Criminology as an independent profession established itself just over a half century ago. An analysis of oral histories collected with seventeen leading scholars in criminology reveal how the profession has worked to establish institutional legitimacy over that time. Extending a thesis of boundary drawing (Gieryn, 1999) the present effort first briefly traces the field’s emancipation from its former intellectual home in sociology. Second, third, and fourth criminology has established a border with economics, public health, and biology while permitting “home disciplines” to continue to inform its formation. Fifth and sixth,it has distinguished itself internally from both Justice Studies and Law and Society. The field has worked to establish separation through crafting an interdisciplinary framing of its approach to the subject of crime that is influenced by but not dependent upon its more established peers. Criminology has made unique contributions to the development of methods and policy. While the emergent field has established a measure of separation from more established academic enterprises, several respondents expressed a lack of paradigmatic markers of theoretical and methodological consensus that carry potential professional costs if left unaddressed. Lessons can be drawn from the frustrations and promise of establishing multidisciplinary, policy-centric fields.

犯罪学作为一个独立的职业，已经建立了半个多世纪。对与十七位犯罪学领先学者收集的口述历史进行的分析揭示了该行业在这段时间内如何建立制度的合法性。在扩展边界图论的基础上（Gieryn，1999），本研究首先简要地追溯了该领域从其以前的社会学思想家中的解放。第二，第三和第四种犯罪学已与经济学，公共卫生和生物学建立了边界，同时允许“家庭学科”继续为其形成提供依据。第五和第六，它在内部上与司法研究和法律与社会区分开。该领域致力于通过建立跨学科框架来建立隔离机制，该框架对犯罪主题的影响受到但不依赖于其较成熟同伴的影响。犯罪学为方法和政策的发展做出了独特的贡献。虽然新兴领域已经建立了与较成熟的学术企业分离的措施，但一些受访者表示缺乏理论和方法共识的范式标记，如果不加以解决，它们将承担潜在的专业成本。可以从建立以政策为中心的多学科领域的挫折和希望中吸取教训。虽然新兴领域已经建立了与较成熟的学术企业分离的措施，但一些受访者表示缺乏理论和方法共识的范式标记，如果不加以解决，它们将承担潜在的专业成本。可以从建立以政策为中心的多学科领域的挫折和希望中吸取教训。虽然新兴领域已经建立了与较成熟的学术企业分离的措施，但一些受访者表示缺乏理论和方法共识的范式标记，如果不加以解决，它们将承担潜在的专业成本。可以从建立以政策为中心的多学科领域的挫折和希望中吸取教训。