Why do evaluation researchers in crime and justice choose non-experimental methods?

Journal of Experimental Criminology

Volumn 1, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 191-213

  Lum, Cynthia ^a   Yang, Sue Ming ^b  

^a NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Criminal justice evaluation; Evaluation research; Experiments; Scientific validity; What works

Indexed keywords

EID: 24944510099     PISSN: 15733750     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11292-005-1619-x     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Andrews, D. A., Zinger, L, Hoge, R. D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P. & Cullen, F. T. (1990). Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology 28(3), 369-404.
2. Boruch, R. (1976). On common contentions about randomized field experiments. In G. Glass (Ed.), Evaluation studies review annual. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
3. Boruch, R., Snyder, B. & DeMoya, D. (2000a). The importance of randomized field trials. Crime and Delinquency 46(2), 156-180.
4. Boruch, R., Victor, T. & Cecil, J. S. (2000b). Resolving ethical and legal problems in randomized experiments. Crime and Delinquency 46(3), 330-353.
5. Burtless, G. (1995). The case for randomized field trials in economic and policy research. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 9(2), 63-84.
6. Cameron, S. & Blackburn, R. (1981). Sponsorship and academic career success. The Journal of Higher Education 52, 369-377.
7. Campbell, D. & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, American Educational Research Association.
8. Clark, S. & Corcoran, M. (1986). Perspectives on the professional socialization of women faculty: A case of accumulated disadvantage? The Journal of Higher Education 57, 20-43.
9. Clarke, R. V. & Cornish, D. B. (1972). The controlled trial in institutional research: Paradigm or pitfall for penal evaluators? Home Office Research Studies (Vol. 15). London, UK: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
10. Cook, T. (2003). Resistance to experiments: Why have educational evaluators chosen not to do randomized experiments? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 589, 114-149.
11. Cook, T. & Campbell, D. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.
12. Corcoran, M. & Clark, S. (1984). Professional socialization and contemporary career attitudes of three faculty generations. Research in Higher Education 20, 131-153.
13. Cox, S. M., Davidson, W. S., & Bynum, T. S. (1995). A meta-analytic assessment of delinquency-related outcomes of alternative education programs. Crime and Delinquency 2, 219-234.
14. Dowden, C., Antonowicz, D. & Andrews, D. A. (2003). Effectiveness of relapse prevention with offenders: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 47(5), 516-528.
15. Farrington, D. (1983). Randomized experiments on crime and justice. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime & justice: An annual review of research (Vol. IV, pp. 257-308). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
16. Farrington, D. (2003a). Methodological quality standards for evaluation research. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 587, 49-68.
17. Farrington, D. (2003b). A short history of randomized experiments in criminology: A meager feast. Evaluation Review 27(3), 218-227.
18. Farrington, D. & Petrosino, A. (2001). The Campbell Collaboration Crime and Justice Group. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 578, 35-49.
19. Feder, L., Jolin, A. & Feyerherm, W. (2000). Lessons from two randomized experiments in criminal justice settings. Crime and Delinquency 46(3), 380-400.
20. Garner, J. H. & Visher, C. A. (2003). The production of criminological experiments. Evaluation Review 27(3), 316-335.
21. Gordon, G. & Morse, E. V. (1975). Evaluation research: A critical review. The Annual Review of Sociology.
22. Heckman, J. & Smith, J. (1995). Assessing the case for social experiments. Journal of Economic Perspectives 9(2), 85-110.
23. Kelling, G., Pate, A. M., Dieckman, D. & Brown, C. E. (1974). The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment: Summary report. Washington DC: The Police Foundation.
24. Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd edn. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
25. Lipsey, M. & Wilson, D. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist 48, 1181-1209.
26. Lipton, D., Martinson, R. & Wilks, J. (1975). The effectiveness of correctional treatment: A survey of treatment evaluation studies. New York: Praeger.
27. Logan, C. H. & Gaes, G. G. (1993). Meta-analysis and the rehabilitation of punishment. Justice Quarterly 10, 245-263.
28. Lösel, F. & Koferl, P. (1989). Evaluation research on correctional treatment in West Germany: A Meta-analysis. In H. Wegener, F. Lösel & J. Haisch (Eds.), Criminal behavior and the justice system: Psychological perspectives. New York: Springer-Verlag.
29. MacKenzie, D. L. (2002). Reducing the criminal activities of known offenders and delinquents: Crime prevention in the courts and corrections. In L. W. Sherman, D. P. Farrington, B. C. Welsh, & D. L. MacKenzie (Eds.), Evidence based crime prevention (pp. 330-404). London, UK: Routledge.
30. McCord, J. (2003). Cures that harm: Unanticipated outcomes of crime prevention programs. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 587, 16-30.
31. Palmer, T. & Petrosino, A. (2003). The "experimenting agency": The California Youth Authority Research Division. Evaluation Review 27(3), 228-266.
32. Pawson, R. & Tilley, N. (1994). What works in evaluation research? British Journal of Criminology 34(3), 291-306.
33. Pawson, R. & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.
34. Petersilia, J. (1989). Implementing randomized experiments - lessons from BJA's intensive supervision project. Evaluation Review 13(5), 435-458.
35. Petrosino, A., Boruch, R., Soydan, H., Duggan, L. & Sanchez-Meca, J. (2001). Meeting the challenges of evidence-based policy: The Campbell Collaboration. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 578, 14-34.
36. Prendergast, M. L., Podus, D., & Chang, E. (2000). Program factors and treatment outcomes in drug dependence treatment: An examination using meta-analysis. Substance Use and Misuse 35(12-14), 1931-1965.
37. Raul, S. & Peterson, L. (1992). Nursing education administrators: Level of career development and mentoring. Journal of Professional Nursing 8, 161-169.
38. Reskin, B. (1979). Academic sponsorship and scientists' careers. Sociology of Education 52, 129-146.
39. Shadish, W., Cook, T. & Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inferences. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
40. Shepherd, J. P. (2003). Explaining feast of famine in randomized field trials. Evaluation Review 27(3), 290-315.
41. Sherman, L. W. (2003). Misleading evidence and evidence-led policy: Making social science more experimental. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 589, 6-19.
42. Sherman, L. W., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D. L., Eck, J., Reuter, P. & Bushway, S. (1997). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn't, what's promising: A report to the United States Congress. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
43. Sherman, L. W., Farrington, D. P., Welsh, B. C. & MacKenzie, D. L. (Eds.), (2002). Evidence based crime prevention. London, UK: Routledge.
44. Spelman, W. & Brown, D. K. (1984). Calling the police: Citizen reporting of serious crime. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
45. Stufflebeam, D. L. (2001). Evaluation models. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
46. Wanner, R., Lewis, L. & Gregorio, D. (1981). Research productivity in academia: A comparative study of the sciences, social sciences and humanities. Sociology of Education 54, 238-253.
47. Weisburd, D. (2000). Randomized experiments in criminal justice policy: Prospects and problems. Crime and Delinquency 46(2), 181-193.
48. Weisburd, D. (2001). Magic and science in multivariate sentencing models: Reflections on the limits of statistical methods. Israel Law Review 35(2), 225-248.
49. Weisburd, D. (2003). Ethical practice and evaluation of interventions in crime and justice: The moral imperative for randomized trials. Evaluation Review 27(3), 336-354.
50. Weisburd, D. & Petrosino, A. (forthcoming). Experiments: Criminology. In K. Kempf (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social measurement. Chicago, IL: Academic Press.
51. Weisburd, D., Lum, C. & Petrosino, A. (2001). Does research design affect study outcomes? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 578, 50-70.
52. Wilson, D. (2000). Meta-analyses in alcohol and other drug abuse treatment research. Addiction 95(3), 419-438.
53. Wilson, D (2001). Meta-analytic methods for criminology. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 578, 71-89.
54. Wilson, D., Gallagher, C. & MacKenzie, D. L. (2000). A meta-analysis of corrections-based education, vocation, and work programs for adult offenders. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 37, 347-368.
55. Wilson, D., Gottfredson, D. & Najaka, S. (2001). School-based prevention of problem behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 17(3), 247-272.
56. Whitehead, J. & Lab, S. (1989). A meta-analysis of juvenile correctional treatment. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 26(3), 276-295.