Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice pp 2227–2239Cite as

History of Randomized Controlled Experiments in Criminal Justice

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:

Overview

This entry examines the history of randomized controlled experiments in criminology and criminal justice. First, fundamental characteristics of randomized controlled experiments are briefly described, emphasizing the connection between this research method and evidence-based crime policy. Then, historical trends of experiments in criminal justice are reviewed, highlighting David Farrington’s work in this area. The authors continue by connecting the history of experiments as well as their characteristics and the debates surrounding their use in the context of the evidence-based crime policy movement. Specifically, the authors suggest that the history of experiments in criminal justice and their relative rarity compared to other evaluation research cannot be divorced from the broader discussions and realities about the “what works” movement in criminal justice. Finally, this entry provides thoughts about the future of experiments in criminal justice and the research...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   4,350.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   4,999.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Recommended Reading and References

  • Baird J (2011) Descriptive validity and statistical power: a review of experiments published in criminology from 1980–2011. Unpublished manuscript. George Mason University, Fairfax

    Google Scholar 

  • Berk R (2005) Randomized experiments as the bronze standard. J Exp Criminol 1(4):417–433

    Google Scholar 

  • Boruch R, Snyder B, DeMoya D (2000a) The importance of randomized field trials. Crime Delinq 46(2):156–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Boruch R, Victor T, Cecil JS (2000b) Resolving ethical and legal problems in randomized experiments. Crime Delinq 46(3):330–353

    Google Scholar 

  • Burtless G (1995) The case for randomized field trials in economic and policy research. J Econ Perspect 9(2):63–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell D, Stanley J (1963) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching. In: Gage NL (ed) Handbook of research on teaching. Rand McNally: American Educational Research Association, Chicago, pp 171–247

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke R, Cornish D (1972) The controlled trial in institutional research: paradigm or pitfall for penal evaluators? vol 15, Home office research studies. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook T (2003) Resistance to experiments: why have educational evaluators chosen not to do randomized experiments? Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 589:114–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrington D (1983) Randomized experiments on crime and justice. In: Tonry M, Morris N (eds) Crime and justice: an annual review of research, vol IV. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 25–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrington D (2003a) Methodological quality standards for evaluation research. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 587:49–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrington D (2003b) A short history of randomized experiments in criminology: a meager feast. Eval Rev 27(3):218–227

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrington D, Welsh B (2006) A half-century of randomized experiments on crime and justice. In: Tonry M (ed) Crime and justice, vol 34. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 55–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman J, Smith J (1995) Assessing the case for social experiments. J Econ Perspect 9(2):85–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Hough M (2010) Gold standard or fool’s gold: the pursuit of certainty in experimental criminology. Criminol Crim Justice 10:11–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelling G, Pate A, Dieckman D, Brown C (1974) The Kansas city preventive patrol experiment: summary report. The Police Foundation, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipton D, Martinson R, Wilks J (1975) The effectiveness of correctional treatment: a survey of treatment evaluation studies. Praeger, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lum C (2009) Translating police research into practice, Ideas in American policing lecture series. Police Foundation, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Lum C, Yang S (2005) Why do evaluation researchers in crime and justice choose non‐experimental methods? J Exp Criminol 1(2):191–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Lum C, Koper C, Telep CW (2011) The evidence-based policing matrix. J Exp Criminol 7:3–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Lum C, Telep C, Koper C, Grieco J (2012) Receptivity to research in policing. Justice Res Pol 14(1):61–96

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie D (2002) Reducing the criminal activities of known offenders and delinquents: crime prevention in the courts and corrections. In: Sherman LW, Farrington DP, Welsh BC, MacKenzie DL (eds) Evidence based crime prevention. Routledge, London, pp 330–404

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie D (2008) Examining what works in corrections. In: Proceedings of the 16th annual ICCA research conference keynote address, St. Louis

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinson R (1974) What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. Pub Interest 35:22–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard R (1980) The impact of supported work on young school dropouts. Manpower Demonstration Research Corp, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazerolle L, Price J, Roehl J (2000) Civil remedies and drug control: a randomized field trial in Oakland, CA. Eval Rev 24(2):212–241

    Google Scholar 

  • McCord J (1978) A thirty-year follow-up of treatment effects. Am Psychol 33(3):284–289

    Google Scholar 

  • McCord J (2003) Cures that harm: unanticipated outcomes of crime prevention programs. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 587:16–30

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2004) Fairness and effectiveness in policing: the evidence. Committee to review research on police policy and practices. In: Skogan W, Frydl K (eds) Committee on Law and justice, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Olds D, Henderson C, Cole R, Eckenrode J, Kitzman H, Luckey D, Powers J (1998) Long-term effects of nurse home visitation on children’s criminal and antisocial behavior: 15-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc 280:1238–1244

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer T, Petrosino A (2003) The “experimenting agency”: the California youth authority research division. Eval Rev 27:228–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Pawson R, Tilley N (1997) Realistic evaluation. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersilia J (1989) Implementing randomized experiments – lessons from BJA’s intensive supervision project. Eval Rev 13(5):435–458

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersilia J, Turner S (1993) Intensive probation and parole. Crime Justice Rev Res 17:281–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrosino A, Boruch R, Farrington D, Sherman L, Weisburd D (2003) Toward evidence-based criminology and criminal justice: systematic reviews, the Campbell collaboration, and the crime and justice group. Int J Comp Criminol 3:42–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Powers E, Witmer H (1951) An experiment in the prevention of delinquency. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt T, Gau J, Franklin T (2011) Key ideas in criminology and criminal justice. Sage, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadish W, Cook T, Campbell D (2002) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inferences. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd J (2003) Explaining feast of famine in randomized field trials. Eval Rev 27(3):290–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman L, Berk R (1984) The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment. Police Foundation, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman L (1998) Evidence-based policing, Second invitational lecture on ideas in policing. Police Foundation, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman L, Weisburd D (1995) General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime hot spots: a randomized controlled trial. Justice Quart 12:625–648

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman L, Gottfredson D, MacKenzie D, Eck J, Reuter P, Bushway S (1997) Preventing crime: what works, what doesn’t, what’s promising: a report to the United States Congress. National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman L, Farrington D, Welsh B, MacKenzie D (eds) (2002) Evidence based crime prevention. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow M (2009) One week in Heron city. In: Harvard executive session on policing and public safety. National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • The Police Foundation (1981) The Newark foot patrol experiment. Police Foundation, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd D (2000) Randomized experiments in criminal justice policy: prospects and problems. Crime Delinq 46(2):181–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd D (2003) Ethical practice and evaluation of interventions in crime and justice: the moral imperative for randomized trials. Eval Rev 27(3):336–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd D, Green L (1995) Policing drug hot spots: the Jersey city drug market analysis experiment. Justice Quart 12:711–736

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd D, Petrosino A (2004) Experiments, criminology. In: Kempf-Leonard K (ed) Encyclopedia of social measurement. Academic, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd D, Lum C, Petrosino A (2001) Does research design affect study outcomes? Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 578:50–70

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminology, Law and Society, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive., MS 6D12, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA

    Cynthia Lum

  2. Institute for Social Science Research, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, 4072, QLD, Australia

    Lorraine Mazerolle

Authors
  1. Cynthia Lum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lorraine Mazerolle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cynthia Lum .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR), Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Gerben Bruinsma

  2. VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Gerben Bruinsma

  3. Department of Criminology, Law and Society, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

    David Weisburd

  4. Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University, Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel

    David Weisburd

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Lum, C., Mazerolle, L. (2014). History of Randomized Controlled Experiments in Criminal Justice. In: Bruinsma, G., Weisburd, D. (eds) Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_252

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_252

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-5689-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-5690-2

  • eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and Law

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation