminology & Criminal Justice (ADPCCJ) 2019 Survey Report . http://www.adpccj.com/documents/2019survey.pdf .

Miller, J., & Palacios, W. R. (Eds.). (2015). Qualitative research in criminology. Transaction Publishers.

Panfil, V. R., & Miller, J. (2014). Beyond the straight and narrow: The import of queer criminology for criminology and criminal justice. The Criminologist, 39 (4), 1–9.

Rice, S., & Maltz, M. (2018). Doing ethnography in criminology: Discovery through fieldwork. Springer.

Roche, S. P., Fenimore, D. M., & Jennings, W. G. (2019). Trends in top journals in criminology and criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 30 (4), 551–566.

Sorensen, J. (2009). An assessment of the relative impact of criminal justice and criminology journals. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37 , 505–511.

Sorensen, J., Snell, C., & Rodriguez, J. J. (2006). An assessment of criminal justice and criminology journal prestige. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 17 , 297–322.

Tewksbury, R., Dabney, D., & Copes, H. (2010). The prominence of qualitative research in criminology and criminal justice scholarship. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 21 , 391–411.

Tewksbury, R., DeMichele, M. T., & Miller, J. M. (2005). Methodological orientations of articles appearing in criminal justice’s top journals: Who publishes what and where. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 16 (2), 265–279.

Tewksbury, R., & Mustaine, E. E. (2011). How many authors does it take to write an article? An assessment of criminology and criminal justice research article author composition. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22 (1), 12–23.

Topalli, V., Dickinson, T., & Jacques, S. (2020). Learning from criminals: Active offender research for criminology. Annual Review of Criminology, 3 , 189–215.

Woodward, V. H., Webb, M. E., Griffin, O. H., & Copes, H. (2016). The current state of criminological research in the United States: An examination of research methodologies in criminology and criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 27 (3), 340–361.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1201 University Boulevard; Suite 210, Birmingham, AL, 35040, USA

Heith Copes & Blake Beaton

Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, 30302, USA

David Ayeni & Dean Dabney

Louisville, USA

Richard Tewksbury

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heith Copes .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Copes, H., Beaton, B., Ayeni, D. et al. A Content Analysis of Qualitative Research Published in Top Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals from 2010 to 2019. Am J Crim Just 45 , 1060–1079 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09540-6

Download citation

Received : 07 February 2020

Accepted : 03 June 2020

Published : 01 July 2020

Issue Date : December 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09540-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Qualitative research
• Ethnographic research
• Content analysis
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Sample details

• Social Issues
• Criminal Justice,
• Descriptive
• Views: 1,022

Related Topics

• Urbanization
• Child Labor
• Social isolation
• Racial Segregation
• Social constructionism
• Globalization
• Serial Killer
• Social contract
• School shooting

Descriptive research examples in criminal justice

The current corrections system in Iran is ineffective in reducing recidivism rates and providing positive outcomes for released individuals. However, recent research has shown that rehabilitative programs can successfully transition nonviolent offenders from jail to secure care programs and eventually to a normative lifestyle. Expanding these programs to more individuals and making them more rigorous could benefit the budget and help offenders develop positive life skills to avoid future criminal behavior. The way law enforcement manages drugs and drug enforcement could also be improved by treating drug use as a public health problem instead of a criminal one. Simplifying laws and removing outdated ones could also ease the burden on corrections facilities and decrease the likelihood of first-time offenders being placed in violent situations. These changes could enhance the criminal justice system and improve safety and security for the public.

Although there are needed changes throughout the system corrections has proven to be the one component that has been ineffective at curbing recidivism in convicted Iranians and is currently unTABLE to provide reasonTABLE outcomes for individuals that are released once they complete their sentences. Recently there has been research and evidence that rehabilitative programs are proactive in operating programs that have transitioned individuals from jail to secure care programs that can then transition criminal individuals to a productive and normative lifestyle once they complete such a program.

These programs take many forms and typically involve taking nonviolent offenders such as drug offenders and those convicted of theft. I believe that increasing these programs and expanding the criminals that are allowed to be involved in these programs. In doing so there would have to increased constraints on such individuals and the program would have to be increasingly rigorous in order to maintain a strict structure for these persons.

ready to help you now

Without paying upfront

Using these alternatives to incarceration can benefit the budget and allows nonviolent offenders to be placed in programs that they can benefit from by building positive life skills that can aid in the avoidance of future criminal behaviors (American Bar Association, n. . ). This is not the only component of law enforcement that requires some adjustments to be made. There is also a need in the manner in which law enforcement manages drugs and drug enforcement. This can be handled by making drugs a public health problem instead of a criminal one (Laszlo, n. D. ).

This can shift a majority of the drug problem onto other services and by decontaminating drug use and possession individuals can get treatment instead of being locked up for a mental health and addiction problem. This would alleviate overbooked court rooms and orisons allowing for the truly violent and dangerous criminals to be placed in space that is taken up by less violent offenders (Laszlo, n. D I). In changing the way the system manages drugs and drug addicts the crimes associated with drug use can also be decreased or eliminated (Chandler, Fletcher, & Follow, 2009).

A significant change within the system could also be made by simplifying the laws and the manner in which they are written. Given that judicial officials struggle with interpreting some laws how can we expect a law enforcement agent in the field in the heat of the moment to do interpret the name law (Mess, 1982). This also includes removing old laws from the books that are active but are no longer meaningful along with laws that have been replaced by new legislation.

Additionally changing the classification of some lesser crimes from the ranks of being felonies can also ease the burden within the corrections facilities and work to decrease the overall first time offenders placed into violent situations within the prison setting Judge, 1990). It is known that by placing nonviolent offenders into long term prison terms here they are near more criminal individuals and they can learn new methods to perform criminal actions upon completion of their sentences.

The criminal justice system that we function within has served our country well, however it is not without flaws in the system. The above component would further work to enhance the criminal justice system and work to close loopholes for offenders and also better serve individuals in the public with regard to providing safety and security for the population. I believe that changing the manner in which we manage crimes and their classifications thin the criminal justice can alter the way in which the public views criminal behaviors.

Cite this page

https://graduateway.com/criminal-justice-policy-process-essay/

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers

• Sex Offender
• Organized crime
• Homosexuality
• Black Lives Matter
• Sexual assault
• Evidence-based practice
• Social norm

Check more samples on your topics

Examples of exploratory research in criminal justice argumentative essay.

One of those programs is called a Diversion Program. Diversion is being used by numerous courts as a teeth of deterrence for 1st time and/or nonviolent offenders. This review will evaluate the program and its effect on recidivism rates in the criminal justice system. Literature Review The Diversion Program is an attempt to divert charges

Examples of experimental research in criminal justice

The importance of keeping the criminal justice system updated with technological advancements in order to effectively combat crime cannot be overstated. It is crucial for the success of these organizations to adapt to these changes. This article will explore the use and implementation of criminal justice organizations, behavior theories, societal and organizational diversity impact, as

Examples of validity and reliability in criminal justice research

Police officer

There are several hypotheses that can be applied to analyze police corruption in addition to the slippery slope hypothesis. Three of them are the society at large, structural or affiliation, and rotten apple hypotheses. Police corruption can be dealt with through policies and training. The slippery slope hypothesis in regard to police corruption refers to

Examples of selective observation in criminal justice

Restorative justice

Often continue their criminal tendencies once released (Bloom, 1999). A more satisfying system of justice is needed, and with this in mind, reformers in the field of penology are looking at alternative forms of achieving justice. A restorative response provides one such option to the traditional retributive justice system which prevails in Canada today. The

Wedding cake model of criminal justice examples

During he paper I will look at the strengths and weaknesses of a rehabilitative approach. I will also look at the governments Big Society principles, examining if this has any effect on offenders. The Church of England Temperance Society is historically the first probation service to be set up in England and Wales in 1876

Examples of consensus model in criminal justice

Kansas has streamlined the legal system by providing a clear outline of steps for criminal cases. These steps consist of police investigation, prosecutor evidence gathering, defendant representation and case presentation, and judge and jury decision-making. It is crucial to have an understanding of these steps in order to safeguard individual rights.This essay examines the Kansas

Examples of net widening in criminal justice system

Gary Howard A crime is which one breaks the law, meaning an individual or a group partakes in an event to do something wrong and one is accused in which a crime was committed. A crime (1981-2005), according to The Free Dictionary is defined as "A violation of a law in which there is injury

Examples of policies in criminal justice

Under this perspective Domestic violence issues will be handled with immediate, hard punishment; more then likely incarceration along with possible No Contact Orders to protect the victim. Unlike the Crime Control Perspective, the Rehabilitation Perspective focuses the attention on the offender and not the victims. Supporters of this perspective believe that society is the reason

Examples of discretionary power in the criminal justice system

The criminal justice system is nothing more than different sets of agencies tasked to carry out penalties for those who have committed a crime and broken the law. How the criminal justice system actually works depends on where and who is in charge such as, a city, county, federal government and also where the laws

Hi, my name is Amy 👋

In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

Fall 2024 Criminal Justice B.S. Online Program courses

First semester courses.

These courses are for new transfer students in the fall 2024 semester.

HUM 300 Landmark Supreme Court Cases

HUM 300 OL-1 Code: 35309   Live Meeting on Zoom Wednesdays, 4:30-5:55 pm

HUM 300 OL-2 Code: 35310  Live Meeting on Zoom, Wednesdays, 9:25-10:40 AM 

This course will look at the most controversial case ever decided by the US Supreme Court, Dred Scott v Sanford, the case which led the US into civil war (yes, there is a Supreme Court case even more controversial than the Dobbs decision!). We will springboard from the Dred Scott case into contemporary issues in the US relating to civil and human rights (other relevant US Supreme Court Cases will be considered in this context). The course will also examine how art has itself become a political battleground in the struggle to expand civil and human rights ever more broadly, especially in the wake of George Floyd's murder, and the BLM protests that followed in its wake. In particular, we will examine the controversy surrounding (especially) murals and statuary showing historical scenes depicting slavery, persons who owned slaves or otherwise supported the institution of slavery, and persons who simply held views that are today considered racist. What if anything is to be done with this artwork, and for what reasons?

HUM 300 OL-3  Course Code: 35311 Live Meeting on Zoom, Tuesdays, 5:55-7:10 pm 

HUM 300 OL-4  Course Code: 35312 Live Meeting on Zoom, Mondays, 4:30-5:45 pm

Stop, Question, Frisk & the Law: Terry v. Ohio in Cultural and Historical Perspectives

This course explores through historical and cultural perspectives the landmark Supreme Court case Terry V. Ohio, which confirmed that it is not unconstitutional for police to "stop and frisk" a person they reasonably suspect to be involved in a crime. The class will pay particular attention to the decision’s shifting consequences for America’s criminal justice system across six decades. The course will culminate in a close examination of the competing statistical claims made in recent challenges to the NYPD’s use of stop-question-frisk in New York City. Along the way, students will refine their legal research and workplace writing skills. This class prepares students, as future criminal justice professionals, to analyze and contextualize struggles for justice through legal studies and the humanities.

SSC 215 Writing in Criminal Justice

Course Code: 36141

Course Description: This research-based academic writing course prepares students to write effectively in their upper-level Criminal Justice courses. Focused on empirical writing, students will write about observations and patterns of behavior, investigating how arguments are made in the field of Criminal Justice. They will also learn to make original scientific inquiries, to structure empirical arguments, and to utilize a guided peer-reviewed writing process. This writing course also focuses on recognizing power structures and bias embedded in scholarly research and in the role of the researcher-writer’s position. Overall, the course will prepare students to produce logically organized, complex research-based writing projects within the field of Criminal Justice.

CJBS 250 Research Methods and Statistics in Criminal Justice

CJBS 250 OL-96  Course Code: 35769

CJBS 250 OL-97 Course Code: 35770

CJBS 250 OL-98 Course Code: 35771

CJBS 250 OL-99 Course Code: 35778

This course will present the research process, types of studies, appropriate descriptive statistical techniques and guidelines for formulating research questions and testable hypotheses. It will also review how to decide on an appropriate population for study, how variables are constructed, and how data are collected and organized, and discuss sampling methods and sample size. A variety of research methods will be covered, including experimental, quasi-experimental and survey methods, as well as other forms of data collection and the use of existing databases. Students will also be exposed to qualitative methodologies including ethnography, observation, content-analysis, and interviewing techniques.

Continuing Student Courses

Students in their second semester or beyond should complete the CJBS 300 and CJBS 415 major core courses in sequence.

CJBS 300 Criminal Justice Theory into Practice

CJBS 300 OL-98 Course Code:  36363

CJBS 300 OL-99 Course Code:  36362

This course builds upon knowledge acquired in previous courses and connects theoretical approaches with practical applications. Students will study a broad array of assessments and evaluations of the policies and programs that have evolved in the field of criminal justice. Students will review and analyze experiments such as D.A.R.E., Minneapolis Domestic Violence and Kansas City Preventive Patrol in the light of relevant criminal justice theories. The ultimate goal of the course is to provide students with essential skills for critically evaluating and assessing programs, based on findings from empirical studies and the scholarly literature.

Prerequisite : CJBS 250

CJBS 415 Capstone Seminar for BS in Criminal Justice

CJBS 415 OL-98  Course Code:  36359

CJBS 415 OL-99  Course Code:  36358

This capstone seminar is required of all Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice majors. It affords students the opportunity to reexamine and integrate the practical and theoretical knowledge and critical thinking skills acquired over the course of their studies within the major into a meaningful culminating experience. Students will participate in debates central to the understanding of the American criminal justice system. Focusing on reexamination of some prominent criminal justice texts, the course will require students to critically examine in depth an original work relative to its social and political context and to the theoretical and empirical literature. Students will also apply and advance theoretical arguments in oral and written form through an in-depth examination of a current or controversial issue of their choosing such as: the use of force by police, plea bargaining, or mass incarceration.

Prerequisite : CJBS 300

Major, minor, and elective courses  

These courses are options for new and continuing students.

ANT/SOC 110 Drug Use and Abuse

ANT/SOC 110-OL 99  Registration Code: 36170

This class explores the controversies surrounding the causes and consequences of substance abuse as well as treatment modalities and prevention strategies. The course examines the methods used by social scientists to estimate the numbers of people who defy the law by using controlled substances; whether drug use is growing or diminishing; the impact of drug-taking on individuals and groups; and the effects of drug use on health problems and crime rates. A wide variety of works, including ethnographic, sociological and clinical studies, first-hand accounts by drug users, anti-drug polemics, reports from criminal justice sources engaged in the War on Drugs and media accounts will encourage critical thinking about this entrenched individual and social problem.

This course is an elective or can count toward a minor in Anthropology. It satisfies the Individual and Society flexible core category in the General Education requirements. 

COR/PSC 230 Sex Offenders in the Criminal Justice System

COR/PSC 230-OL 99 Registration Code: 36199

The aim of this course is to develop an understanding of the causes of sexual crimes and the treatment of sex offenders throughout the criminal justice process. There is an analysis of the laws that relate to sex offenders and the cyclical nature of sex offender legislation. The course examines the difficulty of balancing rights of the offenders and rights of the community, as well as what forms of community protection are viable for these individuals. By the end of the course, students should have an understanding of sex offender typologies, types of treatment offered, laws and policies regarding sex crimes, and the likely future direction of legislation.

COR/PSC 230 can satisfy a 200 level Category C requirement in the CJBS major, or a course in the Police Studies minor. 

COR 320 Race, Class and Gender in a Correctional Context

COR 320 OL-99 Registration Code: 34942

Examination of the role of race, class and gender within the institutional correctional community. Analysis of the impact upon clients, staff and administration through examination of current correctional institutions and case studies by selected corrections experts.

COR 320 can satisfy the Diversity or Category C (Corrections) 300 level requirement in the CJBS major.

LAW 202 Law and Evidence

LAW 202-OL 99 Registration Code: 36158

A comprehensive analysis of the rules of evidence. Particular subjects include judicial notice, presumptions, the nature of real and circumstantial evidence, burden of proof, province of court and jury, documentary evidence, hearsay evidence, confessions, admissions, witnesses and constitutionally protected evidence. Emphasis on evidence in criminal cases.

LAW 202 can satisfy a requirement for the Law minor or Category B, Law and Courts, in the CJBS major. 

LAW 206 The American Judiciary

LAW 206 OL-99 Registration Code: 36157

A study of the nature of the judicial process: precedent and legal reasoning; decision making; the basis of criminal and civil lawsuits; the role of the lawyer, the judge and the public; the organization of state and federal courts; the Supreme Court; democracy and judicial review.

LAW 206 can satisfy a law minor requirement or Category B, Law and Courts in the CJBS major.

LAW 301 Jurisprudence

LAW 301 OL-99 Registration Code: 35116

This course considers the study of the theory and philosophy of law and the relationship between law and society. Issues to which special attention will be paid include the problem of disobedience, the nature of the judicial process, and the relations between law and personal morality. Current controversies about civil disobedience, the role of courts, non-victim crimes and the relationship of the police to the rule of law will be explored.

Prerequisite: LAW 203 Constitutional Law, or equivalent

LAW 301 can satisfy a law minor requirement or Category B, Law and Courts in the CJBS major.

LAW/POL 313 Law and Politics of Race Relations

LAW 313 OL-99 Registration Code: 35210

Analysis of the politics of race and racism in the United States through the examination of major court decisions and of legislations affecting minority groups. Treatment of racial minority groups in the criminal and civil justice systems, and by courts, police and prisons will be included.

Prerequisite: POL 101 American Government or equivalent course

LAW 313 can satisfy a law minor requirement or a Category B, Law and Courts requirement in the CJBS major. 

PED/PSY 180 Stress Management

PED 180 OL-99 Registration Code: 36178

This course will explain the sources and consequences of stress. Key theories and terminology will be discussed and evaluated. A variety of instruments that measure stress levels among individuals will be demonstrated. Coping techniques enabling students to adjust to the demands of stress will be described and practiced.

PED 180 is an elective.

PSC 202 Police and Diversity

PSC 202 OL-99 Registration Code: 36577

This course will explore the pervasive influence of culture, race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation and various disabilities on daily encounters, contacts and interaction between police officers and civilian employees of police organizations, and other community members.  The emphasized focus is on the cross - cultural contact, ethno- cultural diversity, the need for awareness and understanding of cultural, ethnic, racial, religious, sexual orientation, gender, and an array of disabilities and other differences. The need to understand these differences is rooted in the concept of procedural justice and respect for those of different backgrounds that influences the decision making processes regarding deployment and other operational considerations.       

Prerequisite: 100 level course in Criminal Justice or related fields

PSC 202 satisfies a Diversity requirement for the CJBS major or a minor requirement for Police Studies.

PSC 235 Women and Policing

PSC 235 OL-99 Registration Code: 35103

An analysis of the social and political forces that guided the evolution of women's role in policing from ancillary specialist to integrated member of the police establishment. Role enhancement from "Police Matron" to "Policewoman" to "Police Officer" is studied against the backdrop of women's reform movements. Title VII Equal Opportunity Act of 1972 and Supreme Court rulings abolishing barriers to women in policing are examined. Study of women police in other countries in state and federal agencies. Topics include female officers' occupational role conflicts; performance on patrol; coping with physical and psychological stressors - male peer prejudice jealous mates favoritism sexual harassment; women's special attributes in policing; female detectives; the future including the role of women in key policy-making decisions.

PSC 235 can satisfy a Diversity requirement for the CJBS major or a minor requirement for Police Studies.

PSC 306 Police Work with Juveniles

PSC 306 OL-99 Registration Code: 35147

The philosophy and methods of police programs for prevention and control of juvenile delinquency and youth crime. Emphasis on specific techniques and a consideration of the issues and problems to be resolved by police.

Prerequisite: ENG 101 and 100 level course in Criminal Justice or related fields.

PSC 306 satisfies a Category A, Police requirement for the CJBS major or a minor requirement for Police Studies.

PSC 321 Police Ethics

PSC 321 OL-99 Registration Code: 34455

An identification and analysis of the diverse ethical issues encountered in the police service. Traditional ethical theories will be examined and will be applied to such topics as discretion, deadly physical force, misconduct, authority and responsibility, affirmative action, civil disobedience, undercover operations and privacy.

PSC 321 satisfies a Category A, Police requirement for the CJBS major or a minor requirement for Police Studies.

PSC 324 Police Use of Force

PSC 324 OL-99 Registration Code: 35494

This course offers a deep examination of police use of force and its implications for American police and the communities they serve from a current and historical context. Permissible limits of police use force are the subject of constant debate, interpretation and policy analysis. Topics include escalation, de-escalation and assessment period; problems arising between citizens and police resulting from use of force; social changes that impact police legitimacy; challenges and solutions for contemporary use of force; reasonableness; excessive force; proportionality and necessity.

PSC 324 satisfies a Category A, Police requirement for the CJBS major or a minor requirement for Police Studies.

SOC/CRJ 236 Victimology

SOC/CRJ 236 OL-99 Registration Code: 36159

This course focuses on the victims rather than the offenders: why they have been "rediscovered" recently why they often do not report crimes to the police how some victims might share responsibility for the crimes with the offenders how they can be repaid for their losses through offender restitution and government compensation and what new services are available to help victims prevent crime and survive attacks.

SOC 236 satisfies a requirement for the Criminology minor or can serve as an elective.

SSC 215 OL-99 Registration Code: 36141

This research-based academic writing course prepares students to write effectively in their upper-level Criminal Justice courses. Focused on empirical writing, students will write about observations and patterns of behavior, investigating how arguments are made in the field of Criminal Justice. They will also learn to make original scientific inquiries, to structure empirical arguments, and to utilize a guided peer-reviewed writing process. This writing course also focuses on recognizing power structures and bias embedded in scholarly research and in the role of the researcher-writer’s position. Overall, the course will prepare students to produce logically organized, complex research-based writing projects within the field of Criminal Justice.

SSC 215 satisfies the Communications category of the General Education College Option and can be an elective. 

Are you looking for a summer course? 

Click here to review a list of recommended courses for CJBS online students.

You can register for any online course offered during the summer session that will help you meet a graduation requirement. Make sure you read the dates and any required meeting times for online courses.

Keep in mind that a three or five week summer course is condensed: you will have to dedicate a significant amount of time each week to complete readings and assignments.