Contrasting simulated and empirical experiments in crime prevention |
| |
Authors: | John E Eck Lin Liu |
| |
Institution: | (1) Division of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA;(2) Department of Geography, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA |
| |
Abstract: | This paper argues that simulated experiments of crime prevention interventions are an important class of research methods
that compare favorably with empirical experiments. It draws on Popper’s demarcation between science and non-science (Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge. Routledge, London, 1992) and Epstein’s principle of generative explanation (Generative social science: studies in agent-based computational modeling. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2006) to show how simulated experiments can falsify theory. The paper compares simulated and empirical experiments and shows that
simulations have strengths that empirical methods lack, but they also have important relative weaknesses. We identify three
threats to internal validity and two forms of external validity peculiar to simulated experiments. The paper also looks at
the problem of validating simulations with crime data and suggests that simulations need to mimic the error production processes
involved in the creation of empirical data. It concludes by listing ways simulations can be used to improve empirical experiments
and discussing the differing operating assumption of empirical and simulation experimentalists.
|
| |
Keywords: | Agent based modeling Computers Crime patterns Crime prevention Experimental validity Experiments Measurement error Simulation |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|