STUDENT RESOURCES BY CHAPTER

The Social Capacity of Inmates

“Individuals who are unable to develop pro-social relationships within their social referent groups are more likely to commit violent crime,” Professor Ian James concluded from his research. About six months ago, Professor James came across a survey instrument designed to measure an individual’s social quotient. The term ‘social quotient’ is analogous to ‘intelligence quotient.’ An intelligence quotient, or IQ, test measures an individual’s cognitive capacity. The social quotient test that Professor James used, called the Social Quotient (SQ) Inventory, measures an individual’s ability to interact positively in social settings.

Professor James had administered the SQ Inventory to 100 inmates at a prison near the university where he worked. As a personal friend of the warden, he was granted nearly unfettered access to the inmates. After completing his research, he wrote an article and submitted it for publication to a scholarly journal. A few weeks later, he received a rather scathing response from the peer reviewers. Here are some of the reviewers’ comments.

• “The SQ Inventory was not developed to measure an individual’s ability to interact positively in social settings. It is a measure of the ability to maintain connections within a social referent group.”
• “The SQ Inventory was developed for high school students who experience difficulty making friends. It is not appropriate for an inmate population.”
• The SQ Inventory is written at a 12th grade reading level and the average reading level in the inmate population is at the 6th grade level.”
• “The researcher reports a high number of no responses on the SQ Inventory. This level of non-responsiveness threatens the ability to conduct an appropriate analysis.”
• “The SQ Inventory measures an individual’s ability to maintain connections with a current social referent group. In this case, the respondents were asked how they get along with other inmates. These data cannot be used to measure the inmates’ social quotient prior to committing a crime.”

As a result of the peer review process, Professor James’ article was rejected by the editor of the scholarly journal.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 2—The Research Process.

Research with a Little Help from Our ‘Friends’

Dr. Barney Peters is a professor of sociology at a mid-sized university in the northeast. Over many years, Dr. Peters has noticed that cohorts of students (e.g., a section of Introduction to Sociology) tend to organize themselves into well-defined roles. He develops a typology that describes these roles.

• Trendsetters—students who exert a great deal of influence on the behavior of other students.
• Enforcers—students who enforce the influence of trendsetters through various forms of ‘feedback.’
• Followers—students who conform to the influence of trendsetters without question.
• Rebels—students who rebel against the influence of trendsetters.

According to Professor Peters, a trendsetter might express an opinion about a controversial topic during a class discussion. A follower would express approval of the opinion either explicitly (e.g., with an affirmative node) or explicitly (e.g., no reaction at all). A rebel would express disagreement with the trendsetter’s opinion. An enforcer has two functions. First, he might encourage others to agree with the trendsetter’s opinion. Second, he may verbally ridicule anyone who disagrees with the trendsetter’s opinion.

So far, Professor Peters’ typology is a casual but consistent observation. He wonders whether students continue these roles outside of the classroom and beyond the university. So, with the assistance of his graduate assistants, Professor Peters ‘encourages’ his students to ‘friend’ him on his personal Facebook account. He explains that doing so would enable him to ‘better communicate’ with them during the semester.

Over the next decade, Professor Peters ‘follows’ the students in each of his classes. He ‘enters’ their Facebook ‘world’ and analyzes how they interact with their other ‘friends.’ The purpose of this research is to determine whether the students maintained the roles they adopted while they were in his class. Eventually, he publishes the results of his study and is designated as a “Distinguished Research Fellow” by the university.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 3—The Ethical Principles that Guide Researchers.

I Paid For This Research, So I Can Use It As I See Fit

DYCR Corporation is a company that specializes in non-lethal weaponry for military clients. Recently, the company developed a product called the Audio Arrester. This device uses sound waves to ‘stun’ potential assailants just long enough for the user to gain control of a conflict. The device has been used with some success in a few military conflicts in and around urban areas.

In order to enhance sales of the Audio Arrester, DYCR Corporation has developed a similar product for police departments. They claim the device “does not cause hearing loss in individuals that use it, have it used on them, or are nearby where it is used.”

Chief Amanda Jones of the Bigton Police Department is considering the purchase of an Audio Arrester. She is concerned, however, that the device will cause hearing loss and asks the salesman to substantiate the company’s claim. The salesman gladly provides her with a sales folder that includes a summary of the “independent research” that substantiates the company’s claim that the device will not cause hearing loss.

After the salesman leaves, Chief Jones thinks, “If the device ‘stuns’ assailants, might it not have the same effect on officers?” She notices that the research summary on the sales folder cites the independent company that allegedly did the product safety research on the Audio Arrester. Using the Internet, she located the company’s address and telephone number. She called the company and asked for a copy of the research report. A representative from the research company told her that they could not distribute the report because, “That research was funded by the DYCR Corporation and, per a contractual agreement, she would have to obtain a copy from the company.” Chief Jones called DYCR’s corporate headquarters and asked for a copy of the report. The company’s representative complied and emailed her a copy of the full report.

After reading the report, Chief Jones had more questions. The researcher had tested the hearing of individuals after they had been exposed to the Audio Arrester. Unfortunately, there was no data indicating the hearing levels of individuals before they were exposed to the device. She noticed that the research had been conducted by a professor from a prestigious university. She found the professor’s telephone number and placed a call to him for clarification.

When asked about the absence of ‘before’ readings, the professor bristled a response. “I did do ‘before’ readings. The company redacted that information in the final report because the difference between ‘before’ and ‘after’ hearing levels was not statistically significant,” the professor said. “Was there any hearing loss at all?” Chief Jones asked. “I can’t say because I signed a non-disclosure statement as part of my agreement with DYCR Corporation,” the professor responded.

With that, Chief Jones turned her attention to the ‘independent research company.’ It took a bit of looking but she learned that the ‘independent research company,’ called DYCR Research is a wholly owned subsidiary of DYCR Corporation. She again called the DYCR Research headquarters and asked what other products safety research reports they did. She was told that they only do testing for products manufactured and distributed by the DYCR Corporation.

Chief Jones called DYCR, Inc.’s corporate headquarters and asked to speak with the chief executive officer. To her surprise, the CEO took the call. She presented the findings of her investigation to the CEO and asked for a full disclosure of the research information. The CEO scoffed at her request and said, “Chief, we paid for that research and it is ours to do with what we please.”

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 3—The Ethical Principles that Guide Researchers.

What Does That Mean?

During a routine group therapy session with some juvenile sexual offenders, Clarice Adams, a correctional counselor, heard several of the attendees use the term ‘rollicking.’ She knew the dictionary defined ‘rollicking’ as loud, rowdy, or boisterous. She suspected the probationers were using a different connotation.

She asked and was told by one of the probationers that “rollicking is sort of like an orgy.” Another probationer disagreed and said the term referred to “doing it in front of a group.” There seemed to be disagreement among the probationers on the precise meaning of the term. There was not, however, any doubt about the pervasiveness of the practice among this group of offenders.

Clarice knew that high risk and experimental sexual behaviors are frequent among these types of offenders. This practice seemed a bit different than other similar behaviors she had encountered in twenty years of correctional counseling. So, she decided to do a bit of research.

Clarice quickly checked the available literature and found some reference to group sexual behaviors among juveniles. The previous research suggested that most of these behaviors were ritualistic and, in some cases, a part of initiation rites for juvenile gangs. She found no research that described the behaviors described by the probationers in her group therapy session.

She selected a sample of twenty juvenile sexual offenders—ten boys and ten girls. She developed a set of interview questions with open-ended responses. After securing approval from her agency’s Institutional Review Board, she conducted interviews with the juveniles in her sample. Her research confirmed what the probationers had told her. Rollicking refers to sexual behavior with or in front of a group. The interviews revealed more details about this behavior.

• Often these sessions are spontaneous and potential participants experience a great deal of peer pressure to participate.
• The use of condoms is strongly discouraged.
• Although sexual in nature, it appears the behavior is primarily a social bonding exercise.

The most interesting finding from the research is the group nature of these sexual interactions. Traditionally, sexual offenders behave individually and go to great lengths to conceal their behaviors. It appears these sessions are encouraged and attended by small groups of sexual offenders who find pleasure in exposing their behaviors.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 4—Classifying Research.

Overreaching the Data

Captain Lorenzo Hinojosa supervises the human trafficking unit of a large metropolitan police agency in the American Southwest. Recently, he attended a meeting sponsored by an advocacy group that represents victims of human trafficking.

At this meeting, representatives from an advocacy group presented Captain Hinojosa with a ‘typical profile’ of a human trafficker. According to their research, the ‘typical human trafficker’ on the southern border of the United States is:

• male
• between 40 and 55 years old
• Hispanic

The representatives further state that when caught human traffickers:

• are transporting large groups of victims in vehicles designed to carry much fewer passengers,
• have large amounts of cash in their possession, and
• seldom possess documents that would reveal their identity.

The leader of the advocacy group encouraged Captain Hinojosa and the other policing professionals that attended the meeting to “use this information to detect human traffickers.”

Captain Hinojosa scoffed at the notion that this ‘profile’ would be useful to the human trafficking unit that he supervised.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 4—Classifying Research.

Interpreting Positive and Negative Correlations

Jack Larson, the warden of a large prison, has just terminated a correctional officer. This officer was observed several months ago imbibing alcohol while on duty. At that time, the warden sent this experienced officer to a substance abuse facility in attempt to salvage his career. Less than a week after the officer finished the program, he reported for work intoxicated. Warden Larson had no choice but to terminate the officer.

During the process, one of the associate wardens mentioned that alcoholism and substance abuse are common among correctional officers. Jack was surprised. He had been with the state’s correctional system for decades, starting as a correctional officer. He knew of officers who consumed alcohol and occasionally encountered one who appeared to have a slight problem, but not to the level of pervasiveness suggested by the associate warden.

With the assistance of a professor from a state university, Warden Larson set out to identify the pervasiveness and potential cause of alcoholism among correctional officers. The professor designed an anonymous survey instrument and conducted interviews.

The results were astonishing. As the associate warden suggested, the level of alcoholism and other forms of substance abuse among correctional officers was astonishing. Jack wanted an explanation of why the level of substance abuse appeared to be higher among correctional officers than in the general population. Although a survey cannot definitively reveal a causal relationship between variables, it did provide some insight.

Two findings seemed contradictory:

• The relationship between age and substance abuse is negative.
• The relationship between experience as a correctional officer and substance abuse is positive.

“How could both of these be true?” Jack asked. Age and experience happen at the same time. When a person gets older, they also become more experienced. Shouldn’t the relationships between these two variables and substance abuse be the same?

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 5—Causality.

Following all of the Rules

The chief of a large metropolitan police department was anxiously awaiting a press conference wherein the result of a racial profiling study would be revealed. When the mayor first suggested a racial profiling study by an independent researcher, the chief was supportive. However, during the past few weeks of reviewing the preliminary copies of the study the chief became less enamored with the idea.

He did not mind the objectivity of the study. In fact, he viewed this as a positive thing. The public would be less willing to accept the findings from an internal study because the department had recently been embroiled in a controversy following the custodial death of an African-American youth. The autopsy revealed that the police officers involved in the study were not to blame for the youth’s death, but objective facts seldom overcome deep-seated mistrust.

Finally, the time had arrived. The researcher presented the following findings.

From these data, the researcher concluded that African-American drivers are more likely to be stopped by the police department. They represent 12 percent of the drivers in the community (estimated by the residential population from the latest census) and 20 percent of the drivers stopped (as reported on police department stops forms).

When asked by a reporter to explain why African-American drivers are more likely to be stopped, the researcher stated “because the officers are engaging in racial profiling.” The public response was immediate and intense. Political leaders ran to the nearest microphones to either chastise or defend the department.

In research method terms, the researcher is alleging that race is the cause of a stop. More specifically, the researcher alleges that being an African-American increases an individual’s probability of being stopped. Let’s look at this controversy as researchers.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 5—Causality.

Identifying the Level of Measurement

Professor Alan Flanagan is an expert in juvenile delinquency. Recently he has become interested in how a juvenile delinquent progresses, or fails to progress, into adult criminality. He collects data on a random sample of 100 adult inmates. His data set includes the following variables.

• Gender of the inmate
• Current age of the inmate
• Age at which the inmate first committed a delinquent act (as a juvenile)
• Age at which the inmate first committed a criminal act (as an adult)
• Annual income at the time of the offense that sent the inmate to prison
• Perceived socio-economic status of the inmate’s family while a juvenile (poor, middle class, wealthy)
• Race or ethnicity of the inmate
• Number of years of formal education
• Seriousness of the inmate’s first delinquent act (on a scale of 1–10 with 10 being the most serious type of crime)
• Seriousness of the inmate’s latest criminal act (on a scale of 1–10 with 10 being the most serious type of crime)
• Religious preference while a juvenile
• Religious preference as a adult
• Marital status

Identify the level of measurement for each of these variables.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 6—Measurement.

Research is Only as Good as its Measures

Professor Sam Sanders hypothesizes that children with learning disabilities are more likely to engage in juvenile delinquency. To test his hypotheses, he intends to administer a survey on 200 randomly selected adolescents between the age of 14 and 17 years old.

Of course, before he does this he must develop conceptual definitions for ‘learning disability’ and ‘juvenile delinquency.’ He defines ‘learning disability’ as any diagnosed condition that restricts a child’s ability to learn. He designates a child as a juvenile delinquent if he/she has been convicted of a crime prior to his or her 17th birthday.

Professor Sanders operationalizes ‘learning disability’ with a review of the child’s transcript. If more than 50 percent of a child’s grades are ‘D’ or less, he assumes the child is unsuccessful in school and therefore must be learning disabled.

His results are a bit confounding. There appears to be no reliable relationship between learning disability and juvenile delinquency.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 6—Measurement.

Paying Attention to Details

Professor Warren Weiss recently received a survey in the mail. The survey is from the National Association of University Professors (NAUP) and its purpose was to gather demographic information about university professors.

The questions asked on the survey were pretty benign. The NAUP is a well respected advocate for university faculty and had, on a number of occasions, supported issues that are important to scholars. For example, the NAUP recently provided legal counsel to a professor at a state university who had been fired after expressing an unpopular opinion about the state’s governor.

Professor Weiss decided to participate. Later that evening, Professor Weiss responded to the questions until he got to the end of the survey. As an experienced survey researcher, what Professor Weiss saw was shocking. The response sets were poorly constructed. Here are some examples.

Place a check mark beside the range that includes your age.

• 20–30
• 30–35
• 35–40
• 40–55
• 55–65
• 65 or older

Place a check mark beside the range that includes your nine month academic salary.

• $20,000–$30,000
• $30,001–$40,000
• $50,001–$60,000
• $60,001 or more

What is your academic rank?

• Assistant professor
• Associate professor
• Professor

How many credit hours are you typically assigned to teach during a semester or quarter?

• 1–3
• 3–6
• 6–9

What is your race/ethnicity?

• White or Caucasian
• Black or African-American
• Asian
• Pacific Islander
• Native American
• Other, please specify                                                 

Help Professor Weiss critique the mutual exclusivity and exhaustiveness of these survey question response sets.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 7—Variables and the Structure of Research.

Classifying Hypotheses

Professor Sonja McKenna is preparing to conduct a research project on the effectiveness of a cognitive intervention strategy for reducing recidivism among adult property crime ex-offenders. The cognitive intervention strategy is a forty-hour program that is designed to teach ex-offenders how to make pro-social choices. The preliminary results indicate that ex-offenders who participate in the program are less likely to reoffend once released from prison.

Professor McKenna selects a random sample of 100 property offenders who are, for all practical purposes, about the same in terms of their ages, gender, levels of education, intelligence, criminal history experiences, and anticipate release on parole dates. She randomly divides the 100 members of the sample into two equivalent groups. She measures the inmates’ capacity to make pro-social choices using a previously developed Pro-Social Decision Making Capacity Inventory to both groups, further confirming that the two groups are equivalent with respect to the variables that could affect change in their pro-social decision-making capacity.

Professor McKenna exposes one group (i.e., the experimental group) to a forty-hour classroom cognitive intervention program. A month later, both groups of inmates are released on parole. Professor McKenna believes that the inmates who were exposed to the cognitive intervention training program are less likely to re-offend within five years of release from prison.

Let’s evaluate Professor McKenna’s hypotheses.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 7—Variables and the Structure of Research.

The Potential Effect of Sampling Bias

Lieutenant Alan Adamcik is the supervisor of a special gang task force. Recently, he was asked to participate in a long-term study involving a sample of juveniles. The researcher, a university professor, is interested in how juveniles are led into gang membership. He proposes to select a sample of 100 juveniles about 12 years of age. He intends to contact these juveniles and, with their parent’s permission, collect extensive lifestyle data (e.g., family structure, school performance, friends, etc.) that the previous research has identified as related to gang membership. Then, twice each year, the researcher will interview each member of the sample, collect the same data, and determine the extent to which the juveniles are gang members, have been approached to join a gang, or have refused to join a gang. The professor has asked Lieutenant Adamcik to help with the sampling and with recognizing gang participation in the juveniles’ behaviors.

Lieutenant Adamcik has a good relationship with the supervisor of the School Resource Officer Program. He asks this supervisor to help him choose 100 juveniles for a gang study. The School Resource Officer Program is offered at the five high schools and ten junior high schools in the urban area roughly equivalent to the jurisdiction of Lieutenant Adamcik’s department. It is from these junior high schools (eighth graders) that the sample is randomly selected. The School Resource Officers at these schools obtained a list of the eighth graders. At the principals’ request, students who earn poor grades or have serious discipline problems were removed from the rosters. Each School Resource Officer selected every 11th student from his or her list of students until they each had 12 students. The names, addresses, and parental contact information for each of the students were given to the professor. The initial list of 120 students was pared down to about 106 students, mainly because some parents did not want their children to participate.

Once the sample is selected, the initial interviews are conducted. The professor is surprised to learn that only about 5 percent of the 12-year-olds had even thought about joining a gang. Over the next five years the influence of the gang subculture is rare within the sample. By the end of the five-year study, only about 2 percent of the juveniles in the sample are either in a gang or thought seriously about joining a gang during the five-year study. The professor publishes a startling finding, “Although traditionally viewed as rampant within juveniles, the opportunity and willingness to join a gang is almost non-existent.”

Let’s consider the manner in which the sample of juveniles was collected and predict if this process may have biased the results of the study.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 8—Sampling.

Hackers Revealed

Joe Adamson is an intelligence analyst with the National Security Agency. His specialty is cybercrime. Lately, he has become interested in hackers. He has the technical knowledge to understand how hackers illegally enter and manipulate computer systems. So far, he has been successful at prohibiting hackers from illegally entering the systems he manages.

Recently, his supervisor asked him to conduct a study on hackers. The supervisor wants:

• a description of the ‘typical’ hacker,
• why these individuals choose to engage in hacking, i.e., what they hope to accomplish,
• what sorts of skills they need to acquire and how they acquire them,
• what motivates them to hack, and
• how the NSA might co-opt prolific hackers to become informers.

Because there is no central list of hackers available from which Joe could select a sample, he chooses to access hackers, one at a time through several clandestine websites that they frequent. His sampling process involves making a connection with a hacker (under an assumed identity), establishing a relationship, and (over time) asking questions that would be responsive to his research questions. Often he finds it necessary to ask willing subjects to refer him to other hackers.

After several months, Joe has collected information from thirty-two hackers. Early on in the process he noticed a pattern among them. Most are young, highly intelligent, and technically astute. He deduces from their responses to his questions that they are a bit reclusive and may be socially inept. Interestingly, he develops a typology with which to classify hackers.

Let us evaluate the method by which Joe collected this sample.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 8—Sampling.

Finding the Threats to Internal Validity

Fran Mitchell is a juvenile probation officer who specializes in drug addiction. At a recent professional meeting she learned of a new faith-based program based on Christian doctrine that has been nominally successful at reducing drug and alcohol use among adolescents. The preliminary numbers are encouraging, so she seeks permission to try the program on her caseload of 50 juvenile drug offenders.

First, she randomly divides her caseload into two groups. Then, she confirms that both groups are relatively equivalent in terms of age, level of drug/alcohol abuse, criminal history, and family support, all factors that tend to have an effect on drug and alcohol dependency. For the next six months, she monitors the urinalysis results of her caseload. The results of these tests are her dependent variable. The results confirm that the two groups have roughly equivalent levels of failed drug tests over the six month ‘pretest’ time.

She designates one of the groups as the experimental group and allows a trained professional to expose them to the faith-based program. The other group, which she designates as the control group, continues its participation in the regular program that all juvenile drug/alcohol addicts are required to complete as a condition of their probation. These programs are each six months long.

At the end of the experiment she again closely monitors the urinalysis results of both groups for a period of six months. Much to her surprise, the level of failed drug tests are equivalent for both groups. More interestingly, the probationers in both groups appear to have reduced their drug and alcohol use substantially. This level of reduction is unprecedented, even from the traditional program offered by the juvenile probation department. She concludes from this that either program appears to have the same effect on drug and alcohol abuse.

Fran decides to continue monitoring the urinalysis results. Within nine months after the completion of the traditional program, the level of failed urinalyses return to their pretest levels. The levels of failed urinalyses remained low (at or below the posttest level) for the research subjects that were exposed to the faith-based program. Frustrated with these results, she decides to conduct interviews with a small sample of her caseload.

During these interviews she learns that an event happened during but outside of the experiment that might explain why both groups of research subjects reduced their drug and alcohol use. It seems that a local musician, popular to the juveniles, named Dippity Doc passed away from a drug overdose during the experiment. This information was known to all of the research subjects and discussed openly in several of the treatment sessions. The probationers seemed to be greatly affected by the passing of the musician and many articulated that they ‘swore off’ drugs shortly thereafter.

Let us consider the threats to the internal validity of Fran’s experimental results.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 9—Experimental Design Research Methods.

Improving the Literacy of Student/Inmates

Jim Jackson is a school teacher who works in the state prison system. He specializes in literacy development for adult offenders. Lately, he has become rather frustrated with the materials he uses to improve the literacy rates of adult offenders. “They just do not seem to work on this new generation of inmates,” he argues. The principal agrees to allow him to try an alternative therapy.

Jim normally teaches two sections of adult literacy to about 50 inmates, 25 in each class. Next week he will begin with two new sections of inmates. For one group, he continues the traditional methods used that are based on the whole language approach. This literacy training program relies on the student/inmate’s ability to memorize a long list of key words. The new program is based on phonics instruction that teaches student/inmates how to use certain rules for pronouncing words. Although phonics instruction is not new to education, this new approach is more interactive.

The classes begin as scheduled. For the next few months Jim exposes one group to the traditionally-used (whole language) approach and the other group to the new phonics-based approach. At the end of the semester Jim administers a reading speed and comprehension test. He is encouraged to learn that the students that attended the phonics-based instruction were reading at a ninth grade level, while the students who were exposed to the traditionally-used method were only reading at the sixth grade level. He assumes the traditionally used method had no effect on the student/inmates’ reading speed and comprehension because the average reading levels of inmates entering the facility has been consistently at the sixth grade level for decades.

Let us evaluate Jim’s experimental method.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 9—Experimental Design Research Methods.

Which Survey Format Would Work Best?

Barbara Martin is a researcher who works for the State Policy Council, a small group of researchers who collect data on matters of public concern for legislators and other state policy makers. Recently, the death penalty has become a controversial issue in the state. This controversy arose when the state prison nearly executed a man for a murder that a subsequent DNA test revealed he could not have committed. The condemned man was within hours of execution before the results were available, forcing the governor to issue an emergency stay while the inmate was being prepared for the death chamber.

Barbara developed and pretested a series of survey questions. These questions were designed to determine the level of support for the state’s death penalty. The legislature was scheduled to go into session within two weeks and a few members had already filed legislation to prohibit the death penalty.

The state is geographically large and demographically diverse. This meant that any sample that would be representative of the state’s populace would have to be very large. About half of the state’s population lives in rural areas. In addition, twelve percent of the state’s adult population does not speak or read English fluently. This would require the translation of the survey instrument into Spanish. Luckily, the State Policy Council had enough resources to conduct a survey of this sort in a very quick time. Furthermore, the narrow focus of this survey did not require a lengthy instrument.

Let’s consider which survey format Barbara should use.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 10—Survey/Interview Research Methods.

Making the Connection Between Response Sets and Analysis Needs

The City of Bigton is a diverse community of about 15,000 residents. It is located adjacent to a large metropolitan area. About 40 percent of its residents are African-American, 40 percent are White, 12 percent are Hispanic, and the remaining 8 percent are Asian, Native American, Pacific Islander, mixed race, or some other race.

Recently, a controversy erupted over a stop and search made by one of the Bigton police officers. The stop involved a group of four African-American juveniles at night on the interstate highway that traverses the community. The driver and passengers were not residents of Bigton. The officer alleged that the vehicle was traveling 22 miles over the posted speed limit.

During the stop the officer asked the driver and each of the passengers to exit the vehicle. He asked for consent to search the vehicle. The subsequent search did not produce contraband or evidence of additional criminal behavior. He issued the driver a warning and terminated the contact.

The young driver happened to be the son of the mayor in a neighboring community. When stopped, he and his three friends were returning from a church activity. The driver alleged that had he not been African-American he would not likely have been stopped and searched. The officer responded that it was night and that he was not able to determine the driver’s race prior to the initial face to face contact. Even so, the driver (with the assistance of his politically astute father) conducted a press conference and accused the Bigton Police Department of racial profiling.

In order to avoid any sense of impropriety, the Mayor of Bigton asked a professor from a nearby university to conduct a survey of Bigton’s residents. Specifically, the mayor wanted to know if racial and ethnic minorities are treated differently during stops by the officers of the Bigton Police Department.

Because the city maintained an active list of residents’ email addresses, the professor chose to conduct an internet-based survey. He emailed a notice to each of the residents and asked them to log on to a website with their street address to take the survey. About 2,500 residents responded to the survey. Here are a few of the questions that the professor asked.

How would you best describe your race or ethnicity?

• Minority
• Non-minority

Were you recently stopped by an officer from the Bigton Police Department? If so, why? (check one)

• A traffic violation
• An equipment violation
• No reason stated by the officer
• Other (specify)                                               

Were you searched during the stop?

• Yes
• No

Did the search reveal any illegal substances or evidence of another crime?

• Yes
• No
• Don’t know

Were you issued a citation?

• Yes
• No

From these and the other responses the professor concluded that:

• About 60 percent of the respondents reported that they are a racial or ethnic minority.
• About 10 percent of all respondents reported that they had been stopped by an officer from the Bigton Police Department.
• 85 percent of these individuals indicated that they were stopped for a traffic violation.
• 10 percent of these individuals indicated that they were stopped for an equipment violation
• 8 percent of these individuals indicated that they were stopped for another reason.
• 2 percent of these individuals indicated that they did not know why they were stopped.
• About 5 percent of the respondents indicated that they had been searched.
• About 2 percent of the respondents indicated that the officer had found an illegal substance or evidence of another crime during the search.
• About 90 percent of the individuals reported that they received a citation.

Let us consider whether the professor’s response sets provided the data that was responsive to the research question?

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 10—Survey/Interview Research Methods.

Are Terrorists as Good as Their Words?

Byron Mathewson is an intelligence analyst for a large metropolitan police department. In recent years, Byron has become quite prolific at finding and monitoring internet websites, chat rooms, blogs, and other electronic communications between known and suspected terrorists.

Following a relatively minor terroristic event, Byron reviewed the communications between the individuals and groups that took credit to see if he could find a pattern. In fact, he did. He noticed that prior to the terroristic event, communications between individuals known to be associated with the group:

• increased in frequency,
• became more specific about a pending terroristic event,
• began using a label that described a pending event, and
• were more vitriolic.

Similar patterns existed in the communications of other terroristic organizations prior to an actual or thwarted terroristic event. Given this knowledge, Byron developed a method for predicting a pending terroristic theat. He hypothesized that a terrorist event was imminent when:

• ‘chatter’ between individuals within a known terroristic organization increased in frequency,
• discussions about terrorist events became more specific with respect to location, scope, and intensity,
• when a previously used term (a label) became commonplace in their communications, and
• the communications became more sharply critical of the government or a private enterprise.

Let us discuss Byron’s research methodology.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 11—Non-Reactive Research Methods.

Who’s Tagging the Evergreen?

Allison Baggett, the President of the Evergreen Neighborhood Association, is frustrated with graffiti. The neighborhood is across the street from a large shopping mall. A linear park (greenbelt) courses through the middle of the neighborhood. This linear park features a winding sidewalk. Several years ago the residents with backyards adjacent to the park erected a five foot concrete wall on both sides of the park to reduce noise and asked the city to reduce the number of street lamps to reduce ‘light pollution.’

Nearly twice each week a resident calls Allison to complain about new graffiti on the wall. The problem is so pervasive that the association even purchased a sandblaster to remove graffiti. Nothing the Association does, including increase police patrols, seems to have any effect on graffiti. In desperation, Allison contacts the police department.

Lieutenant James Brooks has a great deal of experience with these sorts of public disorder crimes. He suspects that juveniles walking to and from the shopping mall are the culprits. Increasing visible police presence would deter individuals from tagging the walls but only when the police are actually there. Because it is a private park, the municipal police department is limited in the resources it can devote to this project.

Lieutenant Brooks suggests the installation of low light cameras throughout the park. When positioned properly, these cameras will record the time and date of tagging incidents as well as provide photographs of suspects. The neighborhood association agrees.

About a week later, Lieutenant Brooks reviews the digital tapes and discovers some rather interesting facts.

• Nearly all of the tagging is done by the same individual.
• There were very few instances where juveniles travelling to and from the mall were observed tagging.
• The primary tagger enters the park through a controlled access gate from the neighborhood. Only members of the association can open this gate.
• Nearly always the tagger is walking a small dog while tagging.
• The suspect appears to be an elderly man.
• Most tagging incidents are done very early in the morning.

With Allison’s assistance, Lieutenant Brooks is able to identify and arrest the suspect. He is charged and convicted of defacing private property. He pays a large fine and his one-year jail sentence is probated. Shorty thereafter, the man moves from the neighborhood. Tagging incidents drop considerably. It seems that the resident is ‘motivated’ to tag the wall because he objected to it being erected at the expense of the neighborhood association.

Let us evaluate Lieutenant Brooks’ research method.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 11—Non-Reactive Research Methods.

Why Did You Stop That Car?

The conventional wisdom suggests that age and gender are highly related to the propensity to violate the traffic law and be observed by a police officer. Younger drivers tend to commit more violations than older drivers. Male drivers are more likely to commit traffic violations than female drivers. Younger drivers drive more frequently and are therefore more likely to be subjected to routine police surveillance and, in turn, stopped.

Aside from these rather consistent findings, it appears that the probability of being stopped by a police officer mainly depends on whether the police officer decides to initiate a stop. Unless and until a police officer actually decides to do so, a traffic stop will not occur, even for an overtly heinous traffic law violation. A police officer may, at his or her discretion, ignore traffic violations with relative impunity. The other side of this coin is that a police officer may, again at his or her discretion and with limited impunity, decide to initiate a traffic stop in the absence of a bona fide violation of the law. The anecdotal evidence suggests that most drivers commit violations of the traffic law on a fairly regular basis. Given the presence of literally thousands of traffic violations ranging from a dirty license plate to vehicular homicide, the opportunities for a so motivated officer to initiate a pretextual traffic stop are nearly limitless.

So how do police officers decide which cars to stop? If traffic violations occur on a regular basis, why are some overlooked while others result in a quick decision to initiate a traffic stop? Are some drivers more likely to be stopped because of their race, age, gender, type of car, where they happen to be observed driving, time of day, etc.?

Michele Quintana, a doctoral student, conducted an extensive literature review of the research that might explain why a police officer initiates a traffic stop. This research, most of it quantitatively measured, suggested that the seriousness of the observed violation, the violations that officers are deployed to focus their enforcement time on, and other contextual factors tend to be associated with the decision to initiate a stop. But association is not cause. Michele wanted to dig deeper into this decision-making process in order to understand its complexities.

To do this, she randomly selected a group of ten police officers from a metropolitan police department near the university she attended. She sat these officers in a room and asked them a series of preselected questions, like:

• How often do you observed traffic violations on a typical shift?
• What percentage of these observations result in a traffic stop?
• What percentage of these observations do not result in a traffic stop?
• What contextual factors are present in and around the observations that result in a traffic stop?
• What contextual factors are present in and around the observations that do not result in a traffic stop?
• Do you ever decide to stop a vehicle or driver prior to observing them violate the traffic law?
• If so, why?
• If so, under what conditions?
• If so, how long does it usually take before the driver commits a violation of the traffic law, thereby legally justifying the stop?

Of course, this was only an initial list of questions. The idea behind this data collection method was to engage the officers in a fruitful discussion on the logic, or lack thereof, associated with the decision to initiate a traffic stop.

The meeting was scheduled to last about an hour. It lasted three, and had Michele not stopped the discussion, it might have gone on for several hours more. Here is an overview of what she learned.

• Police officers observe dozens of bona fide traffic violations during a typical shift.
• Police officers initiate traffic stops on a small fraction of the observed traffic violations.
• The decision to initiate a traffic stop is complicated and varies from officer to officer.
• The most consistent factor affecting the decision to initiate a traffic stop are contextual factors associated with the observation. These contextual factors include, but are not limited to:
• the time of day
• the perceived value of the vehicle within the socio-economic climate of the neighborhood
• how the driver reacts to being observed
• the types and frequency of crimes committed in the area
• Police officers use these and other contextual factors while deciding to initiate a pretextual stop.
• Normally, a police officer will observe a bona fide (albeit minor) violation of the traffic law within one mile of the initial observation.

Let’s evaluate Michele’s research method.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 12—Qualitative Research Methods.

Drugs Incorporated

Walter Isaacs is somewhat of a maverick among his colleagues in the College of Business Administration. He could spend his time conducting research on legitimate business enterprises. However, Walter is more interested in illegal business.

His research suggests that the process by which individuals conduct business is the same regardless of the legality of the business. Business leaders focus their attention on efficiency, reducing risks, and, of course, on increasing profit. According to Professor Isaacs, “The owners of a dry cleaning business and the owner of a marijuana distribution cartel do essentially the same things.”

To test his theory, Walter took a year-long sabbatical. With the assistance of a narcotics sergeant from the local police department he decided to infuse himself in the illegal drug trade. Walter spent weeks creating an alternative identity. He let his gray hair grow long, stopped shaving, bought some ‘flashy’ clothes, and even got a few tattoos. Hanging out on a street corner one day Walter was confronted by a local drug distributor and offered a ‘job.’ “You are an old guy. Nobody will suspect you of dealing in drugs. I want you to help me deliver drugs from my warehouse to the main pushers in the city,” the drug distributor proposed. Walter jumped at the chance.

For the next few months, Professor Isaacs was, for all practical purposes, a drug distributor. He dutifully picked up small cases of illegal drugs at a warehouse, delivered them to the sellers, and returned with the proceeds. He became a trusted member of the team. So much so that Walter was invited to accompany the boss to the production facility—a cocaine producing farm in South America. Just as Walter suspected, the discussions between the distributor and his production workers was not much different than that of a legitimate shoe shop owner talking to the factory manager at a shoe assembly plant. On the way home, Walter used his well-developed quality control skills to recommend some changes to the boss for reducing risk and a more efficient delivery of the product.

At the end of the year, with his sabbatical nearing an end, Walter feigned a fatal illness. He told his boss that he needed to move to another town to be near his daughter so she could take care of him in his waning months. Walter had been so convincing that the boss believe him and even suggested that Walter set up a new distribution center in the town where he was moving to.

After six weeks of near seclusion at his cabin by the lake, Walter organized the notes from his research experience. Eventually, this research would result in the publication of dozens of articles in scholarly journals, two books, a cover story in Time magazine (all with Walter’s concealed identity), and a distinguished professorship. Walter’s detailed descriptions of the inner workings of a large drug distribution cartel proved his point. It does not matter whether the business is legitimate or illegal—business is the same. Importantly, Walter’s work provided the most detailed insight into the ‘corporate culture’ of the illegal drug business.

Let’s evaluate Walter’s research method.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 12—Qualitative Research Methods.

What Are We Trying To Do Here?

Last year the city council in a midsize southern community (population 250,000) passed an ordinance requiring its police officers to arrest individuals they suspected to be guilty of domestic violence. A similar ordinance had been proposed numerous times in the state legislature but had never passed.

The chief of police at the time when the ordinance was being discussed was not in favor. “Look, we don’t have any problem arresting suspects. But these suspects are different because they live with their victims and in some cases their victims depend on them. Maybe the best approach would be more ‘social workers’ and fewer ‘police officers,’” he said publically. The chief knew that in most cases the victims of domestic abusers drop the charges the next morning, after realizing that the primary means of support for themselves and their families would not be available to them if convicted of domestic violence and sent to jail. His concern was that a mandatory arrest policy would constrain domestic violence victims from calling for help. Given the escalating nature of this crime pattern, a mandatory arrest policy might result in more severe injuries. When the ordinance passed, the chief chose to retire.

A year later the chief, now an adjunct professor at a nearby university, decided to revisit the mandatory arrest policy. Using his knowledge of the criminal justice system he was able to locate a sample of approximately 1,000 victims of domestic violence whose cases occurred prior to the mandatory arrest policy. In a similar fashion he located a sample of approximately 900 victims of domestic violence whose cases occurred six months or later after the effective date of the mandatory arrest policy. He believed that it likely took six months for the public to completely understand the ramifications of the mandatory arrest policy.

Using a mail survey, he asked these victims questions relating to their victimization. Here are a few of the most important questions.

• How many times were you abused by the same person before you called the police?               
• How severe were the physical injuries you sustained during the incident that you called the police? (check all that apply)
• Minor cuts or bruises (not requiring medical attention)
• Serious cuts or bruises (requiring some limited medical attention)
• Sprains
• Broken bones
• Injuries to internal organs
• Injuries that required immediate medical care
• Injuries that adversely affected your long-term mobility
• Injuries that adversely affected your long-term health or lifestyle
• Other (explain)
• Were you reluctant to call the police?
• Yes
• No
• If you answered ‘yes’ to the previous question, explain why.

After analyzing the results, the chief turned professor, confirmed his suspicions. Domestic violence victims were more reluctant to contact the police for help after the enactment of the mandatory arrest policy. This delay resulted in an escalation of victimization. Injuries sustained by domestic violence victims after the enactment of the mandatory arrest policy were substantially more severe than those of victims occurring prior to the enactment of the mandatory arrest policy.

Let’s evaluate the former chief’s research method.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 13—Evaluation Research Methods.

Baseball and Punishment

About two decades ago, the state legislature passed a law requiring enhanced penalties for repeat violent offenders. Basically, the law requires that on the third conviction for a violent criminal offense the sentence imposed should not be less than 20 years to life in a state prison. The law, commonly called the ‘three strikes you’re out’ law, was designed to incapacitate violent offenders for longer periods. Ideally, the violent offenders sentenced under the law would have sufficient time in prison to ‘age out’ and be less likely to recidivate once released. Hopefully, knowledge of the law would deter potential violent offenders from committing a third violent offense.

During the twenty-year period following the enactment of this law, the crime rate across the state has consistently dropped. The rate of violent crime dropped more than 30 percent. Proponents of the ‘three strikes you’re out’ law argue that the drop in crime, particularly violent crime, is caused by the incapacitation of violent offenders. Opponents of the law argue that the crime rate has dropped in a neighboring state at the same rate during the same time. They attribute this drop to a reduction in the proportion of younger people in the population, i.e., the aging out of the Baby Boomer generation.

One thing is for sure, the law did increase the size of the state’s prison system. Over the past 20 years the state’s population grew 10 percent, while its prison population grew 75 percent. The law also had a disparate effect on African-American males. The proportion of African-American males within the state’s population remained constant at about 6 percent, while the percentage of African-American males incarcerated in the prison system grew from 10 to 20 percent.

The newly elected governor is concerned about the growing size of the prison system and its effect on the state’s budget. Correctional spending has grown (when corrected for inflation) more than 80 percent over the past two decades. Spending for education and economic development dropped (when corrected for inflation) about 20 percent each. The state is literally robbing the schoolhouse to pay for the jailhouse.

The governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and other state leaders have asked the state prison system to conduct an evaluation on the effectiveness of the ‘three strikes you’re out’ law. Specifically, they want to know if the law has reduced crime and been cost effective.

Let’s consider how one might conduct this evaluation research.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 13—Evaluation Research Methods.

Now it’s Personal

Recently, the police officers union, representing the officers at the Bigton Police Department, filed a grievance alleging that the City of Bigton is not adhering to the agreed upon compensation enhancement agreement. This agreement was negotiated about a decade ago. It required the city to weigh work experience and education equally while making merit salary decisions for police officers. The agreement was insisted on by the rank and file officers because most of them did not have a college degree. The city, on the other hand, wanted to attract more college educated officers, thinking that in doing so it would create a more efficient police force. During the negotiations for the labor contract, the two entities compromised and agreed to consider both factors equally. The agreement was intended to ensure that an experienced officer without a college degree and an inexperienced officer with a college degree would have an equal chance at earning additional salary due to merit.

The labor negotiation hearing officer ordered an analysis of the salaries of Bigton’s police officers. The analyst used the Pearson r statistic to determine correlation between education, experience, and salary. Here are the results.

Use these data to evaluate the union’s claim.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 14—Data and Information Analysis.

Decriminalizing Marijuana

The state legislature is in the middle of a controversy on whether to decriminalize the use of marijuana. The most widely discussed proposal would decriminalize (make legal) the possession of small amounts of marijuana (three grams or less) for personal or recreational use. The penalties for the distribution of large amounts of marijuana would remain the same.

Public opinion polls consistently indicate strong opposition to the decriminalization of marijuana use or possession, even in small amounts. The state’s relatively conservative political history has traditionally supported severe penalties for drug use and possession.

Knowing this, the sponsor of the bill, a legislature from an urban district, sanctioned a study of the issue. Several months before the legislature convened, an independent research organization was hired and asked to determine the underlying reasons behind why the majority of the state’s residents opposed the decriminalization of small amounts of marijuana.

The research organization collected a stratified random sample of 1,200 residents. They conducted extensive open-ended interviews (via telephone) with the members of the sample and recorded these interviews, with the interviewees’ knowledge of course. On a daily basis another group of researchers developed written records of these interviews. These transcripts were given to the interviewers who in turn appended them with personal notes and reminders they had made during the interviews.

When the data collection was complete, the researchers read through the transcripts to identify common themes among the responses. They learned the following.

Using this information, the legislator amended his bill, including:

• Increasing the penalties for the possession of more than three grams of marijuana.
• Increasing the penalties for selling, distributing, and possession with intent to sell marijuana.
• Increasing the penalty for selling all drugs, including marijuana, to minors.
• Adding marijuana impairment and a presumptive level of impairment to the driving under the influence statute.
• Creating a statewide program that chronic marijuana users could access for help with addiction.
• Requiring possessors of small amounts of marijuana (three grams or less) to pay a civil penalty, in the form of a tax, to fund the statewide addition program.
• Increasing the state police budget to allow the hiring of additional narcotics officers to focus on the enforcement of ‘harder’ drugs.

In addition, the legislator commissioned an op-ed article, which he distributed to the media, written by a respected psychologist that strongly disputed the notion that marijuana use leads to the use of harder drugs.

Let us evaluate the researcher’s analytical strategy.

Access the flash cards for this research vignette to test your ability to apply what you’ve learned from Chapter 14—Data and Information Analysis.