1 Auteur Welsh and Farrington
.
2 Jaar van 2012
. publicatie
3 Thema/ Week 1. Research on crime prevention
. Onderwerp
4 Onderzoeksvra Developing a new crime policy to help build a safer, more
. ag/ sustainable society that strikes a greater balance between
Probleemstelli prevention and control.
ng
5 Kernargument Prevention of crime should be researched more and with
. Standpunt(en) higher quality, so that policy makers have access to high
en argument(en) quality evidence.
van de auteur(s) Policy should be based on evidence-based practice (facts)
and should be taken into account that the policy-makers are
doing the best they can with the available information.
Ensuring that
- the highest quality scientific research is at centre
stage in the policy-making process is important;
- overcoming the “short-termism” politics of the day;
Politicians think of prevention as a soft policy and
there is no immediate effect from prevention. This
stands in the way of implementation.
- and striking a greater balance between crime
prevention and crime control.
When making new crime reduction policy: first look at
effectiveness (costs and reduction). Then at the decay: the
loss of effectiveness after treatment ends; and then scale-
up: the decrease in program effects when a program is
expanded state-wide. But it’s also important to look at
personal benefits! Not only crime-related benefits.
6 Centrale Prevention early intervention, education
. concepten en vs.
hoe deze Control of crime
Samenhangen
7 Verband met Farrington (2003) same author.
. andere
literatuur
,8 Kritiek They don’t critique their own work.
.
Titel van het artikel: _Science, politics, and crime prevention: toward a
new crime policy____
, Titel van het artikel: ____Methodological quality standards for
evaluation research______
1 Auteur Farrington
.
2 Jaar van 2003
. publicatie
3 Thema/ Week 1. Quality standards for crime policy evaluation
. Onderwerp research.
4 Onderzoeksvra We need a methodological quality standards for evaluation
. ag/ research that can be used by systematic reviewers, scholars,
Probleemstelli policy makers, the mass media, and the general public in
ng assessing the validity of conclusions about the effectiveness
of interventions in reducing crime.
5 Kernargument The main conclusions are that new methodological quality
. Standpunt(en) scales should be developed, based on statistical conclusion
en argument(en) validity, internal validity, construct validity, external
van de auteur(s) validity, and descriptive validity, and that Pawson and
Tilley’s challenge to the Campbell evaluation tradition does
not have any implications for methodological quality
standards.
6 Centrale The SMS (internal validity, statistic concl., construct
. concepten en validity)
hoe deze 1. a strong research design: RCT and valid outcome
Samenhangen measures;
2. significant prevention effects
3. replication 1+ additional site with experimental design
and significant effects;
4. sustained effects for at least one year after the treatment
vs. Farringtons quality scale (all five)
1. Statistical conclusion validity
2. Internal validity
3. Construct validity
4. External validity
5. Descriptive validity
Campbell approach vs. realistic approach
7 Verband met Sherman
. andere Pawson and Tilly’s context mechanism outcome approach
literatuur 1. past evaluation research has failed because of its focus on
what works;
2. instead, researchers should investigate CMO-
configurations;
3. these configurations should be studied using qualitative,
.
2 Jaar van 2012
. publicatie
3 Thema/ Week 1. Research on crime prevention
. Onderwerp
4 Onderzoeksvra Developing a new crime policy to help build a safer, more
. ag/ sustainable society that strikes a greater balance between
Probleemstelli prevention and control.
ng
5 Kernargument Prevention of crime should be researched more and with
. Standpunt(en) higher quality, so that policy makers have access to high
en argument(en) quality evidence.
van de auteur(s) Policy should be based on evidence-based practice (facts)
and should be taken into account that the policy-makers are
doing the best they can with the available information.
Ensuring that
- the highest quality scientific research is at centre
stage in the policy-making process is important;
- overcoming the “short-termism” politics of the day;
Politicians think of prevention as a soft policy and
there is no immediate effect from prevention. This
stands in the way of implementation.
- and striking a greater balance between crime
prevention and crime control.
When making new crime reduction policy: first look at
effectiveness (costs and reduction). Then at the decay: the
loss of effectiveness after treatment ends; and then scale-
up: the decrease in program effects when a program is
expanded state-wide. But it’s also important to look at
personal benefits! Not only crime-related benefits.
6 Centrale Prevention early intervention, education
. concepten en vs.
hoe deze Control of crime
Samenhangen
7 Verband met Farrington (2003) same author.
. andere
literatuur
,8 Kritiek They don’t critique their own work.
.
Titel van het artikel: _Science, politics, and crime prevention: toward a
new crime policy____
, Titel van het artikel: ____Methodological quality standards for
evaluation research______
1 Auteur Farrington
.
2 Jaar van 2003
. publicatie
3 Thema/ Week 1. Quality standards for crime policy evaluation
. Onderwerp research.
4 Onderzoeksvra We need a methodological quality standards for evaluation
. ag/ research that can be used by systematic reviewers, scholars,
Probleemstelli policy makers, the mass media, and the general public in
ng assessing the validity of conclusions about the effectiveness
of interventions in reducing crime.
5 Kernargument The main conclusions are that new methodological quality
. Standpunt(en) scales should be developed, based on statistical conclusion
en argument(en) validity, internal validity, construct validity, external
van de auteur(s) validity, and descriptive validity, and that Pawson and
Tilley’s challenge to the Campbell evaluation tradition does
not have any implications for methodological quality
standards.
6 Centrale The SMS (internal validity, statistic concl., construct
. concepten en validity)
hoe deze 1. a strong research design: RCT and valid outcome
Samenhangen measures;
2. significant prevention effects
3. replication 1+ additional site with experimental design
and significant effects;
4. sustained effects for at least one year after the treatment
vs. Farringtons quality scale (all five)
1. Statistical conclusion validity
2. Internal validity
3. Construct validity
4. External validity
5. Descriptive validity
Campbell approach vs. realistic approach
7 Verband met Sherman
. andere Pawson and Tilly’s context mechanism outcome approach
literatuur 1. past evaluation research has failed because of its focus on
what works;
2. instead, researchers should investigate CMO-
configurations;
3. these configurations should be studied using qualitative,
