Three types of Family Environment Scale profiles: Functional,distressed, and abusive families

In order to facilitate the interpretation of Family Environment Scale (FES) profiles, Moos and Moos (1976, 1984) developed a typology of family environments based on data drawn from a representative community sample. The present study attempts to extend this work by describing three types of FES profiles from abusive, distressed (clinic referred for child behavior problems), and functional families. All families were impoverished, single parent, and mother-headed. Data were gathered in their homes. Profile types for the three groups and implications for intervention are discussed.     

Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases

The lay-person's knowledge of the factors that influence eyewitness memory was examined by evaluating the manner in which mock jurors integrated eyewitness evidence to draw inferences about defendant culpability and the likelihood that an identification was correct. Three hundred and twenty-one undergraduates viewed a videotaped trial within which ten witness and identification factors were manipulated between trials. Manipulation checks showed that subjects demonstrated superior memory for the evidence and the manipulated variables had their intended impact on appropriate rating scales. However, only one variable, witness confidence, had reliable effects on subjects' perceptions of culpability, on the perceived likelihood that the identification was correct, and on several other relevant dependent variables. Eight variables that have been shown to affect identification accuracy in the empirical literature had trivial effects on mock jurors' inferences. It was concluded that lay-people are insensitive to the factors that influence eyewitness memory.     

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.