A way to describe and explain the world using“empiricism” – observation and measurement

To do more than describe we look for relationships between phenomena

These phenomena are called “variables” because they can change in value and their changes can be accurately measured

If variables change in value together they might be related or “associated”

We may hypothesize that changes in one variable cause changes in another. That’s what “cause and effect” means.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVCrMOnn-d0

Science is driven by hypotheses and theories

Hypothesis: A proposed, testable explanation of a phenomenon, usually expressed in the language of cause and effect.

Lunar cycles and homicide: As the moon waxes, homicide increases

Theory: An explanation that has been rigorously tested and is widely accepted to be true.

Variable: The things that we measure to test a hypothesis or theory.

Lunar cycle: How “full” is the moon?

Homicide: Murder rate – how many murders per 100,000 population?

Pitfalls

There are lots of variables in the world, so if we measure we’ll find that many seem to change together. But is the relationship real or an “artifact” of the measurement process?

To avoid this trap a hypothesis must be based on established knowledge

Can’t pick out hypotheses from thin air

Theories predict how “independent” (aka “causal”) variables affect “dependent” (aka “effect”) variables

Poverty Crime. Changes in poverty (ind. variable) cause changes in crime (dep. variable)

BUT...is the causal order accurate? Could it really be Crime Poverty?

BUT...might other variables (education, where one lives) be the real cause?

Poor education crime? Maybe the relationship between poverty and crime is spurious. It looks like poverty is the cause because it’s related to education.

Poverty poor education crime? Maybe poverty has an influence, but it’s not direct – it’s mostly on an intervening variable (education.)

Best way to untangle what really causes crime is to set up an experiment

We randomly create two groups (that makes them equivalent in all respects)

We make one group poor, leave the other alone, then years later compare their mean number of arrests

That’s why most social science research isn’t experimental – it’s after the fact

Use existing data. Try to statistically “control” (weed out) all other variables

Must identify and measure all variables that could affect crime

Critical variables are often difficult to measure or quantify.

How would someone measure personality factors?

Social conditions?

Non-scientific explanations

Spiritual - crime caused by witches, or the Devil

Can’t be scientifically tested because they rely on unobservable phenomena

Methods for collecting evidence

▪ Trial by battle

▪ Trial by ordeal

▪ Compurgation: accused would be acquitted if set number of people, usually twelve, would testify under oath that he or she was innocent – based on belief that fear of God would prevent so many from lying

Scientific -- “natural” explanations

Use variables in the material, observable world to explain crime

Classical Criminology

Free will

▪ Crime product of free choice

▪ Committed through a rational cost-benefit analysis

Crime control

▪ Make costs of crime exceed its benefits

▪ Emphasize certainty, severity and celerity (promptness) of punishment

Positivist criminology

Behavior determined by factors outside individual control

▪ People think and reason, but do so after the fact, to justify behaviors whose origins were predetermined

▪ That’s why punishment doesn’t always work

Originally focused on biological factors; later expanded into psychological and social factors

Positivist criminologists more concerned with nature of behavior than with how it is legally defined

Crime is “socially constructed” – what is defined as criminal depends on time, place and how crime is defined Differences in crime rates may be due to differences in how people are

treated Legal distinctions may be unrelated to causal factors

▪ Identical acts may have different causes

▪ Why call some acts “aggravated assault” and others “murder”?

Disparities in how laws are written and enforced

▪ Crimes of the poor (street crime) are more likely to be dealt with severely than crimes of the rich (white collar crime)

Disparities in resources available to lower-income defendants

▪ Police Issues: “It’s Good to be Rich”

▪ Police Issues: “Time or Money

Recent mass shootings

08/24/12 Jeffrey Johnson, 58, a self-employed NYC man shot and killed a former coworker in front of the Empire State Building. Officers fired sixteen rounds, killing Johnson and injuring nine bystanders.

08/08/12 Wade Michael Page, 40, opened fire in and around a Milwaukee-area Sikh temple, killing six and wounding three including a police officer. He died from a self-inflicted wound to the head. Page was a well-known white supremacist and sang in a white-power band.

07/20/12 A troubled graduate student burst into a Colorado theatre during a midnight showing of “A Dark Knight,” threw gas grenades and opened fire with a shotgun, a rifle and two pistols, wounding fifty-eight and killing twelve. James Holmes, 24, was arrested without incident.

How do these compare to more conventional violent crime?

05/04/12 A neo-Nazi who led an Arizona border militia shot and killed his live-in girlfriend, her daughter, granddaughter and daughter’s boyfriend, then killed himself. Ex-Marine Jason Ready had a history of domestic violence.

Bank robberies

“Ordinary” gang violence (drive-by’s, etc.)

Organized crime “hits”

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7419244n

http://youtu.be/NC6QZKP_F5Q