An evaluator’s reflections and lessons learned about gang intervention strategies: an agenda for research

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Caterina G. Roman

Purpose This paper is designed to critically review and analyze the body of research on a popular gang reduction strategy, implemented widely in the United States and a number of other countries, to: (1) assess whether researchers designed their evaluations to align with the theorized causal mechanisms that bring about reductions in violence; and (2) discuss how evidence on gang programs is generated and consumed. That review and assessment is then used to frame a research agenda for studying gang interventions. Design/methodology/approach A case study design is used to generate a multi-faceted understanding of the possible avenues for evaluation research on the law enforcement-based strategy known as the Group Violence Intervention. The paper discusses questions that remain to be answered about the strategy, such as “what type of deterrence is operating?” and if the model actually works by the threat of deterrence, and not by removing high-risk offenders and shootings from the street, what activities are needed to maintain the effect? Findings Across roughly two dozen impact evaluations of GVI, none have examined the likely cause and effect components of this multi-partner strategy in reducing the violence. Furthermore, there are many issues related to the production and generation of criminal justice evaluation research that have adversely pushed the balance of evidence on what works in gang reduction toward law enforcement programming. However, there are many strategies that researchers can use to think broadly about appropriate and holistic research and evaluation on gangs and gang programming. Practical implications The recommendations for research, if implemented, can help build a body of knowledge to move toward community-based and restorative models of gang violence reduction. Originality/value This original piece is one of the first essays to contextualize and discuss how aspects of the production of social science research on gangs may directly impact what programs and strategies are implemented on the ground.

mBio ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Imperiale ◽  
Arturo Casadevall

ABSTRACT In the fall of 2001, Bacillus anthracis spores were spread through letters mailed in the United States. Twenty-two people are known to have been infected, and five of these individuals died. Together with the  September 11 attacks, this resulted in a reevaluation of the risks and benefits of life science research with the potential for misuse. In this editorial, we review some of the results of these discussions and their implications for the future.


1987 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 13-16
Author(s):  
David Rymph

As a practicing anthropologist with strong ties to university-based graduate training programs, I have occasionally been invited to give guest lectures to classes in applied anthropology, evaluation research, and public administration. When asked to share my practical experience, what I have most often wanted to communicate to students are the lessons learned on the job about how administrators, program people, and researchers get on with one another. I am referring to my own struggles to learn and adapt to the social realities of how public agencies make decisions about the proper use of social science research. While lectures on behavior in complex organizations may be helpful, experience is the better teacher. Toward this end, my colleague Carol Bryant, a Ph.D. anthropologist with the Lexington-Fayette County, Kentucky Health Department, and I have developed a technique to help trainees experience the multi dimensional character of applied social science problems in human service systems. Combining role play with conflict resolution goals, sociodrama gives students and trainees the opportunity to act out aspects of real world roles and problem situations in a non-threatening and supportive atmosphere.


2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 2-14
Author(s):  
Julie Still ◽  
Zara Wilkinson

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to address the use of librarians as a study population in social science research outside of the field of library and information science. Additionally, it aims to make general claims about how frequently librarians have been studied compared to other occupations, as well as to identify and describe existing research that has used librarians as a study population. Design/methodology/approach – The described study had two parts. Two social science databases were searched using the subject headings “librarians” and eight additional occupations, and the results for all nine occupations were analyzed. The peer-reviewed results for “librarians” were then coded by content. The articles that used librarians as a study population were identified, reviewed and described. Findings – Although librarians, as an occupational group, possess many characteristics that should make them an ideal choice for social science research, they seem to be studied less frequently than other occupations. Research limitations/implications – Other occupational groups, such as mathematicians, were also studied infrequently. Further research might consider, more broadly, why some occupations are studied more frequently than others. Future studies might also compare librarianship to other female-dominated professions, such as nursing and education. Additionally, the subject heading “librarians” was applied to articles that studied non-professional library employees, making it difficult to isolate only articles with a focus on degreed librarians. Originality/value – Few other studies have examined social science research in which librarians are used as the study population. By focusing on how librarians are studied and written about in other fields, this paper will add to the body of literature on the professional image of librarians.


2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. 604-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Simakova

The article examines science-policy conversations mediated by social science in attempts to govern, or set up terms for, scientific research. The production of social science research accounts about science faces challenges in the domains of emerging technosciences, such as nano. Constructing notions of success and failure, participants in science actively engage in the interpretation of policy notions, such as the societal relevance of their research. Industrial engagement is one of the prominent themes both in policy renditions of governable science, and in the participants’ attempts to achieve societally relevant research, often oriented into the future. How do we, as researchers, go about collecting, recording, and analyzing such future stories? I examine a series of recent interviews conducted in a number of US universities, and in particular at a university campus on the West Coast of the United States. The research engages participants through interviews, which can be understood as occasions for testing the interpretive flexibility of nano as “good” scientific practice and of what counts as societal relevance, under what circumstances and in view of what kind of audiences.


2004 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry Louis Gates

In 1903, William Edward Burghardt Du Bois famously predicted that the problem of the twentieth century would be the problem of the color line. Indeed, during the past century, matters of race were frequently the cause of intense conflict and the stimulus for public policy decisions not only in the United States, but throughout the world. The founding of the Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race at the beginning of the twenty-first century acknowledges the continuing impact of Du Bois's prophecy, his pioneering role as one of the founders of the discipline of sociology in the American academy, and the considerable work that remains to be done as we confront the “problem” that Du Bois identified over a century ago.


1970 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-456
Author(s):  
A. P. M. Coxon ◽  
Patrick Doreian ◽  
Robin Oakley ◽  
Ian B. Stephen ◽  
Bryan R. Wilson ◽  
...  

KWALON ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-51
Author(s):  
Jing Hiah

Abstract Navigating the research and researchers’ field: Reflections on positionality in (assumed) insider research To challenge rigid ideas about objectivity in social science research, qualitative researchers question their own subjectivity in the research process. In such endeavors, the focus is mainly on the positionality of the researcher vis-à-vis their respondents in the research field. In this contribution, I argue that the positionality of the researcher in academia, what I refer to as the researchers’ field, is equally important as it influences the way research findings are received and evaluated. Through reflections on positionality in my insider research concerning labour relations and exploitation in Chinese migrant businesses in the Netherlands and Romania, I explore how my positionality as an insider negatively influenced my credibility and approachability in the researchers’ field. I conclude that it is necessary to pay more attention to researchers’ positionality in academia as it may shed light on and make it possible to discuss the written and unwritten standards of researchers’ credibility and approachability as an academic in the researchers’ field. Accordingly, this could provide insights into the causes of inequalities in academia and contribute to the current challenge for more diversity in academia.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document