Abstract
Objectives
Despite experiments being termed the “gold standard,” criminology has been slow to adopt experimentation as a methodology. The goal of this research note is to better understand the use of experiments in criminology and the potential barriers in implementing this methodology.
Methods
We conducted a systematic assessment of experiments in Criminology and Justice Quarterly by reviewing every article published since the inception of the journals and coding for numerous elements (i.e., field versus lab studies, research areas, outcomes, and funding sources).
Results
Despite a general increase, experiments make up only 2.8% (n = 44) of studies in Criminology and 3.1% (n = 31) of studies in Justice Quarterly.
Conclusions
While it is not always clear why experiments are not used more often, we explore the possible reasons for a lack of experimentation (i.e., a lack of mentoring, challenges to practitioner buy in, etc.) and areas for future research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
kappa level vary; a kappa value of 0.8 or above is generally agreed to be a strong relationship.
References
Abrahamse, A. F., Ebener, P. A., Greenwood, P. W., Fitzgerald, N., & Kosin, T. E. (1991). An experimental evaluation of the Phoenix repeat offender program. Justice Quarterly, 8(2), 141–168.
Ariel, B. (2012). Deterrence and moral persuasion effects on corporate tax compliance: findings from a randomized controlled trial. Criminology, 50, 27–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2011.00256.x.
Banks, D., & Gottfredson, D. (2004). Participation in drug treatment court and time to rearrest. Justice Quarterly, 21(3), 637–658. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820400095931.
Benett, S., Mazerolle, L., Antrobus, E., Eggins, E., & Piquero, A. (2018). Truancy intervention reduces crime: Results from a randomized field trial. Justice Quarterly, 35(2), 209–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2017.1313440.
Berman, J. (1976). The volunteer in parole program. Criminology, 13(1), 111–113.
Bickman, L., & Helwig, H. (1979). Bystander reporting of crime The Impact of Incentives. Criminology, 17, 283–300.
Birks, D., Townsley, M., & Stewart, A. (2012). Generative explanations of crime: using simulation to test criminological theory. Criminology, 50, 221–254.
Bleda, P. R., Bleda, S. E., & White, L. A. (1976). Bystander reactions to a petty crime. Criminology, 14(2), 287–290.
Bohm, R. M., Clark, L. J., & Aveni, A. F. (1990). The influence of knowledge on reasons for death penalty opinions: An experimental test. Justice Quarterly, 7(1), 175–188 1080/07418829000090521.
Boruch, R. F., Victor, T., & Cecil, J. S. (2000). Resolving ethical and legal problems in randomized experiments. Crime and Delinquency, 46(3), 330–353.
Braga, A. A., & Bond, B. J. (2008). Policing crime and disorder hot spots: A randomized controlled trial. Criminology, 46, 577–607.
Braga, A. A., Weisburd, D. L., Waring, E. J., Mazerolle, L. G., Spelman, W., & Gajewski, F. (1999). Problem-oriented policing in violent crime places: A randomized controlled experiment. Criminology, 37, 541–580. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1999.tb00496.x.
Braga, A. A., Welsh, B. C., Papachristos, A. V., Schnell, C., & Grossman, L. (2013). The growth of randomized experiments in policing: the vital few and the salience of mentoring. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 10(1), 1–28.
Chermak, S., McGarrell, E. F., & Weiss, A. (2001). Citizens' perceptions of aggressive traffic enforcement strategies. Justice Quarterly, 18(2), 365–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820100094941.
Clarke, R. V. G., & Cornish, D. B. (1972). The controlled trial in institutional research: paradigm or pitfall for penal evaluators? London: HM Stationery Office.
Davis, R. C., & Taylor, B. G. (1997). Proactive response to family violence: The results of randomized experiment. Criminology, 35(2), 307–334.
Deaton, A., & Cartwright, N. (2018). Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials. Social Science & Medicine, 210, 2–21.
DeJong, C., & St. George, S. (2018). Measuring journal prestige in criminal justice and criminology. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 29(2), 290–309.
Denver, M., Pickett, J. T., & Bushway, S. D. (2017). The language of stigmatization and the mark of violence: Experimental evidence on the social construction and use of criminal reocrd stigma. Criminology, 55, 664–690. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12145.
Dunford, F. W. (1990). System-initiated warrants for suspects of misdemeanor domestic assault: a pilot study crime and deviance. Justice Quarterly, 7(4), 631–653. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829000090791.
Dunford, F. W., Huizinga, D., & Elliott, D. S. (1990). The role of arrest in domestic assault: The Omaha police experiment. Criminology, 28(2), 183–206.
Duwe, G. (2012). Evaluating the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP): Results from a Randomized Experiment. Justice Quarterly, 29(3), 347–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2011.555414.
Esbensen, F. A., Peterson, D., Taylor, T., & Osgood, D. (2011). Results from a multi-site evaluation of the G.R.E.A.T. Program, Justice Quarterly, 29(1), 125–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2011.585995.
Erickson, P. G., & Goodstadt, M. S. (1979). Legal stigma for marijuana possession. Criminology, 17(2), 208–216.
Exum, M. L. (2002). The Application and robustness of the rational choice perspective in the study of intoxicated and angry intentions to aggress. Criminology, 40, 933–966. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2002.tb00978.
Fagan, J. A. (1990). Treatment and reintegration of violent juvenile offenders: Experimental results. Justice Quarterly, 7(2), 233–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829000090571.
Farrington, D. P. (1983). Randomized experiments on crime and justice. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice, vol. 4 (pp. 257–308). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Farrington, D. P. (2003). A short history of randomized experiments in criminology: a meager feast. Evaluation Review, 27(3), 218–227.
Farrington, D. P. (2008). Criminology as an experimental science. In C. Horne & M. J. Lovaglia (Eds.), Experiments in criminology and law: a research revolution (pp. 175–179). New York: Roman & Littlefield.
Farrington, D. P., & Welsh, B. C. (2005). Randomized experiments in criminology: what have we learned in the last two decades? Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 9–38.
Farrington, D. P., & Welsh, B. C. (2006). A half century of randomized experiments on crime and justice. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: a review of research, Vol. 34 (pp. 55–132). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Feder, L., & Dugan, L. (2004). A test of the efficacy of court-mandated counseling for domestic violence offenders: The Broward experiment. Justice Quarterly, 19(2), 343–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820200095271.
Fitzgerald, T. J. (1974). Contingency contracting with juvenile offenders. Criminology, 12(2), 241–248.
Garner, J. H., & Visher, C. A. (2003). The production of criminological experiments. Evaluation Review, 27(3), 316–335.
Graziano, L., Schuck, A., & Martin, C. (2010). Police misconduct, media coverage, and public perceptions of racial profiling: an experiment. Justice Quarterly, 27(1), 52–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820902763046.
Greenwood, P. W., & Turner, S. (1993a). Evaluation of the paint creek youth center: Residential program for serious delinquents. Criminology, 31(2), 263–280.
Greenwood, P., Turner, S., & RAND. (1993b). Private presentence reports for serious juvenile offenders: Implementation issues and impacts. Justice Quarterly, 10(2), 229–243.
Groff, E. R., Ratcliffe, J. H., Haberman, C. P., Sorg, E. T., Joyce, N. M., & Tayor, R. B. (2015). Does what police do at hot spots matter? The Philadelphia policing tactics experiment. Criminology, 53, 23–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12055.
Hedberg, E. C., Katz, C. M., & Choate, D. E. (2017). Body-worn cameras and citizen interactions with police officers: estimating plausible effects given varying compliance levels. Justice Quarterly, 34(4), 627–651. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2016.1198825.
Hoffman, P. B., Gottfredson, D. M., Wilkins, L. T., & Pasela, G. E. (1974). The operational use of an experience table. Criminology, 12(2), 214–228.
Johnson, D., & Kuhns, J. B. (2009). Striking out: race and support for police use of force. Justice Quarterly, 26(3), 592–623. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820802427825.
Johnson, D., Wilson, D.B, Maguire, E.R. & Lowrey Kinberg, B.V. (2017) Race and perceptions of police: experimental results on the impact of procedural (In)justice, Justice Quarterly, 34(7), 1184-1212, https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2017.1343862.
Klepper, S., & Nagin, D. (1989). The deterrent effect of perceived certainty and severity of punishment revisited. Criminology, 27(4), 721–746.
Koper, C. (1995). Just enough police presence: reducing crime and disorderly behavior by optimizing patrol time in crime hot spots. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 649–672.
Kvalseth, T. (1980). Seriousness of offenses an experimental study based on psychophysical scaling technique. Criminology, 18(2), 237–244.
Labriola, M., Rempel, M., & Davis, R. C. (2008). Do batterer programs reduce recidivism? Results from a randomized trial in the bronx. Justice Quarterly, 25(2), 252–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820802024945.
Lum, C., & Yang, S. (2005). Why do evaluation researchers in crime and justice choose non-experimental methods? Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1(2), 191–213.
Mackenzie, D. L., Wilson, D. B., & Kider, S. B. (2001). Effects of correctional boot camps on offending. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 126–143.
Maimon, D., Alper, M., Sobesto, B., & Cukier, M. (2014). Restrictive deterrent effects of a warning banner in an attacked computer system. Criminology, 52, 33–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12028.
Martin, S. E., & Sherman, L. W. (1988). Catching career criminals: proactive policing and selective apprehension. Justice Quarterly, 3(2), 171–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418828600088881.
Mazerolle, L. G., Kadleck, C., & Roehl, J. (1998). Controlling drug and disorder problems: The role of place managers. Criminology, 36, 371–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01252.x.
McCord, J. (1981). Longitudinal perspective on patterns of crime. Criminology, 19(2), 211–218.
McCord, J. (2003). Cures that harm: unanticipated outcomes of crime prevention programs. The Annals of the American Academy, 587, 16–30.
McGarrell, E. F., & Kroovand Hipple, N. (2007). Family group conferencing and re-offending among first-time juvenile offenders: The indianapolis experiment. Justice Quarterly, 24(2), 221–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820701294789.
McGloin, J. M., & Thomas, K. J. (2016). Incentives for collective deviance: group size and changes in perceived risk, cost, and reward. Criminology, 54, 459–486. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12111.
Mitchell, O., MacKenzie, D. L., Wilson, D. B. (2006). Incarceration-based drug treatment. In B.C. Welsh & D.P. Farrington, Preventing Crime: What works for children, offenders, victims and places. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-007-9040-2
Na, C., & Paternoster, R. (2012). Can self-control change substantially over time? Rethinking the relationship between self- and social control. Criminology, 50, 427–462.
Nagin, D. S., & Pogarsky, G. (2003). An experimental investigation of deterrence: Cheating, self-serving bias, and impulsivity. Criminology, 41(1), 167–193.
Nagin, D. S., & Sampson, R. J. (2019). The real gold standard: measuring counterfactual worlds that matter most to social science and policy. Annual Review of Criminology, 2, 123–145.
Ngo, F. T., Paternoster, R., Curran, J., & MacKenzie, D. L. (2011). Role-taking and recidivism: A test of differential social control theory. Justice Quarterly, 28(5), 667–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2010.528013.
Nix, J., Pickett, J. T., Wolfe, S. E., & Campbell, B. A. (2017). Demeanor, race, and police perceptions of procedural justice: Evidence from two randomized experiments. Justice Quarterly, 34(7), 1154–1183. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2017.1334808.
Paternoster, R., & Deise, J. (2011). A heavy thumb on the scale: The effect of victim impact evidence on capital decision making. Criminology, 49, 129–161.
Petrosino, A. J., Boruch, R. F., Farrington, D. P., Sherman, L. W., & Weisburd, D. (2003). Toward evidence-based criminology and criminal justice: systematic reviews, the Campbell collaboration, and the crime and justice group. International Journal of Comparative Criminology, 3, 42–61.
Pickett, J. T., Roche, S. P., & Pogarsky, G. (2018). Toward a bifurcated theory of emotional deterrence. Criminology, 56(1), 27–58.
Pogarsky, G. (2004). Projected offending and contemporaneous rule-violation: Implications for heterotypic continuity. Criminology, 42(1), 111–135.
Pogarsky, G., Roche, S. P., & Pickett, J. T. (2017). Heuristics and biases, rational choice, and sanction perceptions. Criminology, 55, 85–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12129.
Ratcliffe, J. H., Taniguichi, T., Groff, E. R., & Wood, J. D. (2011). The Philadelphia foot patrol experiment: A randomized controlled trial of police patrol effectiveness in violent crime hotspots. Criminology, 49, 795–831.
Roche, S., 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.
Rosenfeld, R., Deckard, M. J., & Blackburn, E. (2014). The effects of directed patrol and self-initiated enforcement on firearm violence: A randomized controlled study of hot spots policing. Criminology, 52, 428–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12043.
Sampson, R. J. (2010). Gold standard myths: observations on the experimental turn in quantitative criminology. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(4), 489–500.
Scheider, M. C. (2001). Deterrence and the base rate fallacy: An examination of perceived certainty. Justice Quarterly, 18(1), 63–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820100094821.
Schultz, P. W., & Tabanico, J. J. (2009). Criminal beware: a social norms perspective on posting public warning signs. Criminology, 47, 1201–1222.
Seron, C., Pereira, J., & Kovath, J. (2006). How citizens assess just punishment for police misconduct. Criminology, 44(4), 925–960.
Sherman, L. W., & Weisburd, D. (1995). General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime “hot spots”: A randomized, controlled trial. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 625–648.
Sherman, L. W., Schmidt, J. D., Rogan, D. P., Gartin, P. R., Cohn, E. J., Collins, D. J., & Bacich, A. R. (1991). From initial deterrence to long-term escalation: Short-term custody arrest for poverty ghetto domestic violence. Criminology, 29(4), 821–850.
Sherman, L. W., Rogan, D. P., Edwards, T., & Whipple, R. (1995). Deterrent effects of police raids on crack houses: A randomized, controlled experiment. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 755–782.
Skardhamar, T. (2010). Distinguishing facts and artifacts in group-based modeling. Criminology, 48, 295–320.
Sontheimer, H., & Goodstein, L. (1993). An evaluation of juvenile intensive aftercare probation: Aftercare versus system response effects. Justice Quarterly, 10(2), 197–227.
Sorensen, J. R. (2009). An assessment of the relative impact of criminal justice and criminology journals. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 505–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrim-jus.2009.07.012.
Sorensen, J. R., Snell, C. E., & Rodriguez, J. J. (2006). An assessment of criminal justice and criminology journal prestige. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 17, 297–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511250500336203.
Sorg, E. T., Wood, J. D., Groff, E. R., & Ratcliffe, J. H. (2014). Boundary adherence during place-based policing evaluations: a research note. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 51(3), 377–393.
Sorg, E. T., Wood, J. D., Groff, E. R., & Ratcliffe, J. H. (2017). Explaining dosage diffusion during hot spot patrols: An application of optimal foraging theory to police officer behavior. Justice Quarterly, 34(6), 1044–1068.
Taylor, B. G., Davis, R. C., & Maxwell, C. D. (2001). The effects of a group batterer treatment program: A randomized experiment in Brooklyn. Justice Quarterly, 18(1), 171–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820100094861.
Telep, C. W., Mitchell, R. J., & Weisburd, D. (2014). How Much time should the police spend at crime hot spots? Answers from a Police Agency directed randomized field trial in Sacramento, California. Justice Quarterly, 31(5), 905–933. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.710645.
Telep, C. W., Garner, J. H., & Visher, C. A. (2015). The production of criminological experiments revisited: the nature and extent of federal support for experimental designs, 2001–2013. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11(4), 541–563.
Thomas, K. J., Hamilton, B. C., & Loughran, T. A. (2018). Testing the transitivity of reported risk perceptions: Evidence of coherent arbitrariness. Criminology, 56(1), 59–86.
Tracy, P. E., & Fox, J. A. (1989). A field experiment on insurance fraud in auto body repair. Criminology, 27(3), 589–603.
Uggen, C. (2008). Thinking experimentally. In C. Horne & M. J. Lovaglia (Eds.), Experiments in criminology and law: a research revolution (pp. 181–187). New York: Roman & Littlefield.
Uggen, C., Vuolo, M., Lageson, S., Ruhland, E., & Whitham, K. H. (2014). The edge of stigma: An experimental audit of the effects of low-level criminal records on employment. Criminology, 52, 627–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12051.
Van Gelder, J. L., Luciano, E. C., Weulen Kranenbarg, M., & Hershfield, H. E. (2015). Friends with my future self: Longitudinal vividness intervention reduces delinquency. Criminology, 53, 158–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12064.
Waldo, G. P., Chiricos, T. G., & Dobrin, L. E. (1973). Community contact and inmate attitudes: An experimental assessment of work release. Criminology, 11(3), 345–381.
Wallace, D., White, M. D., Gaub, J. E., & Todak, N. (2018). Body-worn cameras as a potential source of de-policing: Testing for camera-induced passivity. Criminology, 56(3), 481–509.
Weisburd, D. (2003). Ethical practice and evaluation of interventions in crime and justice: the moral imperative for randomized trials. Evaluation Review, 27, 336–354.
Weisburd, D. (2005). Hot spots policing experiments and criminal justice research: Lessons from the field. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 599(1), 220–245.
Weisburd, D. (2010). Justifying the use of non-experimental methods and disqualifying the use of randomized controlled trials: challenging folklore in evaluation research in crime and justice. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 6(2), 209–227.
Weisburd, D., & Green, L. (1995). Policing drug hot spots: the Jersey City drug market analysis experiment. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 711–736.
Weisburd, D. & Hinkle, J. C. (2012). The importance of randomized experiments in evaluating crime prevention. The Oxford Handbook of Crime Prevention.
Weisburd, D., Lum, C. M., & Petrosino, A. (2001). Does research design affect study outcomes in criminal justice? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 50–70.
Weisburd, D., Lum, C. M., & Yang, S. M. (2003). When can we conclude that treatments or programs “don’t work”? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587(1), 31–48.
Weisburd, D., Morris, N. A., & Ready, J. (2008). Risk-focused policing at places: an experimental evaluation. Justice Quarterly, 25(1), 163–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820801954647.
Weisburd, D., Braga, A. A., Groff, E. R., & Wooditch, A. (2017). Can hot spots policing reduce crime in urban areas? an agent-based simulation. Criminology, 55, 137–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12131.
Welsh, B. C., Peel, M. E., Farrington, D. P., Elffers, H., & Braga, A. A. (2011). Research design influence on study outcomes in crime and justice: a partial replication with public area surveillance. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7(2), 183–198.
Willis, C. L., & Wells, R. H. (1988). The police and child abuse: An analysis of police decisions to report illegal behavior. Criminology, 26(4), 695–716.
Wilson, D. B., Mitchell, O., & MacKenzie, D. L. (2005). A systematic review of drug court effects on recidivism. Criminology and Public Policy, 2(4), 459–487.
Wood, M. T. (1979). Random assignment to treatment groups a strategy for judicial research. Criminology, 17(2), 230–241.
Young, D.W, Farrell, J.L., & Taxman, F.S. (2013) Impacts of juvenile probation training models on youth recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 30(6), 1068-1089, https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.673633.
Acknowledgments
We would like to express our deepest gratitude to Dr. David Weisburd for his valuable and constructive suggestions during development of this research and writing of this research note. His willingness to so generously give his time has been very much appreciated and undoubtedly improved the outcome of our work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix. Brief descriptions of articles included in study
Appendix. Brief descriptions of articles included in study
Author(s) (year) | Study | Research design | Sample | Outcome measure(s) | Study outcome(s) | Field/Lab | Funding source(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Juveniles | |||||||
Fagan (1990) | Tests the effectiveness of the Violent Juvenile Offender Program (VJO) in reducing recidivism of violent juvenile offenders. VJO provides enhanced supervision and intervention to develop social competence. | Juveniles were randomly assigned to treatment (VJO program) or control (mainstream juvenile correction programs) groups. | 227 juveniles (122 treatment, 105 control) | Time at risk (1 year post-release), time to first arrest for violent offense, and self-reported criminality and social outcomes | Evidence of treatment effect. Reductions in the number and severity of arrests for youth in the treatment group, as well as significantly greater time until re-arrest (13.5 months vs. 10 months) | Field | National Institute for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Dept. of Justice |
Greenwood and Turner (1993a) | Evaluation of the Paint Creek Youth Center (PCYC), which provides a comprehensive package of services and activities (case management, treatment, therapy, transition planning) for youth to reduce the likelihood of reoffending. | Youth were assigned to either treatment (placement in PCYC) or control (traditional training schools run by the Department of Youth Services) groups. | 150 juveniles (75 treatment, 75 control) | Official recidivism (re-arrest and reincarceration) and self-reported recidivism (delinquency and drug use) | No evidence of treatment effect. No significant difference between treatment and control, although those who completed the experimental program performed significantly better than those who were removed for disciplinary reasons. | Field | National Institute of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention |
Greenwood and Turner (1993b) | Tests the effect of alternative sentencing recommendation for serious juvenile offenders. Alternative sentencing involved client-specific plans (CSP) advocating for non-custodial sentences (group home, foster home, psychiatric facility). | Treatment group received CSP advocating for a non-custodial sentence, and the control group received standard sentencing channels (no CSP). | 243 youth (123 treatment, 120 control) | Case disposition (actual court disposition), subsequent behavior (1-year post-disposition status) | Evidence of treatment effect. CSP reduced sentence length and use of custodial sentences for youth, and that many experimental subjects performed satisfactorily in less restrictive settings | Field | Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention |
McCord (1981) | Tests the potential value of identifying recidivism prospectively Uses data from the experimental Cambridge-Sommerville Youth Study. | Authors identified and followed up with youth who had been convicted of crimes as an adult. Treatment (academic tutoring, counseling, medical and psychiatric attention, community programs) and control (no services, only regular reporting) | 208 men (111 treatment, 97 control) | Recidivism | Evidence of treatment effect. The discriminant analysis was able to correctly identify 63% of the 51 recidivists on the basis of age at first conviction and type of crime for which they were first convicted and 70% of the desistors. | Field | National Institute of Mental Health |
McGarrell and Kroovand Hipple (2007) | The Indianapolis Experiment examines the effect of restorative justice processes and Family Group Conferences (FGC) on reoffending. | Young first-time offenders were randomly assigned to FGC (treatment group) or other court diversion programs (control group). | 782 youth (400 treatment, 382 control) | Recidivism: re-arrest, time to failure (over a period of 24 months) | Evidence of treatment effect. Assignment to FGC results in a significantly longer time until failure. Participation in FGC reduces incidence of reoffending. | Field | Three private foundations, Indiana Criminal Justice Institute, DOJ, OJJDP |
McGloin and Thomas (2016) | Tests the theoretical assumption that the presence of others shifts the decision-making about engaging or not in deviant/risky behavior | Vignette asking students to make a decision to engage or not in a deviant act (i.e., destruction of property or theft) based on hypothetical scenarios that manipulated the size of the group involved. | 659 university students | Anticipated experience of rewards, anticipated experience of informal social costs, anticipated sanction risk | Partial evidence of treatment effect As the number of people engaged in deviant act increases, the likelihood that anticipating rewards would increase and the perceived risk of formal sanction decreased. No support found for anticipated experience of informal social costs. | Lab | Not specified |
Van Gelder, Luciano, Weulen Kranenbarg, and Hershfield (2015) | Tests whether instilling a greater sense of vividness of the future motivates people to act in a more future-oriented way and reduces their delinquent involvement | Two schools were randomly allocated as treatment and control conditions. The treatment group was “befriended” by a realistic version of their older, future self (quasi-experimental design). Students in the control group befriended a realistic version of their present self. Both groups were asked to respond to messages from future/present self over 7 days. | 133 high school students (students from one H.S. were assigned to treatment and students second H.S. to the control condition) | Delinquent behavior (theft, property damage, use of violence, and truancy) | Evidence of treatment effect. Individuals with a more vivid image of their future self-reported less engagement in delinquent and antisocial activities. Those who befriended the future self-reported less delinquent behavior than those who befriended their present self. | Field | Not specified |
School-based | |||||||
Bennett, Mazerolle, Antrobus, Eggins and Piquero (2018) | Evaluates the effects of a truancy intervention—Ability School Engagement Program (ASEP)—on offending. The program aimed to actively engage parents and their truant children in a group conference. | Schools were allocated to treatment or control. The treatment group participated in ASEP conferences. Control group schools continued implementing truancy laws as usual. | 102 students (51 treatment, 51 control) | Offending (arrests, cautions, and warrants) | Evidence of treatment effect Youth in the control group exhibited an increase in official offending while experimental youth did not. | Field | Australian Research Council Laureate Fellowship |
Esbensen, Peterson, Taylor, and Osgood (2011) | Examines the effects of the Gang Resistance Education and Training (GREAT) program on youth gang membership. | Classrooms in each of the participating schools were assigned to receive GREAT (treatment condition) or not (control condition). Students were surveyed before the experiment, after the experiment, and 1 year later. | 195 classrooms (102 treatment, 93 control), including 3820 students | Gang membership, violent offending, attitudes about the police and teachers (all self-reported) | Partial evidence of treatment effect GREAT students were less likely to be involved in gangs and had more positive opinions about police than control. No significant program effects were identified in violent offending. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Community-based | |||||||
Bleda, Bleda, and White (1976) | Examines the effects of the gender of a witness, wrongdoer, and authority figure on bystander reactions to a simulated crime. | Students were randomly assigned to experimental conditions: one with female confederates and other with male confederates | 144 undergraduate students (72 treatment, 72 control) | Spontaneous reporting of petty crime, corroborate crime in writing | Evidence of treatment effect Females bystanders report more often than males, female wrongdoers were reported more often than males, and witnesses refused to confirm the crime in writing in the presence of a male rather than a female. | Lab | Not specified |
Mazerolle, Kadleck, and Roehl (1998) | Evaluates the role of place managers in reducing disorder problems, drug problems, and incivility on street blocks Place managers are people who work or live near problem places and have responsibility to the street block. | Street blocks were randomly allocated to be patrolled by the Beat Health Unit (treatment) or regular police patrol (control). The Beat Health Unit is a civil remedy program through which the police build healthy relationships with residents and place managers. | 100 street blocks (50 treatment, 50 control) | Males selling drugs, civil behavior, disorder, | Evidence of treatment effect The street blocks assigned to the Beat Health program showed decreases in signs of disorder, males selling drugs, and increases of civil behavior in public places. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Schultz and Tabanico (2009) | Examines the effect of posting Neighborhood Watch signs on perceptions of crime and fear of crime Includes three studies | In each study, participants viewed a virtual neighborhood. Each study had separate manipulations. Study 1 manipulated the type of Neighborhood Watch sign (no sign, generic sign, high crime, low crime). Study 2 manipulated neighborhood SES (low, middle, high) and presence of Neighborhood Watch sign (no sign, generic sign). Study 3 manipulated neighborhood SES (low, high) and type of Neighborhood Watch sign (new, aged, defaced, no sign). | Study 1: 179 students Study 2: 229 community residents Study 3: 360 university students | Perceptions of the community, home value, fear of crime, worry about victimization | Evidence of treatment effect All experiments consistently found the potential for publicly posted Neighborhood Watch signs to produce unintended consequences such as increased fear of crime and worry about victimization. The outcomes are influenced by the information printed on the sign and by an interaction between the sign and the neighborhood context in which they are posted. | Lab | Department of Justice |
Theory testing | |||||||
Ariel (2012) | Tests the effect of deterrence and moral persuasion on the tax-reporting behavior of corporations in Israel | Two experimental groups received tax letters, one conveying a deterrent message and the other a moral persuasion message. The control group did not receive any letters from the tax authority. | 4395 corporations (731 deterrence; 732 moral persuasion; 2932 control) | Gross sales, Tax payments, Tax deductions | No evidence of treatment effect Neither the deterrence nor moral persuasion approach produced statistically significant results for greater tax compliance. | Lab | Not Specified |
Birks, Townsley, and Stewart (2012) | Tests theoretical propositions of environmental criminology (routine activity, rational choice, and crime pattern) and its effects on patterns of offending (hot spots, repeat victimization, and the journey to crime curve) | Computerized simulation models of residential burglary were used to produce an explanatory model of offending behavior. Each model has an experimental and control condition based on the three theories of interest. | 8 models, each run until 1000 crimes had occurred. | Spatial clustering of crime (hot spots) Repeat victimization The journey to crime curve | Evidence of treatment effect The simulation suggests that with respect to burglaries, routine activity theory and awareness space mechanisms have greater impact on the patterns of spatial clustering, repeat victimization and the journey to crime curve. | Lab | Not Specified |
Denver, Pickett, and Bushway (2017) | Two part study Study 1 tests the impact of language/labeling on the stigma of a criminal history. Study 2 examines the relationship between a criminal record and subsequent employment opportunities | Study 1: Participants were surveyed about their perceptions of recidivism risk using two versions of a survey: one version used crime-first labels (ex: “convicted criminal”), and the other used person-first labels (“person convicted of a crime”). Study 2: Participants were surveyed using a vignette asking the participant to make a decision about hiring a person who had been in prison. Conditions varied the type of job, the type of conviction, and how long ago the applicant was released. | Study 1: 996 participants. Study 2: 1540 participants | Study 1: Public perceptions of recidivism risk. Study 2: Public support for re-integrating persons with criminal records | Evidence of treatment effect Study 1: Crime-first vs. people-first language and labels increase public perception of recidivism, but only in cases of violent conviction. There was no evidence of this effect for nonviolent drug or property conviction. Study 2: Applicants with violent convictions are less likely to be hired than are nonviolent offenders and are also more likely to be denied a job in the healthcare industry (vs. construction or retail) and when release from prison was more recent. | Lab | National Institute of Child Health and Human Development |
Exum (2002) | Tests the effects of alcohol and anger on violent decision-making using a rational choice perspective (costs and benefits) | Experimental and control conditions manipulated the presence of alcohol or no alcohol, and anger or no anger. Participants read scenarios and completed questionnaires measuring aggressive intentions and perceived consequences of violence. | 84 male university students of legal drinking age | Levels of anger, levels of aggression (hitting another person), costs and benefits of aggression | No evidence of treatment effect Neither alcohol nor anger had a statistically significant effect on aggressive/violent decision-making. | Lab | National Institute of Justice and National Consortium of Violence Research |
Hindelang (1973) | Tests the idea that individuals who attribute causality to forces outside their locus of control and will experience less arousal of guilt when they transgress a norm than will individuals who attribute causality to their own efforts | After an initial screener, participants were randomly assigned to the experimental conditions and were able to choose the levels of shock they would administer to the learner while the control used a programmed schedule of shocks. | 321 students took the initial test and 60 who opposed to the use of shocks were selected for experimentation | Perception of freedom of manipulation Guilt arousal | No evidence of treatment effect The results do not support the hypothesis that individuals who perceive themselves as responsible for outcomes experience different amount of guilt form individuals who perceive themselves as not responsible for outcomes. | Lab | Not specified |
Klepper and Nagin (1989) | Tests deterrence theory elements (perceived risk of detection and severity of punishment) within the domain of tax noncompliance | Participants were surveyed using a vignette asking about their perceptions of sanction risk and their intentions to engage in criminal behavior. In the scenarios, the circumstances of the opportunity for lawbreaking were experimentally manipulated. | 163 master’s students | Tax compliance or noncompliance | Evidence of treatment effect Perceptions of the threat of detection and the fear of criminal prosecution play an important role in deterring tax noncompliance. Severity of punishment plays an important role in deterring law breaking. | Lab | National Science Foundation and Internal Revenue Service |
Maimon, Alper, Sobesto, and Cukier (2014) | Tests the effect of security means (warning banner) to deter unauthorized access to computer systems or reduce the duration of a trespassing incident. Includes two studies | Study 1: computers were deployed in a university for two months. Trespassers who accessed the target computer were randomly assigned to either a warning banner (treatment) or no warning banner (control) condition. Study 2: Computers were deployed for 6 months with multiple manipulations—warning banner (present or absent), bandwidth capacity (slow or fast), and RAM size (large or small). | Study 1: 86 computers (42 treatment, 44 control) Study 2: 502 computers (259 treatment, 243 control) | Study 1: immediate incident cessation (termination of a trespassing incident after a period of 5 s from its start). Incident duration (time between the beginning and the end of a trespassing incident) Study 2: same as experiment 1. | Partial evidence of treatment effect Study 1: While warning banner does not lead to immediate termination trespassing incident, the warning banner reduces the duration of system trespassing incidents on the attacked system. Study 2: confirms findings from Study 1 but found mixed support for the interactive effect between warning and bandwidth capacity, and no support for computer RAM size | Field | National Institute for Standards and Technology, National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism in the University of Maryland, and National Science Foundation |
Na and Paternoster (2012) | This study tests the long-term stability thesis of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) general theory of crime and examines the relationship between self-control and social control over time. | Parents in the treatment group participated in child-rearing and child management training to improve self-discipline and organization in their children. Parents in the control group did not receive the training. | 399 individuals and their families | Self-control measured by school teachers Social control measured by parental attachment through interviews with parents or caregivers. | Evidence of treatment effect Individuals in the treatment group had greater levels of self-control than the control group. Study contradicts the long-term stability thesis of G&H’s 1990 study | Field | Not specified |
Nagin, and Pogarsky (2003) | Tests deterrence theory elements (certainty of apprehension and severity of punishment) through an experiment in which participants could cheat in order to claim a cash bonus | This is a 2 × 3 experimental design in which participants were randomly assigned to one of four certainty/severity combinations (varying low and high certainly of detection, low and high severity of a penalty for cheating). | 256 university students | Cheating (yes or no) | Partial evidence of treatment effect The prevalence of cheating significantly decreased when detection was more certain, but not when the penalty was more severe. Cheating probability is dependent on present orientation and self-serving bias. | Lab | Not specified |
Ngo, Paternoster, Curran, and MacKenzie (2011) | Tests the elements of differential social control (DSC) theory through role-taking variables, role-commitment variables, and structural location variables as predictors of recidivism using data from the Maryland Boot Camp Experiment | Participants were randomly assigned to either a boot-camp correctional program or a non-military correctional program. Participants were surveyed prior to assignment and again prior to release from either facility. | 203 adult male offenders (91 in boot-camp condition, 112 in control) | Recidivism data from the Maryland Department of Public Safety | Partial evidence of treatment effect Role-taking is partially related to recidivism. Structural location is partially related to recidivism (three of the six elements of structural location were significant predictors). Role-commitment variables were not significantly related to recidivism. | Field | Department of Justice |
Pickett, Roche, and Pogarsky (2018) | Tests deterrence theory elements, specifically perceived sanction risk and fear of apprehension | Respondents were presented with experimental vignettes describing specific criminal opportunities in which situational characteristics that influence objective apprehension risk were randomized. A total of 3 vignettes with 2–3 manipulations per vignette were used. | 965 adults | Situational perceived apprehension risk Generalized fear of apprehension and Generalized Criminal propensity | Evidence of treatment effect Perceived apprehension risk is positively related to fear of apprehension, at a general level and within specific criminal opportunities. Fear is the strongest predictor of situational intentions to offend, stronger even than prior offending or self-control. | Lab | Albany Faculty Research Awards Program and Hindelang Criminal Justice Research Center at the University of Albany, SUNY |
Pogarsky (2004) | Examines the relationship between actual and projected offending behavior (drunk driving and cheating) | This study uses both a laboratory experiment (quiz) and a vignette survey. Quiz had two manipulations: certainty of apprehension (high and low) and severity of penalty (high and low). Survey had a vignette with drunk driving punishment manipulation (1-month or 12-month suspension) | 209 university students | Projected likelihood of driving while intoxicated | Evidence of treatment effect Participants who cheated during the experiment were more likely to drive drunk than those who did not cheat. Additionally, certainty of punishment had a stronger deterrent effect than did severity of punishment. | Lab | National Consortium on Violence Research (NCOVR) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) |
Pogarsky, Roche, and Pickett (2017) | Uses rational choice theory to study group differences in sanction risk perceptions for different types of offenses (drunk driving, speeding, texting while driving, burglary, robbery) | Five experiments were embedded in two nationwide surveys with a randomized post-test only. | Survey 1: 1004 adult respondents Survey 2: 623 adult respondents | Perceptions of risk of arrest | Evidence of treatment effect Evidence suggests that perception of risk of arrest varies depending on any given situation. Evidence was found that exposure to emotional information causes changes in perception of formal sanction risk. | Lab | Albany Faculty Research Awards Program and Hindelang Criminal Justice Research Center at the University of Albany, SUNY |
Scheider (2001) | Tests certainty-based deterrence assumption that a strong positive relationship exists between the objective properties of punishment certainty and individuals’ perceptions of these properties | Experimental group received information about the actual probabilities of experiencing various negative outcomes for criminal behaviors; control group did not receive information. Participants were asked to judge the certainty of negative outcomes for themselves if they were going to engage in criminal behavior. | 697 university students | Perceptions of certainty (participants were asked to consider the likelihood that the consequences would happen to them from six different categories) | Partial evidence of treatment effect Providing information on base rates influences an individual estimate of personal certainty five out of 15 times. Base rate did not influence estimates of personal certainty for certain offenses (cocaine use, drunk driving, fraud and vandalism) | Lab | Not specified |
Skardhamar (2010) | Examines the validity of the semi-parametric group-based modeling (SPGM) suitability to test for the existence of distinct latent groups, as those presented by trajectory theories of offending | Ten different simulations were run, each with 100 trials and with different effects of heterogeneity. | 1000 individuals | Distinctness of latent groups that have different behavioral trajectories; groups have different characteristics or profiles (risk factors); groups react different to certain events. | No evidence of treatment effect. Results from simulations show that SPGM is an unreliable method to test for the existence of distinct sub-populations in a sample. A more refined model is needed in order to make definite conclusions on taxonomic versus general theories of offending. | Lab | Norwegian Research Council |
Thomas, Hamilton, and Loughran (2018) | Examines the stability of risk perceptions (perceptual deterrence) across three experimental studies, which specifically vary informative and non-informative anchors and question order | Study 1: Informative anchor study. Participants were asked to appraise risk of arrest in hypothetical crime, with risk manipulated as 71% (high anchor), 32% (low anchor), or not specified (no anchor). Study 2: Non-informative anchor study. Participants were surveyed asked to assess the risk of contracting a sexually transmitted infection, with risk manipulated as 71% (high anchor), 32% (low anchor), or not specified (no anchor). Study 3: Order of Survey Item Study. Participants were asked to appraise the risk of arrest for various crimes, with the crime presented first manipulated (marijuana first, homicide first, shoplifting first). | Study 1: 155 undergraduates (54 low anchor, 51 high anchor, 50 no anchor). Study 2: 158 undergraduates (51 high anchor, 51 low anchor, 56 no anchor). Study 3: 156 undergraduates (51 marijuana first, 54 homicide first, 51 shoplifting first) | Stability of individuals’ risk perceptions of arrest across the three presentation modes | Evidence of treatment effect While the relative ranking of risk of arrest of different crimes remains fairly stable across individuals, the absolute value of an appraised risk is subject to anchoring and framing effects. Study 1: Participants in the high-anchor group reported higher perceived likelihood of arrest for various types of crimes, compared to other conditions. Study 2: Participants in the high-anchor group reported higher perceived likelihood of arrest for various types of crimes, compared the other conditions. Study 3: Item order led to differences in perceived risk of arrest for four of the seven crimes, with the first items presented gravitating toward moderate risk. | Lab | Not Specified |
Courts | |||||||
Abrahamse, Ebener, Greenwood, Fitzgerald, and Kosin (1991) | Evaluates the effects of enhanced investigation of repeat offenders post-arrest through the Repeat Offender Program (ROP) | Subjects were randomly allocated to the ROP (experimental condition) or standard police investigation procedures (control condition) | 450 offenders (257 treatment, 233 control) | Conviction rates; prison sentence length | Partial evidence of treatment effect Likelihood of prison incarceration and length of sentence increased with treatment. However, there was no change in conviction rates. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Banks and Gottfredson (2004) | Evaluates the effects of the Baltimore Drug Treatment Court (BDTC) against standard court procedures. BDTC includes supervision, drug treatment, and status hearings | Circuit Court cases were assigned to BDTC or a control group at a 1:1 randomization ratio, while District Court cases were assigned to BDTC or a control group at a 2:1 ratio. | 235 nonviolent felony offenders (139 treatment; 96 control) | Time until re-arrest (survival analyses) | Evidence of treatment effect Drug court participants showed longer time until re-arrest and reduced the risk of re-arrest for a drug crime. | Field | Not specified |
Bohm, Clark, and Aveni (1990) | Tests the effects of a course on the death penalty in America on students’ opinions on the death penalty | Students in the death penalty course (treatment condition) and students in another course offered at the same time (control condition) were surveyed about the death penalty before and after the course. | 71 undergraduate students (44 treatment, 27 control) | Support for or opposition to the death penalty | No evidence of a treatment effect Participation in death penalty class did not significantly affect five of six reasons for opinions regarding the death penalty. | Lab | Not specified |
Erickson, and Goodstadt (1979) | Tests employers’ receptivity to job applicants with a criminal history involving marijuana charges | Researchers posing as job applicants were randomly assigned to the following criminal history conditions: convicted and fined for marijuana possession, absolute discharge for marijuana possession, or no criminal record. | 120 employers with job openings (group sizes in each condition not specified) | The employer’s response when the potential applicant asked if it would be worthwhile for him to apply. | Evidence of treatment effect The more serious an applicant’s criminal history, the less receptive employers were to his application. | Field | Not specified |
Feder and Dugan (2002) | Examines the effects of the Duluth Model—a batterers’ intervention program—on defendants charged with domestic violence (Broward Experiment) | Defendants were randomly assigned to either the treatment condition (1 year of probation and counseling) or the control condition (1 year of probation only). | 404 defendants charged with domestic violence (230 treatment, 174 control) | Defendants’ attitudes toward domestic violence, Victim’s attitudes toward domestic violence, re-arrest | No evidence of treatment effect No significant differences found in their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors regarding domestic violence. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Labriola, Rempel, and Davis (2008) | Examines the effects of batterer intervention programs on domestic violence recidivism. Intervention programs followed either the Domestic Violence Accountability Program (DVAP) or the Fordham Tremont model. Both programs included education and counseling | Using a 2 × 2 factorial design, offenders were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: (1) batterer education/ counseling program and monthly judicial monitoring; (2) batterer education/ counseling program and graduated monitoring; (3) monthly monitoring only; (4) graduated monitoring only. | 420 convicted misdemeanor domestic violence offenders (102 in condition 1, 100 in condition 2, 109 in condition 3, 109 in condition 4) | Official reports of re-arrest, victim reports of re-abuse | No evidence of treatment effect Neither the batterer program nor type of monitoring had a significant effect on re-arrest or victim satisfaction. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Paternoster and Deise (2011) | Examines the effects of victim impact statements on jurors’ feelings and emotions and their inclination to impose the death penalty | Participants were given a summary of a capital murder case and a video of the testimony. One condition included a victim impact statement, while the other did not. After watching the video, participants were asked whether they would impose the death penalty or not. | 135 “death-qualified” adults selected from a juror registration list (73 in the victim impact statement condition, 62 in the control condition) | Participants’ decision to impose the death penalty or not as well as their emotions after watching the video testimony | Evidence of treatment effect Participant who saw the victim impact statement were more likely to impose the death penalty. They also felt more hostile, upset, ashamed, angry, and vengeful than did control group participants. | Lab | Not specified |
Uggen, Vuolo, Lageson, Ruhland, and Whitham (2014) | Examines the relationship between a job applicant’s criminal history and its stigmatizing effects on employment | Two black men and two white men were paired by race and used fictitious identities to apply to jobs. One from each pair would claim an arrest for disorderly conduct with no conviction (treatment group), while the other would claim no criminal record (control group), and both would apply to the same positions. | 598 applicants to 299 employers (1 treatment and 1 control applicant for each) | Whether or not a potential employer called the applicant for an interview or job offer | Evidence of treatment effect White applicants with no history of arrest received the most calls for interviews. Within each racial group, those without a criminal record were 4% more likely to be called than those with a prior arrest. Black applicants received fewer calls than did white applicants. | Field | National Institute of Justice/JEHT Foundation |
Wood (1979) | Evaluates the Special Adjudication for Enforcement (SAFE) project, aimed at improving traffic safety through more efficient court adjudication, counseling for drunk driving, and public education. This study specifically evaluated the fidelity of the experimental design and attitudes of the individuals involved (i.e., court personnel and defendants) | Random assignment entered the program at three stages: (1) assignment to SAFE program, court trial, or bail forfeit condition; (2) assignment to the predesigned referral portion or magistrate decided referral; and (3) assignment to treatment within the experimental and control design at each decision point. | 85% of cases entered SAFE program, 10% went to court trial, 5% went to bail forfeit. Within SAFE, 1/3 received predesigned referral and 2/3 received magistrate referral. | Composition of treatment groups (based on defendant characteristics), defendant’s reactions, personnel reactions | Evidence of treatment effect This program was an effective experiment in a judicial setting. The intended distribution of cases to experimental and control groups was achieved. Personal characteristics of offenders were balanced across groups. Defendants reacted favorably to experience, personnel felt process was fair and endorsed program. | Field | Department of Transportation |
Corrections | |||||||
Berman (1976) | Evaluates the effects of volunteer lawyers spending time with parolees compared to standard parole supervision. Volunteer lawyers were not given any specific instructions about how to spend time with parolees, other than that they could not represent those parolees in court | Parolees were randomly assigned to the volunteer program or to normal parole supervision. Parolees were interviewed before beginning parole and again after 9 months, and official data was also collected from the parole office. | 32 parolees | Recidivism rates, employment rates, parolees’ perceptions | Partial evidence of treatment effect Treatment participants felt better about society’s concern for them. No evidence of treatment effects in recidivism or employment outcomes. | Field | Not specified |
Duwe (2012) | Tested the effects of the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP), which sought to increase offenders’ access to community services through enhanced case management collaboration | Offenders scheduled for release from prison were randomly allocated to either treatment (MCORP) or control (usual reentry) in a 2:1 ratio. | 269 offenders transitioning from prison to the community (175 treatment, 94 control) | Recidivism, employment, participation in community programming, vocational training, committed relationship, housing stability, social support, income support, debts, community crime rate | Partial evidence of treatment effect Participants in the treatment condition showed higher rates of employment, lower rates of homelessness, wider social support networks, increased involvement in community programming, and lower rates of reoffending. But treatment participants were more likely to have debts. There was no effect on community crime rates. | Field | Minnesota Department of Corrections |
Fitzgerald (1974) | Examines the effects of reinforcement strategies on juvenile probationers’ incentive to work off their fines | Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups: (1) probation time reduced as a reward for working, (2) activities and field trips offered as a reward for working, (3) probation time reduced and activities offered as a reward for working, and (4) probation as usual with no contingent rewards. | 20 male juveniles on probation | Time spent working | Evidence of treatment effect Participants offered both time off their probation term and activities worked the most hours among the four groups. Those in the activity-only group worked more hours than those in the time-off-only group, and all three groups worked more hours than the group with no contingent rewards. | Field | Not specified |
Hoffman, Gottfredson, Wilkins, and Pasela (1974) | Examines the effects of experience tables and response prompt forms on parole board members’ clinical risk assessments and parole decisions | Parolees were assigned to one of four groups. Group A: parole board members were provided with both an experience table and response form provided to guide their assessments. Group B: parole board members were provided with a response form but no experience table. Group C (control): neither experience table nor response form was provided. Group D (added late): parole board members were provided with an experience table but no response form. | 2181 adult male parolees (575 in Group A; 477 in Group B; 956 in Group C, 173 in Group D) | Parole board members’ clinical case estimates and ultimate parole decisions | Partial evidence of treatment effect Clinical assessments were closer to statistical estimates when an experience table was provided. Response forms had a similar effect to a lesser degree. However, the presence of an experience table did not affect ultimate parole decision. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Sontheimer and Goodstein (1993) | Evaluates the effects of intensive aftercare probation for juveniles. Intensive Aftercare Probation (IAP) officers have a small caseload, contact with juvenile and his family during placement, and increased contact while in the community | Eligible subjects were randomly assigned to either IAP (treatment group) or traditional aftercare probation (control group). | 90 male juvenile offenders (44 treatment group, 46 control group) | Recidivism measured as re-arrests for any criminal offense (official records) | Partial evidence of treatment effect Participants in the treatment group showed lower frequency of arrest but no difference in arrest incidence (measured dichotomously). | Field | Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency |
Taylor, Davis, and Maxwell (2001) | Examines the effect of the Victim Services’ Alternatives to Violence batterer intervention program on recidivism | Subjects were randomly allocated to a 40-h batterer treatment program (treatment group) or 40 h of community service (control group). | 376 adult males convicted of domestic violence | Recidivism, as measured by official police records and by victim surveys | Evidence of treatment effect Participants in the treatment group showed lower levels of recidivism, compared to control. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Waldo, Chiricos, and Dobrin (1973) | Examines the effects of community contact through work release on changes in inmates’ attitudes | Inmates were randomly assigned to a work release group (treatment group) or not (control group). Both groups were surveyed before work release began (pre-test) and again at the end of their prison sentence (post-test). | 132 inmates (87 work release, 45 control) | Inmate perceptions of legitimate opportunity, achievement motivation, legal self-concept, self-esteem, focal concerns | No evidence of treatment effect There were no significant differences between treatment and control groups on most scales. Treatment group actually showed lower levels of self-esteem, compared to control. | Field | Ford Foundation |
Young, Farrell, and Taxman (2013) | Evaluates the effects of Juvenile Assessment, Referral, Treatment Planning, and Placement (JARPP) training for case managers on juvenile recidivism | Agency offices were block randomized into study condition: 4 offices received enhanced JARPP training with peer coaches, 4 offices received standard JARPP training without peer coaches, 4 offices that received no JARPP training (control). Three cohorts of youth were tracked: Baseline (cases opened within 4 months prior to training), Cohort 1 (cases opened within 1 month of training) and Cohort 2 (cases opened 6–10 months after training) | 2237 juveniles (773 Baseline, 789 Cohort 1, 719 Cohort 2) | Delinquency at 6-month and 12-month follow-up measured through re-referral to the agency, detention, adjudication as delinquent, and surveillance-oriented placement | Evidence of treatment effect JARPP training with peer coaches reduced re-referrals and surveillance-oriented placement. There was no effects evidence on detention or adjudication outcomes. | Field | National Institute on Drug Abuse |
Police | |||||||
Bickman and Helwig (1979) | Examines the effects of incentive reporting and anonymity on bystander reporting of a crime | Survey used four conditions varying reward for and anonymity of reporting shoplifting (reward v. no reward; anonymity v. no anonymity). Then, a staged shoplifting scenario occurred for the shopper to witness. Researchers recorded whether subjects reported the incident or not and asked additional questions about the decision. | 120 store shoppers | Whether or not surveyed participant reported confederate shoplifter | No evidence of treatment effect Neither of these variables affected the reporting of a staged shoplifting. | Field | National Science Foundation |
Braga and Bond (2008) | Tests the effects of problem-oriented policing strategies against standard patrol | Hot spots were matched into 17 pairs, and then one from each pair was randomly assigned to treatment or control conditions. | 34 total hot spots (17 treatment, 17 control) | Calls for service, systematic observation of disorder | Evidence of treatment effect Both calls for service and observed disorders were reduced in the treatment areas. | Field | Bureau of Justice Assistance |
Braga et al. (1999) | Tests the effects of problem-oriented policing strategies against standard patrol | Hot spots were matched into 12 pairs, and then one from each pair was randomly assigned to treatment or control conditions | 24 total hot spots (12 treatment, 12 control) | Criminal incidents, calls for service, observations of disorder | Evidence of treatment effect Criminal incidents, calls for service, and observations of disorder were reduced in treatment hot spots, compared to control. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Chermak, McGarrell, and Weiss (2001) | Examines public support for aggressive traffic enforcement across three conditions | Experimental areas were selected because of their high crime rate. One condition—the East Target Area—used a general deterrence strategy of increased police presence. Another condition—the North Target Area—used a specific deterrence strategy of vehicle and pedestrian stops targeting high-risk offenders. A third condition used standard police patrol as usual. Researchers surveyed civilians prior to the intervention and again afterward. | 6 police beats (2 contiguous beats in each condition). 420 civilian interviews (151 in general deterrence condition, 138 in specific deterrence condition, 131 in control condition) | Public support for police, public perceptions of crime and quality of life | Evidence of treatment effect Support for aggressive patrol increased in the East Target Area. Citizens living in the East Target Area also showed higher levels of support for the police. The North Target Area also showed favorable effects but generally did not reach significance. There were no significant differences in perception of crime or quality of life among the three groups. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Davis and Taylor (1997) | Reports on a joint law enforcement-social services approach to reduce the incidence of repeat domestic violence | The research design randomly assigned households reporting domestic incidents to receive or not receive a follow-up to the initial patrol response. In addition, housing projects were randomly assigned to receive or not receive public education about domestic violence. | 432 total (233 home visits, 199 no visit) 64 housing project (32 treatment, 32 control) | Victim self-report of violence, Official police reports of violence, Awareness and use of family violence services | Partial evidence of treatment effect Neither treatment produced a reduction in violence. Households in projects that had received public education and households that received the follow-up visits were both more likely to report new violence to the police than households that did not receive the treatments. | Field | Not specified |
Dunford (1990) | Tests the effects of different police action in domestic assault cases involving missing subjects | Suspects were assigned to one of two options: warrant or no-warrant disposition. | 247 interactions total (111 warrant, 136 no warrant) | Official recidivism (new arrest), Victim report of repeated violence (including fear of injury, pushing/hitting, physical injury) | Evidence of treatment effect Comparisons of the two experimental groups using both victims’ reports and official measures of recidivism found that the warrant group had lower rates of recidivism and took longer to fail than did the no-warrant group. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Dunford, Huizinga and Elliott (1990) | Replicates the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment in Omaha, Nebraska | Three treatment groups: Suspects who were eligible for the experiment were randomly assigned to one of three police dispositions: mediation, separation, or arrest. | 330 interactions total (115 mediate, 106 separate, 109 arrest) | Official recidivism (new arrest), Victim report of repeated violence (including fear of injury, pushing/hitting, physical injury) | No evidence of treatment effect No differences were found in prevalence or frequency of repeat offending. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Graziano, Schuck and Martin (2010) | Involves two experiments: (1) assesses the impact of an incident of racial profiling on residents’ attitudes about profiling and (2) examines the effects of exposure to a video clip of deliberation about the incident on residents’ beliefs about the causes of profiling | Study 1: a natural experiment involving a local incident that gained media attention. Study 2: treatment group received a video about some local incident and control group did not receive the video | Study 1: 306 participants Study 2: 437 participants | Study 1: Racial profiling Study 2: Racial profiling, Perceptions of traffic stop dangers, Perceptions of racial profiling inevitability | Evidence of treatment effect All residents, White and minority, were less likely to believe that police officers engaged in profiling after the incident. | Field | Not specified |
Groff et al. (2015) | Philadelphia Policing Tactics Experiment Tests three policing tactics applied to small, high-crime places: (1) foot patrol, (2) problem-oriented policing, and (3) offender-focused policing | Three treatment groups: foot patrol, problem-oriented policing, and offender-focused policing. There was one control group paired with each experimental condition. | 81 hot spots (20 treatment hot spots and 7 control hot spots paired for each condition) | All violent crime, violent street felonies | Evidence of treatment effect Offender-focused sites experienced a reduction in all violent crime and a reduction in violent felonies compared with their control places. Problem-oriented policing and foot patrol did not significantly reduce violent crime or violent felonies. | Field | Not specified |
Hedberg, Katz and Choate (2017) | Estimates two measures of effectiveness of BWCs by comparing incidents that occur in a patrol area assigned cameras (treatment) to incidents that occur in a patrol area without cameras assigned (control) | Officers in treatment patrol area received BWCs; control group officers did not receive BWCs. | 4380 incidents in 2 patrol area analyzed (21,660 in treatment group; 22,720 in control group) | Complaints against officers, arrests, resistance associated with arrest | Partial evidence of treatment effect Found that BWCs have no effect on the rate of arrest or resistance but can substantially reduce complaints. | Field | Bureau of Justice Assistance |
Johnson and Kuhns (2009) | Examines whites’ and blacks’ support for police use of force using a survey-based experiment | Survey-based experiment, which manipulated the race (black, white) of a teenage suspect and asked respondents to answer various questions about the suspect’s involvement in hypothetical situations. | 1508 respondents | Approval for police use of force | Evidence of treatment effect The race of the offender influences blacks’ approval for the use of force by police but does not affect whites’ approval. Predictors for approval of police use of force differ by the race of respondent, the race of offender, appropriateness of use of force. | Field | Not specified |
Johnson, Wilson, Maguire and Lowrey-Kinberg (2017) | Using a video of a simulated traffic stop, seeks to understand the effects of procedural justice, injustice, and race have on community members’ cooperation, trust, and confidence in the police | Randomized factorial design with three procedural justice conditions (positive, neutral, and negative) and two driver race conditions (white and African American). Following the video, participants answered questions about attitudes toward the police. | 546 participants | Cooperation with police, trust and confidence in police, and obligation to obey police | Evidence of treatment effect Findings showed that procedural justice improved encounter-specific assessments of police. Black respondents assessed police less favorably than non-black respondents. The positive effect of procedural justice was larger when the driver was white. | Lab | Not specified |
Koper (1995) | Employs survival models to test hypotheses about the effects of specific instances of police patrol presence at high-crime locations on the time until the next occurrence of criminal or disorderly behavior at these locations. Data are from the Minneapolis Preventative Patrol Experiment | Treatment involved officers spending uncommitted patrol time in the hot spot in order to provide “intensified but intermittent patrol.” Control group received regular patrol. | 16,997 police patrol stops (10,050 drive-bys, 947 stops of 20 min or less) | Length of survival time without disorder | Evidence of treatment effect Results show that optimal length of patrol stops is approximately 11 to 15 min in order to generate significantly longer survival times without disorder—i.e., greater residual deterrence—than that generated by driving through a hot spot. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Kvalseth (1980) | Seeks to quantify the relationship (a) between the judged seriousness of thefts and the amount stolen and (b) between the judged seriousness of tax evasion and the amount of money involved. This experimental study is partly a replication of two previous studies in Canada and the USA | Each subject was presented with 25 offenses and then asked to judge the seriousness of the offense. | 50 respondents | Magnitude of seriousness of offense | Evidence of treatment effect When comparing the three cultural populations, any change in the judgment of offense seriousness by the Norwegian subjects exceeded the corresponding changes perceived by the Canadian and the U.S. subjects | Lab | Not specified |
Martin and Sherman (1988) | Tests the idea that apprehended active offenders would not have been apprehended without the police unit’s efforts. Identifies criteria and processes of target selection – the most controversial aspect of both proactive policing and selective incapacitation | Treatment group involved selective apprehension of individuals known to be involved in criminal activity. Control group involved only arresting individuals with warrants. | 250 pairs (125 treatment, 125 control) | Arrest rates, type of arrest charge | Evidence of treatment effect For treatment targets, selective apprehension produced a seven-fold increase in the likelihood of arrest. The types of charges on which treatment targets were arrested differed from those on which control targets were arrested. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Nix, Pickett, Wolfe and Campbell (2017) | Entails two randomized experiments to test whether suspect race and demeanor affect officers’ perceptions of the threat of violence and the importance of exercising procedural justice while interacting with suspicious persons | Two factorial survey designs using vignettes. Study 1 manipulated suspect demeanor (respectful, disrespectful) and race (white, black). Study 2 use the same manipulations and included a third manipulation of type of disrespect (symbolic, verbal). | Study 1: 242 respondents Study 2: 236 respondents | Importance of exercising procedural justice, Likelihood that suspect becomes physically combative | Partial evidence of treatment effect Found that suspect race fails to exert a statistically significant effect on either outcome. However, officers perceive a greater threat of violence and indicate it is less important to exercise procedural justice with disrespectful suspects | Field | Not specified |
Ratcliffe, Taniguchi, Groff, and Wood (2011) | Philadelphia Foot Patrol Experiment Examines the impact of foot patrol on violent crime | Treatment blocks received foot patrol officers. Control blocks received no foot patrolling. | 120 Foot Patrol Areas (60 Treatment, 60 Control) | Reported violent crime | Evidence of treatment effect. Results identified a significant reduction in the level of treatment area violent crime after 12 weeks. | Field | Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Temple University CLARA Research Award |
Rosenfeld, Deckard and Blackburn (2014) | Evaluates the effects of a 9-month randomized controlled hot spots field experiment on firearm assaults and robberies in St. Louis, Missouri | Two treatment groups and one control group. Treatment 1 employed enhanced patrols to the hot spot, with instruction to patrol slowly and avoid engaging in self-initiated activity. Treatment 2 involved enhanced patrols and officers were instructed to engage in one or more types of self-initiated activity. Control group was given no instruction. | 32 hot spots (8 treatment 1, 8 treatment 2, 16 control) | Firearm assault rate, firearm robberies rate, displacement effects | Partial evidence of treatment effect The intervention substantially reduced the incidence of nondomestic firearm assaults, with no evident displacement. By contrast, found no effects of the intervention on firearm robberies. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Seron, Pereira, and Kovath (2006) | Examines the factors that contribute to citizens’ judgments of fair punishment for police misconduct | Experimental, factorial survey presented respondents with vignettes of complex social situation and asked them to report on their judgments. Surveys manipulated four main factors: mobilizing event, gender, citizen’s initial demeanor, and discourtesy/ offensive language. Main factors were further manipulated in severity. | 18,346 vignette responses (from 1100 respondents) | Level of punishment for police misconduct | Evidence of treatment effect Citizens do weigh the officer’s behavior (particularly the unnecessary use of force) and mitigating evidence (particularly the degree to which the civilian is injured). | Field | National Science Foundation |
Sherman and Weisburd (1995) | Minneapolis Hot Spot Study Examines the general deterrent effects of an increase in uniformed police patrol dosage across police hot spots | Treatment and control groups were each randomly allocated to hot spots within statistical blocks. Treatment group employed intensified but intermittent patrol. Control group continued patrol as usual. | 110 hot spots (55 treatment, 55 control) | Calls for Service | Evidence of treatment effect Modest, but statistically significant reductions in total crime calls for service. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Sherman et al. (1991) | Examines the relationship between time held in custody for domestic violence and deterrence | Cases were randomly allocated to one of three groups: short arrest (averaging 2.8 h), full arrest (averaging 11.1 h), or no arrest (warning only). | 1200 domestic violence cases. 705 victims were interviewed (240 in full arrest group, 224 in short arrest group, 241 in no arrest group). | Official records measured recidivism and victim interviews 6 months later measured victim perceptions. | Partial evidence of treatment effect In the short term (within 30 days), short arrest showed the strongest deterrent effects. However, after 1 year, short arrest actually had a criminogenic effect. Full arrest showed no significant effects in either the short- or long-term. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Sherman, Rogan, Edwards, and Whipple (1995) | Tests the block-level deterrent effects on crime of uniformed police raids of crack houses | Treatment blocks received a randomized raid of crack houses. Control blocks were left alone. | 207 blocks (98 treatment, 109 control) | Calls for service, Reported offenses | Partial evidence of treatment effect Experimental blocks, in relation to controls, showed reductions in both calls for service and offense reports. Raids in which arrests were made (23 of 104 assigned) had no consistently different impact from raids in which no arrests were made. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Sorg, Wood, Groff, and Ratcliffe (2017) | Tests what factors influence the amounts of activity officers undertake outside of their assigned hot spots and at nearby streets. Used data from Philadelphia Foot Patrol Study | In the original experiment, treatment blocks received foot patrol officers, while control blocks received no foot patrol. This analysis, however, focuses only on the activity within the buffer zones of the treatment areas. | 120 ft patrol areas (60 treatment, 60 control), analyzed over seven time blocks | Number of police-initiated activities undertaken within the buffer zones | Evidence of treatment effect The size of the target area and the amounts of crime occurring within and outside of the target area predict the level of activity that officers perform outside their assigned areas. There was no significant relationship between an officer’s activity level within the assigned beat and within surrounding buffer zone. | Field | Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Center for Health Policy. |
Telep, Mitchell, and Weisburd (2014) | Tests the recommendation that police officers randomly rotate between hot spots, spending about 15 min patrolling in each. | Treatment hot spots received random visits for approximately 15 min. Control received standard police patrol. | 42 paired hot spots (21 treatment, 21 control) | Calls for service, Part I crime incidents, Soft crime incidents | Evidence of treatment effect Results suggest significant overall declines in both calls for service and crime incidents in the treatment hot spots relative to the controls. | Field | Sacramento Police Department |
Wallace, White, Gaub and Todak (2018) | Examines whether body-worn cameras (BWC) contribute to depolicing. | Treatment group received BWC at Phase 1. Control group continued standard patrol until BWC Phase 2 implementation (6 months later). | 149 officers (82 treatment, 67 control) | Officer-initiated calls, arrests, response time, and time on scene | Possible backfire effect Self-initiated calls increased for officers assigned to the treatment condition. No differences across any of the four outcomes. | Field | Laura and John Arnold Foundation |
Weisburd, Braga, Groff, and Wooditch (2017) | Evaluates the impacts of hot spots policing on street robbery using an agent-based simulation. | Two treatments of hot spots policing (low intensity and high intensity) in a simulated borough of a city. Two control conditions (constant random patrol, no police officers). | 110 hot spots | Total robberies (per grid cell, per beat, per borough), Total robberies by chronic offenders, Total robberies by non-chronic offenders, total chronic reoffenders, total non-chronic reoffenders, total victims, total repeat victims | Evidence of treatment effect Experiments reveal statistically significant effects for hot spots policing beyond both a random patrol model and a landscape without police. Simulations suggest that wider application of hot spots policing can have significant impacts on overall levels of crime in urban areas. | Lab | Not Specified |
Weisburd and Green (1995) | Evaluates an innovative drug enforcement strategy developed as part of the Drug Market Analysis Program | Treatment group implemented a crackdown strategy in drug market hot spots. Control condition involved application of unsystematic, arrest-oriented narcotics enforcement based on ad hoc target selection. | 56 hot spots (28 treatment, 28 control) | Emergency calls for service | Evidence of treatment effect Found consistent and strong effects of the experimental strategy on disorder-related emergency calls for service. | Field | National Institute of Justice |
Weisburd, Morris, and Ready (2008) | Evaluates Risk-Focused Policing at Places (RFPP), a community-oriented policing and problem-solving strategy that targets risk and protective factors related to delinquency and problem behaviors of youths living in census block group areas | Treatment group received program; control group did not receive program and continued with the status quo. | 13 pairs of census block groups, including 800 individuals (411 individuals in treatment group, 389 individuals in control group) | Indicators of juvenile delinquency and antisocial behavior, substance abuse, and risk and protective factors, and measures of procedural justice | No evidence of treatment effect The RFPP program did not influence self-reported delinquency, or perceptions of risk and protective factors and police legitimacy | Field | Office of Juvenile Delinquency and Juvenile Justice |
Willis and Wells (1988) | Uses an experimental survey design with manipulated vignettes to determine the response of police to several abuse events that differ in their nature and seriousness | Employed 10 vignettes with the following manipulated variables: severity of maltreatment, type of maltreatment, age of child, sex of parent, sex of child. | 142 respondents | Willingness to report | Evidence of treatment effect Primary significant contributors to willingness to report are the seriousness of abuse, perception that the behavior is criminal, and race of the family | Field | North Carolina Department of Human Resources |
Other | |||||||
Tracy and Fox (1989) | Measures the extent to which auto body repair shops inflate repair estimates for collision damage claims to insurance companies | Experimentally manipulated insured versus non-insured vehicles. Also manipulated extent of damage, car type, location of body shop, sex of driver. | 191 total (96 insured, 95 not insured) | Repair estimate | Evidence of treatment effect Auto body estimates were significantly higher with insurance than without. | Field | Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General and Massachusetts State Rating Board |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dezember, A., Stoltz, M., Marmolejo, L. et al. The lack of experimental research in criminology—evidence from Criminology and Justice Quarterly. J Exp Criminol 17, 677–712 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-020-09425-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-020-09425-y