Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T07:59:22.484Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Multisite Randomized Trials in Criminology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2014

Doris Layton MacKenzie
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Janani Umamaheswar
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Li-Chen Lin
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Brandon C. Welsh
Affiliation:
Northeastern University
Anthony A. Braga
Affiliation:
Rutgers University, New Jersey
Gerben J. N. Bruinsma
Affiliation:
Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Relatively few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted in criminology and criminal justice; rarer still are multisite RCTs. Yet, as the field moves toward a more evidence-based perspective, we anticipate increases in the numbers of RCTs. The results of these trials will begin to identify efficacious interventions, and more sophisticated analyses will be required to identify interventions that accomplish the desired impact. Multisite RCTs provide a mechanism for increasing our understanding of what works for whom, and why, and in what environments.

Multisite studies are independent randomized experiments undertaken in two or more sites where researchers involved in the study plan and collaborate across these sites (Boruch 1997; Kraemer, 2000; Weisburd and Taxman, 2000). Some of the reasons for conducting multisite studies involve the need to replicate findings from initial single-site studies, to gain a sample size large enough to obtain sufficient power, and to discern moderate to small effect sizes. In addition to outlining further the definitional criteria of a multisite RCT, both of these justifications for conducting a multisite study are discussed in detail.

Type
Chapter
Information
Experimental Criminology
Prospects for Advancing Science and Public Policy
, pp. 163 - 193
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andrews, D. A., and Bonta, J.. 2003. The Psychology of Criminal Conduct. Cincinnati: Anderson.Google Scholar
Andrews, D. A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R. D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., and Cullen, F. T.. 1990. “Does Correctional Treatment Work? A Clinically-Relevant and Psychologically Informed Metaanalysis.” Criminology 28: 369–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, A. J., Harrison, P. M., Berzofsky, M., Caspar, R., and Krebs, C.. 2010. Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2008. NCJ231169. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Binder, A., and Meeker, J. W. 1988. “Experiments as Reforms.” Journal of Criminal Justice 16: 347–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boruch, R. F. 1997. Randomized Experiments for Planning and Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunford, F. W., Huizinga, D., and Elliott, D. S.. 1990. “The Role of Arrest in Domestic Assault: The Omaha Police Experiment.” Criminology 28(2): 183–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. 1978. “An Exercise in Mega-silliness.” American Psychologist 33: 517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrington, D. P., and Welsh, B. C.. 2005. “Randomized Experiments in Criminology: What Have We Learned in the Last Two Decades?”Journal of Experimental Criminology 1: 9–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garner, J., Fagan, J., and Maxwell, C.. 1995. “Published Findings from the Spousal Assault Replication Program: A Critical Review.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 11: 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henggeler, S. W., Schoenwald, S. K., and Pickrel, S. G.. 1995. “Multisystemic Therapy: Bridging the Gap between University- and Community-based Treatment.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 63: 709–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hirschel, J. D., and Hutchison, I.. 1992. “Female Spouse Abuse and the Police Response: The Charlotte, North Carolina Experiment.” The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 83(1): 73–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoagwood, K., Hibbs, E., Brent, D., and Jensen, P.. 1995. “Introduction to the Special Section: Efficacy and Effectiveness in Studies of Child and Adolescent Psychotherapy.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 63:683–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kraemer, H. C. 2000. “Pitfalls of Multisite Randomized Clinical Trials of Efficacy and Effectiveness.” Schizophrenia Bulletin 26:533–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landenberger, N. A., and Lipsey, M. W.. 2005. “The Positive Effects of Cognitive-Behavioral Programs for Offenders: A Meta-analysis of Factors Associated with Effective Treatment.” Journal of Experimental Criminology 1: 451–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lempert, R. 1989. “Humility Is a Virtue: On the Publication of Policy-relevant Research.” Law and Society Review 23:145–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsey, M. W. 1992. “Juvenile Delinquency Treatment: A Meta-analytic Inquiry into the Variability of Effects.” In Meta-analysis for Explanation: A Casebook, edited by Cook, T. D., Cooper, H., Cordray, D. S., Hartmann, H., Hedges, L. V., Light, R. J., Louis, T. A., and Mosteller, F., pp. 83–127. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Lipsey, M. W., Chapman, G., and Landenberger, N. A.. 2001. “Cognitive-Behavioral Programs for Offenders.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 578: 144–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsey, M. W., and Landenberger, N. A.. 2006. “Cognitive-Behavioral Interventions.” In Preventing Crime: What Works for Children, Offenders, Victims, and Places, edited by Welsh, B. C. and Farrington, D. P., pp. 57–71. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Lipsey, M. W., Landenberger, N. A., and Wilson, S. J.. 2007. “Effects of Cognitive-Behavioral Programs for Criminal Offenders.” Campbell Systematic Reviews 6: 1–27.CrossRef
Lipsey, M. W., and Wilson, D. B.. 1998. “Effective Intervention for Serious Juvenile Offenders: A Synthesis of Research.” In Serious & Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions, edited by Rolf Loeber and David P. Farrington, pp. 313–45. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Lipsey, M. W., and Wilson, D. B. 2001. Practical Meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. 6, 1–27.Google Scholar
Logan, C. H., and Gaes, G. G.. 1993. “Meta-analysis and the Rehabilitation of Punishment.” Justice Quarterly 10: 245–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenzie, D. L. 2006. What Works in Corrections: Reducing the Criminal Activities of Offenders and Delinquents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meinert, C. L. 1980. “Toward More Definitive Clinical Trials.” Controlled Clinical Trials 1: 249–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meinert, C. L. 1986. Clinical Trials. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, O., Wilson, D. B., and MacKenzie, D. L.. 2007. “Does Incarceration-based Drug Treatment Reduce Recidivism?”Journal of Experimental Criminology 3(4), 353–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, O., Wilson, D. B., Eggers, A., and MacKenzie, D. L.. 2011. Drug Courts’ Effects on Criminal Offending for Juveniles and Adults: A Campbell Collaboration Systematic Review. Oslo, Norway: The Campbell Collaboration.
Pearson, F. S., Lipton, D. S., Cleland, C. M., and Yee, D. S.. 2002. “The Effects of Behavioral/Cognitive-Behavioral Programs on Recidivism.”Crime and Delinquency 48(3): 476–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, A.E., Weisburd, D., and Hewitt, C.. 2010. “Are Criminologists Describing Randomized Controlled Trials in Ways that Allow Us to Assess Them? Findings from a Sample of Crime and Justice Trials.”Journal of Experimental Criminology 6: 245–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersilia, J. 1989. “Implementing Randomized Experiments: Lessons from BJA’s Intensive Supervision Project.” Evaluation Review 13: 435–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersilia, J., and Turner, S.. 1993a. “Evaluating Intensive Supervision Probation/Parole: Results of a Nationwide Experiment.” Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
Petersilia, J., and Turner, S. 1993b. “Intensive Probation and Parole.” Crime and Justice 17: 281–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrosino, A. J. 1995. “The Hunt for Experimental Reports: Document Search and Efforts for a ‘What Works?’ Meta-analysis.” Journal of Crime and Justice 18: 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raudenbush, S. W., and Liu, X.. 2000. “Statistical Power and Optimal Design for Multisite Randomized Trials.” Psychological Methods 5(2): 199–213.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., and Moher, D.. 2010. “CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomized Trials.” Annals of Internal Medicine, 152(11): 1–8.CrossRef
Sherman, L.W. 1998. “Evidence-based Policing.” Washington DC: Police Foundation.
Sherman, L.W., and Berk, R.. 1984. “The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment.” Police Foundation Reports, No. 1, Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
Sherman, L.W., and Cohn, E. G.. 1989. “The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment.” Law and Society Review 23: 117–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taxman, F., and Rhodes, A. G.. 2010. “Multisite Trials in Criminal Justice Settings: Trials and Tribulations of Field Experiments.” In Handbook of Quantitative Criminology, edited by Piquero, A. R. and Weisburd, D., pp. 519–40. New York: Springer.
Taxman, F., and Lockwood, D.. 1996. Systemic Case Management: The Washington-Baltimore High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Treatment and Criminal Justice Supervision Project. Unpublished paper. University of Maryland, College ParkGoogle Scholar
Visher, C. A., Winterfield, L., and Coggeshall, M. B.. 2005. “Ex-offender Employment Programs and Recidivism: A Meta-analysis.” Journal of Experimental Criminology 1: 295–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisburd, D. 1993. “Design Sensitivity in Criminal Justice Experiments.” Crime and Justice 17: 337–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisburd, D., Lum, C. M., and Petrosino, A.. 2001. “Does Research Design Affect Study Outcomes in Criminal Justice?” Annals, AAPSS: 578.
Weisburd, D., and Taxman, F. S.. 2000. “Developing a Multicenter Randomized Trial in Criminology: The Case of HIDTA.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 16: 315–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welsh, B. C., Sullivan, C. J., and Olds, D. L.. 2010. “When Early Crime Prevention Goes to Scale: A New Look at the Evidence.” Prevention Science 11: 115–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, H. C., Sabol, W. J., and Greenman, S. J.. 2010. “Prisoners in 2009.” NCJ231675. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
Wilson, D. B., Bouffard, L. A., and MacKenzie, D. L.. 2005. “A Quantitative Review of Structured Group-oriented, Cognitive-behavioral Programs for Offenders.” Journal of Criminal Justice and Behavior 32(2): 172–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. B., Gallagher, C. A., and MacKenzie, D. L.. 2000. “A Meta-analysis of Corrections-based Education, Vocation, and Work Programs for Adult Offenders.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 37: 347–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. B., and MacKenzie, D. L.. 2006. “Boot Camps.” In Preventing Crime: What Works for Children, Offenders, Victims, and Places, edited by Welsh, B. C. and Farrington, D. P., pp. 73–86. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Wolf, F. M. 1986. Meta-analysis: Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×