Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Most of the methods we use in criminology to infer relationships are based on mean values of distributions. This essay explores the historical origins of this issue and some counterproductive consequences: relying too heavily on sampling as a means of ensuring “statistical significance”; ignoring the implicit assumptions of regression modeling; and assuming that all data sets reflect a single mode of behavior for the entire population under study. The essay concludes by suggesting that we no longer “make do” with the standard methodologies used to study criminology and criminal justice, and recommends developing categories that more accurately reflect behavior and groupings than the ones we currently use; looking at alternative sources of data, including qualitative data such as narrative accounts; and developing alternative methods to extract and analyze the data from such sources.
Michael D. Maltz (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: