Improving evaluation of anti-crime programs: Summary of a National Research Council report

Journal of Experimental Criminology

Volumn 2, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 271-307

  Lipsey, Mark ^a   Petrie, Carol ^b   Weisburd, David ^c,d   Gottfredson, Denise ^d  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NATIONAL ACADEMIES OF SCIENCES   (United States)

^c HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Anti crime programs; Evaluation; Experiments; Impact evaluation; Observational methods; Quasi experiments; Randomized trials; Research methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750510271     PISSN: 15733750     EISSN: 15728315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11292-006-9009-6     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (56)

1. Ayres, I. & Levitt S. (1998). Measuring positive externalities from unobservable victim precaution: An empirical analysis of LOJACK. Quarterly Journal of Economics 113(1), 43-77.
2. Berk, R. (1992). The differential deterrent effects of an arrest in incidents of domestic violence: A Bayesian analysis of four randomized field experiments (with Alec Campbell, Ruth Klap and Bruce Western). American Sociological Review 5(57), 689-708.
3. Berk, R. (2003). Conducting a randomized field experiment for the California department of corrections: The experience of the inmate classification experiment. Paper presented at the Workshop on Improving Evaluation of Criminal Justice Programs, September 5, Washington DC: National Research Council. Available: http://www7.nationalaeademies.org/CLAJ/ Evaluation%20-%20Ricliard%20Berk.pdf.
4. Braga, A. (2003). Hot spots policing and crime prevention: Evidence from five randomized controlled trials. Paper presented at the Workshop on Improving Evaluation of Criminal Justice Programs, September 5, Washington DC: National Research Council. Available: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/CLAJ/ Evaluation%20-%20Anthony%20Braga.doc.
5. Brainard, J. (2001). The wrong rules for social science? The Chronicle of Higher Education A21, March 9.
6. Brown, S. (1989). Statistical power and criminal justice research. Journal of Criminal Justice 17, 115-122.
7. Chamberlain, P. (2003). The benefits and hazards of conducting community-based randomized trials: Multidimensional treatment foster care as a case example. Paper presented at the Workshop on Improving Evaluation of Criminal Justice Programs, September 5, Washington DC: National Research Council. Available: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/CLAJ/Evaluation%20- %20Patricia%20Chamberlain.doc.
8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Cook, T. & Campbell, D. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
10. Cook, P. J. & Tauchen, G. (1984). The effect of minimum drinking age legislation on youthful auto fatalities, 1970-1977. Journal of Legal Studies 13, 169-190.
11. Cooper, H. M. (1998). Synthesizing research: A guide for literature reviews (3rd ed.). (Applied Social Research Methods Series 2.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12. Cooper, H. M. & Hedges, E. V. (1994). The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
13. Farrington, D. P. & Welsh, B. C. (2002). Improved street lighting and crime prevention. Justice Quarterly 19(2), 313-331.
14. Fleiss, J. (1982). Multicenter clinical trials: Bradford Hill's contributions and some subsequent developments. Statistics in Medicine 1, 353-359.
15. Garner, J. H. & Visher, C. A. (2003). The production of criminological experiments. Evaluation Review 27(3), 316-335.
16. Garner, J., Fagan, J. & Maxwell, C. (1995). Published findings from the spouse assault replication program: A critical review. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 11(1), 3-28.
17. Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M. & Boles, S. M. (1999). Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health 89, 1323-1327.
18. Herrell, J. M. & Straw, R. B. (2002). Conducting multiple site evaluations in real-world Settings (New Directions for Evaluation No. 94.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
19. Kelling, G. L., Pate, T., Dieckman, D. & Brown, C. E. (1974). The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment: Technical report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.
20. Lipsey, M. (2000). Statistical conclusion validity for intervention research: A significant (p < .05) problem. In L. Bickman (Ed.), Validity and social experimentation: Donald Campbell's legacy. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Lipsey, M. & Wilson, D. (2001). Practical meta-analysis (Applied Social Research Methods Series Vol. 49.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. Ludwig, J. & Cook, P. J. (2000). Homicide and suicide rates associated with implementation of the Brady Handgun violence prevention act. Journal of the American Medical Association 284, 585-591.
23. Manski, C. (1995). Identification problems in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24. Manski, C. & Nagin, D. (1998). Bounding disagreements about treatment effects: A case study of sentencing and recidivism. Sociological Methodology 28, 99-137.
25. National Research Council (2001). Informing America's policy on illegal drugs: What we don't know keeps hurting us. Committee on data and research for policy on illegal drugs. In C. F. Manski, J. V. Pepper & C. V. Petrie (Eds.), Committee on law and justice and committee on national statistics. Commission on behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
26. National Research Council (2004) Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. Committee to review research on police policy and practices. In W. Skogan & K. Frydl (Eds.), Committee on law and justice, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
27. National Research Council (2005). Firearms and violence: A critical review. Committee to improve research information and data on firearms. In C. F. Wellford, J. V. Pepper & C. V. Petrie (Eds.), Committee on law and justice, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
28. National Research Council and Institute of Medicine (2001). Juvenile crime, juvenile justice. Panel on juvenile crime: Prevention, treatment, and control. In J. McCord, C. Spatz Widom & N. A. Crowell (Eds.), Committee on law and justice and board on children, youth, and families. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29. Oakes, J. M. (2002). Risks and wrongs in social science research. Evaluation Review 26(5), 443-479.
30. Palmer, T. & Petrosino, A. (2003). The experimenting agency: The California youth authority research division. Evaluation Review 27(3), 228-266.
31. Petersilia, J. & Turner, S. (1993). Intensive probation and parole. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (vol. 19) (pp. 281-335). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
32. Petrosino, A., Turpin-Petrosino, C. & Buehler, J. (2003a). Scared straight and other juvenile awareness programs for preventing juvenile delinquency: A systematic review of the randomized experimental evidence. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 589, 41-62.
33. Petrosino, A., Boruch, R. F., Farrington, D. P., Sherman, L. W. & Weisburd, D. (2003b). Toward evidence-based criminology and criminal justice: Systematic reviews, the Campbell collaboration, and the crime and justice group. International Journal of Comparative Criminology 3(1), 42-61.
34. Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W. & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35. Rydell, C. P. & Everingham, S. S. (1994). Controlling cocaine: Supply versus demand programs. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
36. Shadish, W., Cook, T. & Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inferences. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin Company.
37. Sherman, L. D. (1992). Policing domestic violence: Experiments and dilemmas. New York: Free Press.
38. Sherman, L. D. (2004). Research and policing: The infrastructure and political economy of federal funding. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 593, 156-178.
39. Sherman, L. D. & Weisburd, D. (1995). General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime 'hot spots': A randomized study. Justice Quarterly 12(4).
40. Sherman, L., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., 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.
41. Sherman, L., Farrington, D., Welsh, B. & MacKenzie, D. (eds.) (2002). Evidence-based crime prevention. London, England: Routledge.
42. Stanley, K., Stjernsward, M. & Isley, M. (1981). The conduct of a cooperative clinical trial. New York: Springer-Verlag.
43. Todd, P. (2003). Alternative methods of evaluating anti-crime programs. Paper presented at the Workshop on Improving Evaluation of Criminal Justice Programs, September 5, Washington DC: National Research Council. Available: http://nrc51/xpedio/groups/dbasse/documents/webpage/027646%7E2.doc.
44. U. S. General Accounting Office (2001). Juvenile justice: OJJDP reporting requirements for discretionary and formula grantees and concerns about evaluation studies. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
45. U. S. General Accounting Office (2002a). Drug courts: Better DOJ data collection and evaluation efforts needed to measure impact of drug court programs. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
46. U. S. General Accounting Office (2002b). Justice impact evaluations: One Byrne evaluation was rigorous; All reviewed violence against women office evaluations were problematic. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
47. U.S.GeneralAccountingOffice(2002c). Violence against women office: Problems with grant monitoring and concerns about evaluation studies. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
48. U. S. General Accounting Office (2003a). Justice outcome evaluations: Design and implementation of studies regiere more NIJ attention. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
49. U. S. General Accounting Office (2003b). Program evaluation: An evaluation culture and collaborative partnerships help build agency capacity. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
50. Wagenaar, A. (1999). Communities mobilizing for change on alcohol. Journal of Community Psychology 27(3), 315-326.
51. 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.
52. Weisburd, D. & Taxman, F. (2000). Developing a multicenter randomized trial in criminology: The case of HIDTA. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 16(3), 315-340.
53. Weisburd, D., Petrosino, A. & Mason, G. (1993). Design sensitivity in criminal justice experiments. In M. Tonry (Ed.) Crime and justice: A review of research (vol. 17). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
54. Weisburd, D., Lum, C. M. & Yang, S. M. (2002). When can we conclude that treatments or programs don't work? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 587, 31-48.
55. Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
56. Wholey, J. S. (1994). Assessing the feasibility and likely usefulness of evaluation. In J. S. Wholey, H. P. Harry & K. E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 15-39). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.