Evaluation Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click Here for More Information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Farrington, D. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Farrington, D. P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Evaluation Review, Vol. 27, No. 3, 218-227 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X03027003002

A Short History of Randomized Experiments in Criminology

A Meager Feast

David P. Farrington

Cambridge University

This article discusses advantages of randomized experiments and key issues raised in the following articles. The main concern is the growth and decrease in the use of randomized experiments by the California Youth Authority, the U.S. National Institute of Justice, and the British Home Office, although other experiments are also discussed. It is concluded that feast and famine periods are influenced by key individuals. It is recommended that policy makers, practitioners, funders, the mass media, and the general public need better education in research quality so that they can tell the difference between good and poor evaluation studies. They might then demand better evaluations using randomized experiments.

Key Words: randomized experiments • criminology • California Youth Authority • National Institute of Justice • Home Office


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Clinical Child Psychology and PsychiatryHome page
C. J. Koegl, D. P. Farrington, L. K. Augimeri, and D. M. Day
Evaluation of a Targeted Cognitive-Behavioral Program for Children with Conduct Problems -- The SNAP(R) Under 12 Outreach Project: Service Intensity, Age and Gender Effects on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes
Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, July 1, 2008; 13(3): 419 - 434.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Crime DelinquencyHome page
E. Brank, J. Lane, S. Turner, T. Fain, and A. Sehgal
An Experimental Juvenile Probation Program: Effects on Parent and Peer Relationships
Crime Delinquency, April 1, 2008; 54(2): 193 - 224.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
N. Axford
What Children Need, * Jane Waldfogel, * Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 2006, ISBN 0 674 02212 2, $35.00/{pound}22.95
Br. J. Soc. Work, September 1, 2007; 37(6): 1126 - 1129.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
J. Lane, S. Turner, T. Fain, and A. Sehgal
Implementing "Corrections of Place" Ideas: The Perspective of Clients and Staff
Criminal Justice and Behavior, January 1, 2007; 34(1): 76 - 95.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Crime DelinquencyHome page
J. Lane, S. Turner, T. Fain, and A. Sehgal
Evaluating an Experimental Intensive Juvenile Probation Program: Supervision and Official Outcomes
Crime Delinquency, January 1, 2005; 51(1): 26 - 52.
[Abstract] [PDF]