NDLI: Must we settle for less rigorous evaluations in large area-based crime prevention programs? Lessons from a Campbell review of focused deterrence

Content Provider	Springer Nature Link
Author	Braga, Anthony A. Weisburd, David L.
Copyright Year	2014
Abstract	Evaluations from a recent Campbell systematic review of focused deterrence programs are critically reviewed to determine whether more rigorous evaluations are possible given methodological challenges such as developing appropriate units of analysis, generalizing findings beyond study sites, and controlling for the contamination of available comparison groups.We synthesize the available evaluation literature on focused deterrence programs completed before and after the publication of the Campbell review to assess opportunities to conduct randomized controlled trials and stronger quasi-experimental evaluations.We find that focused deterrence strategies are amenable to more rigorous evaluation methodologies such as block randomized place-based trials, multisite cluster randomized trials, and quasi-experimental evaluations that employ advanced statistical matching techniques.Focused deterrence programs can, and should, be subjected to more rigorous tests that generate more robust evidence on program impacts and provide further insight into the crime control mechanisms at work in these programs. More generally, our review supports the idea that program evaluators do not have to “settle for less” methodological rigor when testing large area-based crime prevention programs.
Starting Page	573
Ending Page	597
Page Count	25
File Format	PDF
ISSN	15733750
Journal	Journal of Experimental Criminology
Volume Number	10
Issue Number	4
e-ISSN	15728315
Language	English
Publisher	Springer Netherlands
Publisher Date	2014-06-08
Publisher Place	Dordrecht
Access Restriction	One Nation One Subscription (ONOS)
Subject Keyword	Deterrence Randomized experiments Quasi-experiments Program evaluation Criminology & Criminal Justice Political Science Social Sciences
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Law

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Improving the evaluation of anticrime programs: There’s work to be done

Wildlife Crime: The Problems of Enforcement

Improving evaluation of anti-crime programs: Summary of a National Research Council report$^{★}$

Situational deterrence and claim padding: results from a randomized field experiment

When is a bologna sandwich better than sex? A defense of small-n case study evaluations

Community Crime Prevention: A Review Essay On Program Evaluations And Policy Implications

Lessons from Two Randomized Experiments in Criminal Justice Settings

Police-monitored CCTV cameras in Newark, NJ: A quasi-experimental test of crime deterrence

“To develop and test:” The inventive difference between evaluation and experimentation

Must we settle for less rigorous evaluations in large area-based crime prevention programs? Lessons from a Campbell review of focused deterrence

Similar Documents

Improving the evaluation of anticrime programs: There’s work to be done

Wildlife Crime: The Problems of Enforcement

Improving evaluation of anti-crime programs: Summary of a National Research Council report$^{★}$

Situational deterrence and claim padding: results from a randomized field experiment

When is a bologna sandwich better than sex? A defense of small-n case study evaluations

Community Crime Prevention: A Review Essay On Program Evaluations And Policy Implications

Lessons from Two Randomized Experiments in Criminal Justice Settings

Police-monitored CCTV cameras in Newark, NJ: A quasi-experimental test of crime deterrence

“To develop and test:” The inventive difference between evaluation and experimentation

Must we settle for less rigorous evaluations in large area-based crime prevention programs? Lessons from a Campbell review of focused deterrence