论实证研究方法在《犯罪学》教学中的应用

犯罪学的源起与刑事实证学派的兴起密不可分,因此犯罪学学科天生具有实证特质。在犯罪学的教学研究中应用实证研究方法具体体现为树立实证研究指导思想、确立实证研究的具体方式以及在具体的教学研究中采取不同的实证研究方法。实证研究方法在教学研究中具有重要意义,应予以提倡。     

论犯罪学的经验性研究方法

定性研究与定量研究、思辨研究与经验研究,均是犯罪学研究所不可缺少的手段。不过,犯罪学作为一门事实科学,经验研究是其基本的手段,定量研究是其重要方法。具体而言,犯罪学的经验性研究方法分为两个层次:(1)犯罪调查的基本方法;(2)犯罪研究的基本技术。运用以上方法,经过一定的研究程序,构建犯罪学理论。     

犯罪学研究范式之我见

犯罪学的范式是有关犯罪和犯罪研究的基本前提假设和理论基础,主要是指研究人员对犯罪本质的基本看法、他们用以描述和分析犯罪的概念选择以及分析研究所采用的策略。犯罪学的范式包含几个方面的基本观念:犯罪本体论观念和认识论方法论观念;犯罪的基本理论假设;犯罪研究领域和兴趣主题;犯罪的基本政策纲领。犯罪学中存在着古典犯罪学、犯罪生物学、犯罪心理学、新实证犯罪学、后实证犯罪学等范式,认识并研究犯罪学的范式有助于提升犯罪学研究的理论自觉。     

盲人摸象、管中窥豹抑或多元融通——犯罪研究的一体化进路

犯罪学是专门研究犯罪事实（犯罪现象、犯罪原因和犯罪人）的综合学科。基于事实反映的基本特征,实证研究是这个学科最基本的研究方法。但是,犯罪学的实证研究,又存在两个突出的问题。一个是主流的犯罪学理论都倾向于把自己的学说看作完整的犯罪理论体系（如盲人摸象）。另一个是当代中国的犯罪实证研究,不仅描述犯罪现象、解释犯罪原因、深入探讨犯罪人的实证作品屈指可数,解决实际问题的能力更是严重不足。从一体化的观念出发,犯罪学亟需以整体思维协调相关学科、方法、结构、体系的关系,加强实证研究的同时,也要避免一以贯之的绝对主张（如管中窥豹）,寻求犯罪治理和学科地位的整体突破。     

犯罪学的研究范式

犯罪学要走出理论困境 ,必须构建科学的犯罪学研究范式。对研究范式的理解应从变量等级、分析轴、经验与思辨、理论框架四个方面的概念入手 ,通过对其的具体阐述 ,可以揭示犯罪学科学研究应遵循的基本规则和研究进路。     

从封闭到开放:教育研究方法范式的转换

我国教育学术界主要存在两种研究方法的范式,二者存在着矛盾与竞争,尤其表现为主张实证研究的学者往往反对思辨研究.其实,将任何一种方法范式的合法性强调到极端,而拒斥其他的研究方法,都是片面的.封闭的教育研究方法范式不仅会限制研究者的学术兴趣、学术视野和学术创新能力,而且往往会导致研究目的、研究过程甚至研究结论被局限在其方法所允许的比较狭隘的范围之内.因此,教育学术界应当超越封闭的方法范式,以实现以下三个转向:从封闭到开放,从控制到解放,从霸权到民主.只有如此,教育学才可能充满活力、具有学科竞争力和影响力.     

新世纪中国犯罪学研究的发展思考

世纪之交我国社会治安和刑事犯罪的状况及发展态势,关系到改革和建设的大局。犯罪学研究应当承担起社会责任。推动和优化犯罪学研究,要求解决犯罪学研究的基本走向。加强犯罪学学科建设,要求明确政府在推动犯罪学学科发展中的作用,重新确立犯罪学的专业学科地位,提高犯罪学学科的社会运用价值。     

犯罪行为研究体系独立论——基于刑事一体化的思考

对犯罪行为的研究虽在刑法学和犯罪学中都有涉及,但受制于学科性质和研究目的的不同,学界对犯罪行为研究的视角和重心各有不同。在刑事一体化理念基础上,通过对犯罪学和刑法学视野中的犯罪行为进行比较研究和理性分析,可以得出有必要和可能把犯罪行为在行为学、犯罪学、刑法学等学科分别研究的基础上突出出来,进行系统的研究,并创设犯罪行为学科;以实现犯罪学中散在性的犯罪行为与刑法学中确定性的犯罪行为的对接。这是强化对犯罪行为研究的深度和分量的重要途径;对完善刑事法律学科和促进刑事司法实践具有重大意义。     

德国犯罪学的最新发展

在德国,犯罪学被定义为关于犯罪与犯罪控制的实证科学,是法学教育不可或缺的组成部分。犯罪学教研活动主要是在大学之内的法律系和大学之外的专门机构进行。犯罪学课程主要有“犯罪学”“青少年刑法”“自由刑执行”等,这些课程通常是以法学专业的选修科目形式出现,犯罪学教材种类较多,内容大同小异。德国高校不颁发犯罪学学士学位和博士学位,但少数几所高校专门设立了犯罪学硕士学位项目。从理论上讲,犯罪学应当是一门独立的学科,但在事实上,犯罪学不仅无法获得足够的独立地位,而且其现有地位还在继续遭到侵蚀。德国犯罪学者们感受到了学科发展的危机,并已发出改革的呼声。     

对法理学研究方法的一点思考

本文从方法论的角度就法理学的繁荣与发展提出了作者的看法 :如欲进一步提高法理学的研究水平 ,充分发挥其在依法治国中的理论指导作用 ,为其他部门法学的研究提供理论基础 ,法理学便不能仅停留于定性的研究 ,而必须面向实践 ,在深化上下功夫。为此要做到 :坚持独立的品格与为现实“服务”相结合 ,价值研究与具体制度研究相结合 ,哲学思考与实证分析研究相结合。     

The Neglect of Quantitative Research in Green Criminology and Its Consequences

While interest in green criminology has rapidly expanded over the past twenty-five years, much of this growth has occurred on the periphery of orthodox criminology. This article suggests that green criminology’s marginalization is partially a result of its non-quantitative methodology. We hypothesize that non-quantitative tendencies within green criminology distance it from orthodox criminology because orthodox criminology values quantitative methods (Tewksbury et al. in J Crim Justice Educ 16(2):265–279, 2005). Here, we examine how neglecting quantitative research methods may contribute to inattention to green criminology within orthodox criminology, and we consider what can be done to change that situation. We suggest that employing quantitative approaches within green criminology is one way to increase its appeal to mainstream criminology, and that quantitative studies, in conjunction with other research methodologies, can also enhance generalizability of findings, influence policy, and advance theory construction and hypothesis testing.     

犯罪学转型中研究对象的固化———从科尔曼的“系统行为内部分析说”谈起简

犯罪学是一门兼具综合性与交叉性的新兴学科,自其诞生以来,相关理论问题争议不断.其中,犯罪学的研究对象一直以来就是学者们热议的话题,尤其在我国犯罪学的转型时期,该问题更需亟待解决.犯罪学不再局限于以传统的个体行为或个体现象作为其研究对象,而是立足于从宏观的视角认识其研究对象,将其固化为一种特殊的系统现象,同时采用科尔曼的“系统行为内部分析”说作为分析犯罪学研究对象的方法论,把群体现象或群体行为作为犯罪学微观上的研究对象,旨在实现犯罪学研究的宏观与微观、系统与要素的结合,从而全面认识犯罪这一特殊的社会现象、及其本质和规律.     

Switching on,switching off: reflections of a practitioner researcher examining the operational behaviour of police officers

ABSTRACT

Evidence-based policing is rapidly becoming adopted by policing agencies among policing jurisdictions. Many academic programmes have been established in higher education to train police managers in applied criminology. However, there is a lack of literature for police officer practitioner researchers (POPR) who might undertake qualitative research, especially research projects that examine police behaviour. This paper reflects on the changing role of the practitioner-researcher and suggests that police officers undertaking qualitative research need to learn to ‘switch off their police role’ and ‘switch on their researcher role’. The author’s insights are drawn from his own experience of qualitative fieldwork working with police officers from New Zealand Police and South Australian Police.     

On Victimology and Victimization

Victimology is, in literal translation, "the science of the victim" (from the Latin victima). Having recently been developed to a considerable degree in many countries of the world, victimology has assembled interesting empirical data and developed a number of theoretical propositions on the personality and behavior of persons who have suffered from crimes, their relationships with the criminals, and the role of the victim in the genesis of the crime. At the same time, sufficient clarity does not exist on the matter of the subject area of victimology, its relationship to disciplines on which it abuts, and the theoretical foundations and principal lines of victimological research. Therefore the question of what constitutes victimology remains pressing, and the answer to it cannot be unambiguous, particularly if one considers the fundamental difference between bourgeois and socialist criminology.     

Thinking Critically About Rural Crime: The Influence of William J. Chambliss

William J. Chambliss (Bill) is well-known for his path-breaking theories of lawmaking and for his innovative research on state-organized crime. However, the fact that his study of the original vagrancy laws marked the birth of rural critical criminology has gone unrecognized by criminologists. The main objective of this article is twofold: (1) to show how Bill helped shape contemporary rural critical criminology and (2) to provide suggestions for further critical theoretical and empirical work on rural crime and social control.     

恐怖主义犯罪原因研析——兼论恐怖主义犯罪研究的方法论

恐怖主义犯罪是为实现一定的政治目的,通过暴力或暴力威胁以及其他非暴力手段制造社会恐怖,侵害他人生命财产的犯罪行为。其在犯罪主体、动机、目的、行为等方面都具有自己的特点,因而不能用传统的个体论的方法探究其产生的根源,而必须将之作为一种犯罪现象从宏观的角度用整体论的方法去研究。作者借鉴著名犯罪学家迪姆凯尔和默顿的犯罪学理论,通过对恐怖主义犯罪现象进行分析,认为恐怖主义犯罪的原因在于各特定社会的文化目标的冲突以及对制度化手段的不同选择。因而只有尊重各种文明的独特性,协调它们的冲突,才是治理恐怖主义犯罪的根本策略。     

Seeing War as Criminal: Peace Activist Views and Critical Criminology

A hallmark of critical criminology is its critique of the traditional definition of crime. For decades, critical scholars have proposed humanistic definitions of crime that bring state violence into the purview of academic criminology—although outside of critical criminology this is a matter of great contentiousness. This study investigates the views of those involved in peace activism, but not in any way associated with academic criminology, about the application of the term ‘crime’ to war, specifically the recent US war on Iraq. Given that there is no existing research on this subject, the article also examines how peace activists define crime generally and whether they believe those responsible for the war should be regarded as war criminals. Not surprisingly, semi‐structured interviews with 13 anti‐war activists reveal significant support for elements of critical criminological definitions of crime but an unexpected concern on the part of some that the application of the term ‘crime’ to war could be counterproductive in efforts to stop state violence. The rationales for this concern, as well as those for other issues addressed in the study, are largely presented in the interviewees’ own words.     

In partial defense of socialist realism

While left realist discourse emerged out of the specific politics of policing in England and Wales, its relative importance for progressive criminology generally has been the subject of much debate. On the one hand, the advocates of left realism have consistently argued that the local crime survey provides an empirical basis for understanding crime patterns and for developing progressive crime control policy. Critics of left realism, on the other hand, have argued that for a variety of reasons, the progressive quality of realist criminology is dubious at best, and reactionary at worst. This paper explores both sides of this debate and argues that while left realism has the potential of making a considerable contribution to the struggle for social justice, that contribution must rest on empirical observation. The paper suggests that while much of the foundation work for left realist literature is grounded in local crime survey data, recent policy recommendations emerging in this literature are not. It is argued that while the local crime survey has potential, there are a number of theoretical and methodological concerns raised by this technology which appear to have remained unexplored within the current debates.The paper begins by challenging Young's conception of the aetiological crisis facing criminology, and argues that the crisis is a definitional one. Ian Taylor's critique of left realism generally, and the Islington Crime Survey (ICS) specifically, is then closely examined in order to assess its validity. It is argued that by imputing his own purposes to the ICS, Taylor's critique is misplaced while the progressive potential that local crime survey technology offers for criminology, both academically and practically, remains unnoticed by him. The section concludes by arguing that a more thoughtful consideration of this line of inquiry leads to the conclusion that while such a technology is of utility, in order for that potential to be realized there are a number of methodological considerations which must be examined.These methodological considerations are then explored. It is argued that if left realism is to distinguish itself from a more conventional approach, local crime surveys must consider the measurement of all moments within the process of crime construction, eliminating the conservative bias inherent in conventional surveys, eliminating the sexist bias inherent in conventional surveys, coping with the sampling error produced by cost effective sampling designs, local versus national surveys, the use of proxy interviews, and the use of in-person interviews as opposed to telephone interviews.The paper concludes by arguing that while modest, the contribution of left realist surveys to the development of progressive criminology and the struggle for social justice is an important one which, if nurtured in a thoughtful way, has the potential for contributing to the demise of the state's monopoly on crime and policing knowledge.     

The strengths and limitations of empirical bioethics

The past two decades have been witness to an "empirical turn" in bioethics. Whereas once this field of study concerned itself purely with theoretical analysis of ethical issues emerging in the design and delivery of health care, increasingly bioethics has embraced a range of empirical research methods from the social sciences and humanities. The emergence of "empirical bioethics" has, however, been the subject of enormous debate, both in regard to its methods and its purpose. For the most part these criticisms fail to appreciate the assumptions that underpin empirical bioethics or misrepresent the claims that are made about its moral utility. This article provides a brief account of the assumptions, strengths and limitations of empirical bioethics.