An assessment of the relative impact of criminal justice and criminology journals

The current study was undertaken to provide an impact assessment of criminal justice and criminology journals as an alternative measure to the prestige survey ratings reported by Sorensen, Snell, and Rodriguez (2006). Citations to sixty-seven target journals were tallied from ten top criminal justice and criminology journals. Various impact measures were fairly consistent with one another and the prestige survey ratings, particularly for a “top tier” of journals. With a couple of notable exceptions, a long-standing core of these elite journals has held their relative positions from early impact studies relying on data from the 1970s and 1980s; nevertheless, significant deviations were noted based on the measurement utilized for all but the top journals. Findings from the current study suggested that the quality of journals is multifaceted and warns against employing a scale based on one dimension of journal quality.     

Assessing the prestige of journals in criminal justice: A research note

This study extends earlier periodical prestige research by determining journal prestige for three criminal justice membership categories and reexamines the emergent rankings, controlling for a potentially salient variable—previous journal publication. Data for the project were derived from questionnaire responses of 1,028 criminal justice educators who were members of either the American Society of Criminology, Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, or both associations, via a three-wave mail survey. Generally, the findings demonstrated conflicting or competing professional ideologies operating in assessments of the relative importance of criminal justice publications. Particularly, respondents' subjective evaluations established two relatively divergent stratification systems of journal prestige.     

Differences in assessments of relative prestige and utility of criminal justice and criminology journals

Several articles have been written about the relative prestige of journals in criminology and criminal justice. Almost uniformly, however, those rankings have focused on sociology and criminology journals and have generally reflected a sociological orientation. If criminal justice is indeed a separate discipline, such approaches are tantamount to asking psychologists to rate sociological journals within a list of psychology journals. Our approach is first to separate respondents by their degree of identification with criminal justice and their educational orientation. Second, we compile a list of responses to questions about prestige and utility to practitioners across the range of criminal justice and criminology journals. Analyses of these data indicate that there are differences in the way scholars rate journals, based on their identity with criminal justice and their educational orientation. These differences, however, are found in specific journals and in types of journals (i.e., police, corrections, criminal justice) rather than in aggregate perceptions of all criminal justice and criminology journals.     

Citation analysis of randomized experiments in criminology and criminal justice: a research note

In recent years multiple studies have used citation analysis as a way to examine the most cited scholars and works in criminology and criminal justice and its subfields. This study is the first to focus on the most cited randomized experiments in criminological research. Using citation counts from both Social Science Citation Index and Google Scholar, and multiple sources of randomized experiments, I present the most cited experiments in six areas: policing, courts, corrections, schools, community, and early prevention. Experiments published in non-criminological (e.g., medical) journals tend to be the most cited, and early prevention research is generally cited most frequently of the six categories. I conclude by considering possible reasons why certain experiments are more cited than others.     

Scholarly influence in criminology and criminal justice journals in 1990-2000

The main aim of this research was to investigate changes in scholarly influence by identifying the most-cited scholars in twenty journals: five American criminology journals, five American criminal justice journals, five international criminology journals, and five international criminal justice journals. The most-cited works of the most-cited scholars were also reported. Results obtained in 2000 were compared with previous findings in 1995 and 1990, and with results obtained from analyzing nine journals in 1996-2000. In 2000, the most-cited scholars were Robert J. Sampson in American criminology journals, Francis T. Cullen in American criminal justice journals, John Braithwaite in international criminology journals, and Robert D. Hare in international criminal justice journals. The expansion from nine to twenty journals benefited international scholars such as John Braithwaite and Richard V. Ericson and scholars in less mainstream areas such as Murray A. Straus. Overall, Robert J. Sampson was the most-cited scholar in these twenty journals in 2000, compared with Lawrence W. Sherman in 1995 and Marvin E. Wolfgang in 1990. The prevalence of citations (the number of different articles in which a scholar was cited) and specialization (where a scholar's influence was based on one or two highly-cited works) were also studied.     

Academic dishonesty among criminal justice majors: A research note

There is a limited, but growing body of literature on the academic integrity of criminal justice majors. This study adds to the research by surveying 850 students at a Midwestern university and comparing criminal justice majors to students majoring in other disciplines. The survey consisted of various academic dishonesty behaviors, rationales for being academically dishonest, and whether or not the behaviors were ethical. The results indicated that there were some differences between criminal justice and non-criminal justice majors; however, for most measures, the two groups of students were similar. Unfortunately, the overall level of cheating was high for both criminal justice and non-criminal justice students.     

Gender differences in research productivity among criminal justice and criminology scholars

Prior research suggests gaps in productivity by gender in the fields of criminal justice and criminology as well as other academic disciplines. Utilizing survey data from a sample of ASC and ACJS members, this study examined the overall extent of disparity in publishing between female and male academics. It also examined the impact of background, departmental, professional, work load characteristics, and other academic factors on publishing. While males published more than females, the disparity was reduced once other relevant variables, such as career length, time devoted to research, rank, and teaching in a program offering a masters or doctorate, were considered. Finally, the factors that influence productivity among male scholars were found to have a similar effect on female scholarship.     

Conservative ideology in criminology and criminal justice

As often as the label “conservative” is used in criminological and criminal justice books, papers, articles, lectures and discussions, rarely is the substance of what “conservative” might mean raised. Its use as a prejoritive by those who are not conservative clouds the word and the complex of ideas it represents with a negative imagery. The author, a confessed conservative, seeks to dispel that cloud by identifying the common features of contemporary American conservative thought in its five major divisions: secular and theological fundamentalism, core conservatism, conservative pragmatism, and libertarian conservatism. How adherents of each of these five camps impact on criminal justice policy and criminological theory is explained. Proposals for a conservative pedagogy in criminal justice are offered to sympathizers and a conservative who’s who and reading list are provided for further reading.     

The scholarly productivity of institutions and their faculty in leading criminology and criminal justice journals

This study extended the work of Sorensen and Pilgrim (2002) by examining the institutional affiliations of authors in leading criminology and criminal justice journals in the subsequent five-year period after their study. Additionally, this study replicated Fabianic's (2002) study, by assessing the average publications of the faculty at the most productive criminal justice graduate programs. The current study examined the years 2000-2004 and made comparisons to the previous studies, which assessed 1995-1999. Findings revealed the University of Cincinnati and the University of Maryland were the most productive institutions and had the most productive faculty.     

The gendering effects of co-authorship in criminology & criminal justice research

Historically, research from various fields has indicated that females are underrepresented in academic papers. Not only are females less likely to publish relative to males, but they are also less likely to be sole-, co-, and first-authors in journal publications. While this gender discrepancy has become smaller in recent decades, males are still disproportionately represented in academic papers. The current study reviews author characteristics of articles published in the top fifteen criminology/criminal justice journals over a forty-year period (1974–2014). Among the 11,348 articles in the study, results indicated that while female sole- and first-authorship increased throughout the study period, 26.6% of sole-authors were female while 32% were first-authors and composed 33.3% of all co-authors. Further, females were less likely to be sole- and first-authors, less likely to have co-authors, and more likely to publish with other female co-authors.     

Exploring academic dishonesty among undergraduate criminal justice majors: A research note

The nature and extent of academic dishonesty among undergraduate criminal justice majors at a mediumsized university in the Southeastern US were explored. Using several theories of deviance as theoretical frameworks, the research sought to investigate the motivations for such behaviors. Criminal justice majors indicated that they are aware of, have engaged in, and plan to become involved in various low, medium, and high levels of academically dishonest behavior in the future. Additionally, study results reveal that specific acts defined as academically dishonest by the university and individual professors are not viewed as dishonest by students. Implications and directions are discussed in light of these research results.     

Publication productivity of criminal justice faculty in criminal justice journals

An important dimension of university faculty life is publication expectation. Often the level of publication productivity is used to assess general program prestige or to evaluate individual faculty performance. The publication rates of faculty in PhD and master-level programs have been unclear. This study examined the publication rates using a general list of criminal justice journals, and a select list of the leading journals, over a five-year period. The faculty members were located in criminal justice programs that granted PhD and master degrees. Publication productivity rates were established for the two different degree level programs, and the institutions with the strongest publication rates were identified. Publication rates are only one factor used in the assessment of program quality and the relationship of publication rates to other program features is discussed.     

What methods are most frequently used in research in criminology and criminal justice?

Articles published in seven leading criminology and criminal justice journals were coded with regard to the research methods used, focusing on the general research designs, data-gathering methods, and statistical analysis techniques employed. The results indicated that survey research was by far the dominant mode of acquiring criminological information, that cross-sectional nonexperimental designs still predominated, and that multivariate statistical methods were the norm. The findings could aid criminology and criminal justice faculty in devising graduate methods curricula that reflected the state-of-the-art as currently practiced by criminological researchers.     

Making space for restorative justice in criminal justice and criminology curricula and courses

Restorative justice, rooted in the practices of indigenous people across the globe, has grown exponentially in both theory and practice since its beginnings in Canada in the 1970s. Restorative justice has influenced the interactions between offenders and victims, helped community members address crime and develop self-efficacy, and changed the way some countries rebuild after a history of oppression. Despite these restorative justice influenced changes, many criminology and criminal justice programs pay scant attention to restorative justice in curricula. This paper will examine ways to include restorative justice in criminal justice and criminology curriculum and the challenges involved in the process. The paper will then examine how the Law and Justice Department at Central Washington University has incrementally added restorative justice components to its curriculum, culminating most recently with the addition of a Community and Social Justice course. The paper will conclude with several examples of classroom activities and assignments that have helped connect students with the theory and practice of restorative justice.     

Schizophrenia: Causes,crime, and implications for criminology and criminal justice

This paper is aimed at criminologists and criminal justicians seeking to understand their role in educating law enforcement and correctional personnel who must deal with the mentally ill. It is motivated by William Johnson's (2011) recent call for rethinking the interface between mental illness, criminal justice, and academia, and his call for advocacy. We concur with his concerns, and insist that this rethinking must necessarily include grounding in the etiology of mental illness (specifically, with schizophrenia) as it is currently understood by researchers in the area. Advocacy must go hand in hand with a thorough knowledge of the condition of the people for whom we are advocating. We first examine major etiological models of schizophrenia, emphasizing the neurodevelopmental model that incorporates genetics, neurological functioning, and immunological factors guided by the assumption that the typical criminologist/criminal justician has minimal acquaintance with such material. We then address the link between schizophrenia and criminal behavior, and conclude with a discussion of the implications for criminology and criminal justice.     

Predicting criminal recidivism: A research note

Criminal justice researchers often develop prediction instruments as a practitioner tool for improving the allocation of resources in community corrections administration. Although best practices have emerged for developing predictions, those best practices lead to predictions that fail to distinguish risk factors from control and correctional responses to risk. The consequence is that predictions fail to predict what they purport to predict, and this limits the utility of those predictions for public policy. This note argues that when properly done, predictions pertain to a latent, unobservable population. Given that perspective, some best practices advocated for prediction should be abandoned, and new best practices should be adopted.     

Criminal justice students: A research note

During the last five years, there have been a good deal of discussion about the nature, purpose, and future of criminal justice education. On the whole, this research has focused upon three areas of investigation. First, it has focused upon the distribution of criminology and criminal justice programs and majors within the United States. Aside from a few comments about the composition of student bodies as an aspect of the makeup of criminal justice programs (Bennett and Marshall, 1979; Berger, 1980), there is little analysis of criminal justice students. This research note focuses upon an on-going longitudinal research effort which is tracking a cohort of criminal justice majors from their upper level college experience through the first few years of their early career development.