排序方式： 共有8条查询结果，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1
1.
2.
Chalfin Aaron Hansen Benjamin Lerner Jason Parker Lucie 《Journal of Quantitative Criminology》2022,38(1):127-157
Journal of Quantitative Criminology - This paper offers novel experimental evidence that violent crimes can be successfully reduced by changing the situational environment that potential victims... 相似文献
3.
4.
5.
Aaron Chalfin Amelia M. Haviland Steven Raphael 《Journal of Quantitative Criminology》2013,29(1):5-43
Objectives
We provide a critical review of empirical research on the deterrent effect of capital punishment that makes use of state and, in some instances, county-level, panel data.Methods
We present the underlying behavioral model that presumably informs the specification of panel data regressions, outline the typical model specification employed, discuss current norms regarding “best-practice” in the analysis of panel data, and engage in a critical review.Results
The connection between the theoretical reasoning underlying general deterrence and the regression models typically specified in this literature is tenuous. Many of the papers purporting to find strong effects of the death penalty on state-level murder rates suffer from basic methodological problems: weak instruments, questionable exclusion restrictions, failure to control for obvious factors, and incorrect calculation of standard errors which in turn has led to faulty statistical inference. The lack of variation in the key underlying explanatory variables and the heavy influence exerted by a few observations in state panel data regressions is a fundamental problem for all panel data studies of this question, leading to overwhelming model uncertainty.Conclusions
We find the recent panel literature on whether there is a deterrent effect of the death penalty to be inconclusive as a whole, and in many cases uninformative. Moreover, we do not see additional methodological tools that are likely to overcome the multiple challenges that face researchers in this domain, including the weak informativeness of the data, a lack of theory on the mechanisms involved, and the likely presence of unobserved confounders. 相似文献6.
This paper asks whether undertaking a cost-benefit analysis provides additional information to policy makers as compared to
an analysis solely of the effect of an intervention. A literature review identified 106 evaluations of criminal justice interventions
that reported both an effect size and measures of net benefit. Data on net benefit and effect size were extracted from these
studies. We found that effect size is only weakly related to net benefits. The rank order of net benefits and effect size
are minimally correlated. Furthermore, we found that the two analytic methods would yield opposing policy recommendations
for more than one in four interventions. These bi-variate findings are supported by the results of multivariate models. However,
further research is needed to verify the accuracy of the standard errors on net benefit estimates, so these models must be
interpreted with caution.
Kevin Marsh is head of Economics at The Matrix Knowledge Group (TMKG). His research interests include the economic evaluation of criminal justice and public health interventions. He completed his PhD in Economics at the University of Bath, specialising in monetary technique for valuing environmental resources. Following a year at the Social Disadvantage Research Centre, Oxford University, Marsh joined TMKG in 2003. At Matrix he is responsible for maintaining the quality of economic and statistical methods, advising on a range of projects across the crime and justice and health sectors. He has recently undertaken research in a number of areas of public policy, including: prisons, promoting physical activity, drug trafficking, reducing drug use among both adult and juvenile populations, human trafficking, reducing health inequalities, reducing social exclusion, and area-based regeneration. Aaron Chalfin is a Research Associate in the Urban Institute’s Justice Policy Center, where his research focuses on evaluations of criminal justice programs, cost-benefit analysis and the economic and social determinants of criminal activity. He has used statistical methods to evaluate programs designed to reduce recidivism and improve labor market outcomes and has developed full-information economic models to estimate social costs and benefits. His current research includes studies of individual and neighborhood characteristics that predict fear of crime and methodological issues in cost-benefit analysis. John Roman is a Senior Research Associate at the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute where his research focuses on evaluations of innovative crime control policies and programs. Roman is directing studies of the demand for community-based interventions with drug-involved arrestees, the use of DNA in burglary investigations, the reclaiming futures initiative and the cost of the death penalty. His prior research includes studies of specialized courts, the age of juvenile jurisdiction, prisoner reentry and cost-benefit methodology. He is the co-editor of Juvenile Drug Courts and Teen Substance Abuse and a forthcoming volume on Cost-Benefit Analysis and Crime Control Policies. 相似文献
| Kevin MarshEmail: |
Kevin Marsh is head of Economics at The Matrix Knowledge Group (TMKG). His research interests include the economic evaluation of criminal justice and public health interventions. He completed his PhD in Economics at the University of Bath, specialising in monetary technique for valuing environmental resources. Following a year at the Social Disadvantage Research Centre, Oxford University, Marsh joined TMKG in 2003. At Matrix he is responsible for maintaining the quality of economic and statistical methods, advising on a range of projects across the crime and justice and health sectors. He has recently undertaken research in a number of areas of public policy, including: prisons, promoting physical activity, drug trafficking, reducing drug use among both adult and juvenile populations, human trafficking, reducing health inequalities, reducing social exclusion, and area-based regeneration. Aaron Chalfin is a Research Associate in the Urban Institute’s Justice Policy Center, where his research focuses on evaluations of criminal justice programs, cost-benefit analysis and the economic and social determinants of criminal activity. He has used statistical methods to evaluate programs designed to reduce recidivism and improve labor market outcomes and has developed full-information economic models to estimate social costs and benefits. His current research includes studies of individual and neighborhood characteristics that predict fear of crime and methodological issues in cost-benefit analysis. John Roman is a Senior Research Associate at the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute where his research focuses on evaluations of innovative crime control policies and programs. Roman is directing studies of the demand for community-based interventions with drug-involved arrestees, the use of DNA in burglary investigations, the reclaiming futures initiative and the cost of the death penalty. His prior research includes studies of specialized courts, the age of juvenile jurisdiction, prisoner reentry and cost-benefit methodology. He is the co-editor of Juvenile Drug Courts and Teen Substance Abuse and a forthcoming volume on Cost-Benefit Analysis and Crime Control Policies. 相似文献
7.
John K. Roman Shannon E. Reid Aaron J. Chalfin Carly R. Knight 《Journal of Experimental Criminology》2009,5(4):345-369
We report the results of a prospective, randomized study of the impact and cost-effectiveness of DNA evidence in investigating
property crimes, mainly residential burglary. Biological evidence was collected at up to 500 crime scenes in five U.S. cities
between 2005 and 2007, and cases were randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups in equal numbers. DNA processing
was added to traditional investigation in the treatment group. A suspect was identified in 31% of treatment cases and 13%
of control cases. A suspect was arrested in 22% of treatment cases and 10% of control cases. Across the five sites, each additional
arrest—an arrest that would not have occurred without DNA processing—cost slightly more than US14,000. In the most cost-effective sites, an additional arrest cost less than US14,000. In the most cost-effective
sites, an additional arrest cost less than US4,000. Expanding the use of DNA as an investigative tool has profound implications.
Since DNA-led investigations are more costly than business-as-usual, substantial investments will be required to expand the
capacity of crime laboratories, police, and prosecutors to use this investigative tool efficiently. In time, such a change
may also impact the types of crimes of cases processed in the criminal justice system. 相似文献
8.
1