Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:09 pm
Time: 10:09 pm
Results for research methods
4 results foundAuthor: Bjerk, David Title: How Much Can We Trust Causal Interpretations of Fixed-Effects Estimators in the Context of Criminality? Summary: Researchers are often interesting in estimating the causal effect of some treatment on individual criminality. For example, two recent relatively prominent papers have attempted to estimate the respective direct effects of marriage and gang participation on individual criminal activity. One difficulty to overcome is that the treatment is often largely the product of individual choice. This issue can cloud causal interpretations of correlations between the treatment and criminality since those choosing the treatment (e.g. marriage or gang membership) may have differed in their criminality from those who did not even in the absence of the treatment. To overcome this potential for selection bias, researchers have often used various forms of individual fixed-effects estimators. While such fixed-effects estimators may be an improvement on basic cross-sectional methods, they are still quite limited when it comes to uncovering a true causal effect of the treatment on individual criminality because they may fail to account for the possibility of dynamic selection. Using data from the NSLY97, this study shows that such dynamic selection can potentially be quite large when it comes to criminality, and may even be exacerbated when using more advanced fixed-effects methods such an Inverse Probabilitiy of Treatment Weighting. Therefore substantial care must be taken when it comes to interpreting the results arising from fixed-effects methods. Details: Ann Arbor, MI: National Poverty Center, 2009. 45p. Source: Internet Resource; National Poverty Center Working Paper Series; #09-14 Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117773 Keywords: CriminalityResearch MethodsTreatment Programs |
Author: Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice Title: Utah Cost of Crime 2012: Overview of Methodology Summary: This paper briefly describes Utah’s approach to creating a new management tool to maximize the money spent on criminal justice and provides August 2012 as the deadline for completing this round of analysis. Details: Salt Lake City, UT: Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, 2012. 1p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 22, 2012 at http://www.justice.utah.gov/Documents/CCJJ/Cost%20of%20Crime/Utah%20Cost%20o%20f%20Crime%202012%20-%20Overview.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.justice.utah.gov/Documents/CCJJ/Cost%20of%20Crime/Utah%20Cost%20o%20f%20Crime%202012%20-%20Overview.pdf Shelf Number: 126105 Keywords: Costs of Crime (Utah)Costs of Criminal Justice (Utah)Research Methods |
Author: Sarver, Christian M. Title: Utah Cost of Crime 2012: Methods for Reviewing Program Effectiveness (Systemic Review/Meta-Analysis) Summary: This paper describes the methodology used by researchers at the Utah Criminal Justice Center and the Commission on Criminal & Juvenile Justice to assess program effectiveness for its inclusion in the Utah's Cost Benefit Model, including sources of data and descriptions of statistical methods used. Details: Salt Lake City, UT: Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, 2012. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 22, 2012 at http://www.justice.utah.gov/Documents/CCJJ/Cost%20of%20Crime/Utah%20Cost%20of%20Crime%202012%20-%20Methods%20Review%20Benefits.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.justice.utah.gov/Documents/CCJJ/Cost%20of%20Crime/Utah%20Cost%20of%20Crime%202012%20-%20Methods%20Review%20Benefits.pdf Shelf Number: 126108 Keywords: Costs of Crime (Utah)Costs of Criminal Justice (Utah)Crime PreventionIntervention Programs (Utah)Research Methods |
Author: Baumer, Eric P. Title: Expanding the Scope of Research on Recent Crime Trends Summary: While there is a burgeoning research literature on crime trends, much of the extant research has adopted a relatively narrow approach, efforts across studies are highly variable, and the overall conclusions that can be drawn are ambiguous. In our judgment, one reason for this state of affairs is that the current data infrastructure that supports crime trends research is incomplete and scattered, yielding redundant efforts and highly inconsistent approaches. The primary purpose of this project was to enhance the data infrastructure by compiling in a centralized location the most commonly referenced datasets and measures. An ancillary objective was to illustrate the utility of the resulting data archive. We do so by considering three substantive research issues: (1) a uniform set of analyses across states, counties, and cities; (2) an assessment of the conditional effects of economic conditions on recent crime trends; and (3) an expanded analysis of the effects of key criminal justice attributes (e.g., the nature of policing, age- and crime-specific imprisonment rates) on recent crime trends that have not been considered extensively in prior research. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2012. 84p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 13, 2012 at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/240204.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/240204.pdf Shelf Number: 127208 Keywords: Crime TrendsResearch Methods |