Fluent Essays

ATTACHED DETAILS INSIDE..... WEEK 6 CLASS DISCUSSION QUESTION PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW ALL INSTRUCTIONS TO COMPLETE THE ASSIGNMENT I HAVE ATTACH A REWRITE FOR YOU TO USE AS YOUR GUIDE TO HELP YOU PUT THE ANSWERS TOGETHER FOR THIS WORK. I HAVE ALSO ATTACHED SOME READING MATERIALS FOR YOU IN CASE YOU NEED THEM. YOU CAN USE OUTSIDE REFERENCES ALSO……. THANKS The focus of our final week is a topic that is of critical importance to the Criminal Justice world -- ETHICS. We have two easy tasks to complete this week -- the discussion board and a quiz for understanding. Be sure that you complete both. For the discussion - using your topic of interest chosen in week 1, identify an ethical issue that is relevant to that research problem. Consider how you would address this ethical issue using ethical standards from the Code of Ethics of the Academy of Criminal Justice Services (ACJS). Discussion: Ethical Issues in Criminal Justice Research Until the end of the 1970s, the research process was largely unregulated. This lack of regulation allowed some scientists to either fail to consider or ignore the ethical implications of their research and to carry out horrendous experiments. For example, the U.S. Public Health Service funded a study known as the Tuskegee Experiment, which started in the 1920s and continued well into the 1970s. This study was designed to examine the progression of syphilis in poor, urban African American males. None of the subjects were told they had syphilis, and some were treated with placebos even though a cure for this disease was available. Since that time, however, significant safeguards have been put in place to prevent these types of ethical violations. Today, Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are responsible for evaluating ethical issues that might surface, especially those concerned with the protection of human subjects prior to the commencement of a research project. Multiple safeguards ensure that many of the ethical violations that might have occurred in the past are now prevented. To prepare: Recall the research problem you chose in Week 1 Identify one ethical issue that is relevant to that research problem. Consider how you would address this ethical issue using ethical standards from the Code of Ethics of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences (ACJS). Post a brief description of an ethical issue in criminal justice research generally or related to the research problem you identified in Week 1. Then explain how you might address it using ethical standards from the ACJS Code of Ethics. I wanted to let you know how useful my research methods class has already proved to be. For my internship this summer, eueryone had to get the CITI (Collaboratru e Institutional Training Initiativ e) training certificatron to conduct our research, which took a few days out of the actual projects. However,because I was already IRB finstitutional Review Boardl certified from my class, I was able to start my project sooner. My superutsor was really appreciatiue thatl didnthave to use my time to complete the IRB trainrng. Additionally, I utill be utilizing my knousledge about suruey methods this summer for my research. ltzlarissa O. , Student I ets begin with a thought experiment (or a trip down memory lane, dependirs l-on your earlier exposure to this example). One d^y as you are drinkirg coffee and reading the newspaper during your summer in California, you notice a small ad recruiting college students for a study at Stanford University. Feeling a bit bored with your part-time job waiting on tables and missing the campus environ- ment you got used to in your previous year as a freshman, you go to the campus and complete an application. per day for l-2 weeks beginning Aug. 14. For further information & applications, come to Room24S,Jordan Hall, Stanford U. (Zimbardo, Banks, Haney, and Iaffe 1973, 3 8) After you arrive at the universiry you are given an information form with more details about the research (Prison Life Study). Intrigued, you decide to continue. First, you are asked to complete a long questionnaire about your family background, physical and mental health history and prior criminal involvement; answer a researchers questions in person; and sign a consent form. A few days lateg you are informed that you and 20 other young men have been selected to participate in the experiment. You then return to the university to complete a battery of psychological tests and are told you will be picked up for the study the next day ftIaney, Banks, and Zimbardo L973). The next morning, Iou hear a siren just before a squad car stops in front of your house. A police officer charges you with assault and battery warns you ofyour constitutional rights, searches and handcuffs you, and drives you off to the police station. After fingerprinting and a short stay in a detention cell: /ou are blind- folded and driven to the Stanford County Prison. Upon arrlal, you are stripped . . .. . r. I ...,ffi .ffi ..H..ffiffii.$.ffi.ffi..i..i., . . ..,..,., ffi*,ffiffiffiffibs 5:gi: ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH naked, skin-searched, deloused, and issued a uniform (a loosely fitting smock \^rith an ID number printed on it), bedding, sozp, and a towel. You dont recognlze anyone, but you notice that the other prisoners and th. goards are college-age, apparendy middle-class white men (and one fuian) like you ftIaney et al. 1973; Zimbardo et al. 1973). The prison warden welcomes you: As you probably know; Im your warden. All ofyou have shown that you are unable to function outside in the real world for one reason or another-that somehow you lack the responsibility of good citizens of this great country. We of this prison, your correctional staff, are going to help you learn what your responsibilities as citizens of this country are. . . . Ifyou follow all ofthese rules and keep your hands clean, repent for your misdeeds and show a proper attitude ofpenitence, you and I will get along just fine. (Zimbar do et al. 197 3, 3 8) Among other behavioral restrictions, the rules stipulate that prisoners must remain silent during rest periods, during meals, and after lights out; that they must address each other only General Information Purpose: A simulated prison witl be established somewhere in the vicinity of Palo Alto, California, to study a number of problems of psychological and sociological relevance. Paid volunteers will be randomly assigned to play the roles of either prisoners or guards for the duration of the sturCy.This time period will vary some- what from about five days to two weeks for any one volunteer-depending upon several factors, such as the sentence for the prisoner or the work effectiveness of the guards. Payment will be $gO a day for performing vari- ous activities and work associated with the opera- tion of our prison. Each volunteer must enter a contractual arrangement with the principal investigator (Dr. P. G. Zimbardo), agreeing to participate for the full dura- tion of the study. It is obviously essential that no prisoner can leave once jailed, except through estab- lished procedures. In addition, guards must report for their eight-hour work shifts promptly and regularly since surveillance by the guards will be around-the- clock-three work shifts will be rotated or guards will be assigned a regular shift-day, evening, or early morning. Failure to fulfitl this contract will result in a partial loss of salary accumulated-according to a I,,, .,,.,. . ,,., .,,,Philip... G.. zimb:efd:o. PhD Ptofess6{.. 6.r lSOqiet f sychoto .,,,:.,,,. . :StentOrd,UniverSiry 60 SECTION I . FOUNDATIONS FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH by their assigned ID numbers; that they must address guards as Mr. Correctional Officerl and that they may be punished for any infractions (Zimbardo et al. 1973). You can tell that you are in the basement of a building. You are led down a corridor to a small cell (6 x9) with three cots, where you are locked behind a steel-barred black door with two other prisoners @xhibit 3.1). There is a small solitary confinement room across the hall for those who misbehave. There is litde privary, since you realize that the uniformed grrards, behind their silver sunglasses, can always observe the prisoners. After you go to sleep, you are awakened by a whisde summoning you and the others foi a roll call. The next morning, you and the other eight prisoners must stand in line outside your cells and recite the rules until you remember all 17 of them. Prisoners must chant, Its a wonderful day, Mr. Correctional OfEcer. Two prisoners who get out of line are put in solitary confine- ment. After a bit, the prisoners in Cell 1 decide to resist: They barricade their cell door and call on the prisoners in other cells to join in their resistance. As punishment, the guards pull the beds out from the other cells and spray some inmates with a fire extinguisher. The guards succeed in enforcing control and become more authoritarian, while the prisoners become increasingly docile. Punishmens are meted out for infractions of rules and sometimes for seemingly no reason at all; punishments include doing push-ups, being stripped naked, having legs chained, and being repeatedly wakened during the night. Would you join in the resistance? How would you react to this deprivation of your liberty by these authoritarian guards? . By the fifth day of the actual Stanford Prison Experiment, five student prisoners had to be released due to evident extreme stress (Zimbardo 2007). On the sixth day, Philip Zimbardo terminated the experiment. A prisoner subsequendy reported, The way we were made to degrade ourselves really brought us down and thats whywe all sat docile towards the end of the experi- ment. (Haney et al. 1973, 88) One guard later recounted his experience: I was surprised at myself . . . I made them call each other names and clean the toilets out with their bare hands. I practically considered the prisoners cattle, and I kept thinking I have to watch out for them in case they try something. (Zimbardo et al. L973, 17 4) Exhibit 3.2 gives some idea of the difference in how the prison- ers and guards behaved. What is most striking about this result is that all the guards and prisoners had been screened before the study began to ensure that they were physically and mentally healthy. The roles of guard and prisoner had been assigned randomly, by the toss of a coin, so the two groups were very similar when the study began. It seemed to be the situation that led to the deterioration of the mental state of the prisoners and the different behavior of the guards. Being a guard or a prisoner, with rules and physical arrangements reinforcing distinctive roles, changed their behavior. Are you surprised by the outcome of the experiment? By the guards report of his unexpected, abusive behavior? By the prisoners ultimate submissiveness and the considerable psychic distress some felt? (\ /e leave it to you to assess how you would have responded if you had been an acfual research participant.) Of course, our purpose in introducing this small experiment is not to focus attention on the prediction of behavior in pris- ons; instead, we want to introduce the topic of research ethics by Source: From The Luctfer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Euil by Philip G. Zimbardo. Copyright @ 2007 by Philip G. Zirnbardo, Inc. Used by permission. 61CHAPTER 3 o ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH Exhibit 3.1 Prisoner in His Gell Commands lnsults Deindividuating Reference Aggression Threats Questions lnformation Use of lnstruments Individuating Reference Helping Resistance encouraging you to think about research from the standpoint of the people who are the subjects of research. We will refer to Philip Zimbardos Stanford Prison Experiment throughout this chapter, since it is fair to say that this research ultimately had a profound influence on the way that social scientists think about research ethics as well as on the way that criminologists understand behavior in prisons. We will also refer to Stan- ly Milgrams (1963) experiments on obedience to authority, since that research also pertains to criminal justice issues and has stimulated much debate about research ethics. Every criminal justice researcher needs to consider how to practice his or her discipline ethically. Whenever we interact with other people as social scien- tists, we must give paramount importance to the rational concerns and emotional needs that shape their responses to our actions. It is here that ethical research practice begins, with the recognition that our research procedures involve people who deserve as much respect for their well-being as we do for ours. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 40 50 60 70 Frequency 100 1 10 @ Guards ffi Prisoners Source: From The Lucifer E1fect: tJnderstanding How Good people Tttm Euilby philip c. Concern with ethical practice in relation to [email protected],Inc.UsedbypermissionofRandom people who are (in some respect) depen- House, an imprint and division ofPenguin Random House LLC, and the Random deng whether as patients or research sub- House Group Ltd AII rights reserved jects, is not a new idea. Ethical guidelines for medicine trace back to Hippocrates in 5 BC Greece (Ilippocratic Oath, n.d.), and the American Medical Association (AMA) adopted the worlds first formal professional ethics code in medicine lt l8+7 (AMA 201 1). Yet the history of medical practice makes it clear that having an ethics code is not sufficient to ensure ethical practice, at least when there are clear incentives to do otherwise. The formal procedures for the protection of participants in research we have today grew Philip Zimbardo,s Stanford out of some widely publicized abuses. One defining event occrured in 1946, when the Nurem- Prison Experiment berg War Crime Tiials exposed horrific medical experiments conducted by Nazi doctors and A twoweek experimenl others in the name of science. Almost 20 years later, Milgrams research on obedience also thal $imulaied thva pri$0n generated controversy about participant protections 6eerry zotf ). fu late ts lgT2,Americans life of bolh priso*ers and guards thai was ended iil learned from news reports that researchers funded by the u.S. Public Health Service had fol- sixdavsbecauseaf wllat lowed 399 low-income A.frican American men since the 1930s, collecting data to study the the sinrulation was d*ing natural course of syphilis @xhibit 3.3). At the time the study began, there was no effective treat- to coliege studsnts !.lho ment for the disease, but the men were told they were being treated for bad blood, whether participated. they had syphilis or not. Participants received free medical exams, meals, and burial insurance 62 SECTION I . FOUNDATIONS FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH ExhibitS.2 Chart of Guard and Prisoner Behavior 10 20 30 Source: Thskegee Syphilis Study Administrative Records. Records of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Archives-Southeast Region (Atlanta). but were not asked for their consent to be studied. What made this research study, known as the Tirskegee Syphilis Experimeng so shocking was that many participants were not informed of their illness and, even after penicillin was recogn ized as an ef[ective treaffnent in 1945 and in large-scale weby 1947, the study participants were not treated. The research vras ended only after the study was erposed. In L973, congressional hearings began, and n L97+, an out-of- court setdement of $10 million was reached; it was not until 1997 that President Bill Clinton made an ofEcial apology (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2009). Of course, the United States is not the only country to have abused human subjects. For example, British military scientists exposed hundreds of Indian soldiers serr.ing under the command of the British military to mustard gas during World War II to determine the how much gas was needed to produce death (Evans 2007). These and other widely publicized abuses made it clear that formal review procedures were needed to protect research participants. The IJ.S. government created a National Com- mission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research and charged it with developing guidelines (I(itchener and Kitchener 2009). The commissions 1979 BehnontReport(from the U.S. Departrnent of Health, Education, andWelfare) estab- lished three basic ethical principles for the protection of human subjects @xhibit 3.4): o Respect for persons: treating persons as autonomous agents and protecting those with diminished autonomy . Beneficence: rninimizingpossible harms and maximizingbenefits o Justice: distributing benefits and risks of research fairly Stanley Milgrams experiments on obedience to authority: l r * r.s ri. i\ t! tt i 4, trtt i t. 1 1 7rJ 1ii,1 \r.rrri ttiii)111\t 1!! i)L<l!t1\J1i J- - ?.fr.i... .-.- i, -., ^ ^ i*,f1 t*iti 1 1 1 t-J i Lti i I i i I U. i, \!1-| -r) ;,i rr)1, r, { ; i i it ri i t. t, rii ! t / i\ t: l i tt t.i !:} t lLtt-,tI Li 1 | Ll11) urJ I lt..t |f,l t J; i* ,,lii-iij i .,.,i\, ),?i rr r 14.r r. rr rt : /ti1i : trt, :.: litlr,,t ti rlt:lttllt.i: t 1t 2 ilti.4i \! I-.....,.. h ;,. rin r rii i:..t t! i rt r ifi?l*,t ilVr-J t.: .._j t.-: 1_J i.r 1 \-! I t, 1.u t_.i l. i t ;1, i r rys t i risi; t i i 1; t { t i\ t} | t i ri {li r, i il\-jJl lj.J tll,.)tt i.idLltJit.J L1-l 1i1l1irr1- ^,-i,,,.-, ^+^.,,^ti..4 1i) I;l! i]]11Pl t ti Nuremberg War Crime Trials: T n +, t r irint,sli r; rin.i nttiilarri ,rih,,r:il ltr,.iri nv iix.t,t li.it.)it\.iJ i1,\.) i:,1 i,i! l,{:lJ \t i {:1 ,i f i {} tJ I !1,1ii*, t fiftl f \i,t^,^i,i \!\i ^,- ll 1,. i,i,,...^--.L..,,,,t!i!iil Jti \tll ,1 I tt 111 l1,11tt UMl\U71i)t.,rl J\t trt.\t It tt1 lItt1\,!11it.J\)l llI 11 ^.,..,,- .^.,^... *1- -. L ^.. ^ ^ *,,..1 ti, -.l-,trI ti:II111 1ll -1! tlf1lt1\t*1!1 !ilrJ\L \t ! i i t i.t, I I !, 1. 1 I U,.{ U Ji.i.J \; \l | \..i . t t \.) ii * r ri:\ r\ ?;\ rtii r. t 1 *v r, * t I iy\ fi i i i,*ttrji j til.-, 2l1trt..tl1rUi \.Jf..lJri lttliJlli.) I rl n ri, i I {,; {,, d, r, t l:..1 ;:i i i * r,l rl r + \i t.) tttj..-J t.jt.\)\j 7/ I \tlr.;.,i t.S\.t\/t.\i I ,.J :tti;i rttl.,:rr: iLt if,fr. tlniTlt:t h{ ,-;,.1 i t.] t-) 1 | i \j 1 i t 1 t t. I ! i.J i i t.t I I 1i.j,-j i $*ititt*, Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment: J 1 t\ h 1 ,\ i 1 : t ft !! \ 1J1,1.-1.^ l.ilt^lJtt \.t1-t,..t^ l),1!. t lllrllt, il\t1!i1li li\,1rl .111t ,i,..i.,,-, i 1i. -, . n l. t .. r. l,-, ..,,,,n ... :..tlllt\.j tll llll-. il/1 ltil ..tt I tttlt \:t) ri1.t.\ny ,t I tJ1\-.! :|lj.i.ji t.l.l !aj\Jt i)\J ,.i,..,, 1.;i.^ ir.,,.i .t,| |, .: \ i i t t i i i \- t i 1, t l,lil tlW *,fi|!:ll iUl ltl:t1,tl1Lj t-tii.Lt \\ lt,,t:; irrrrorrt* il r tt,a,li t,ttl*t lt:itii tijt,i\ it*t|:. tlir.: i,*?tiS* itt 1t i;i r1 tritiltr,rti *rg.:1fiifltS t**ffl1 tJ ! /*. rttt.ll\JUt,2.rt tu tTl t fi tfiittli ir, ai!,*i i1 wr:s ;jii;,riii;{*d iJ ** vll*ttivr: iri !,t b;;iiii il th v, iii r t ttti,T \ r,: s1t t,;v ii tI q t:lji {\i\{t,:irl ..ill.,ir it iitt t, ,: i 2.t.) * 1.\.1 lt i.j 1., t.l t,i. I i \.t t t L 4 y 11 \.J ,..-1 ,., l nar ,,.,r.t,1r)rrnL.\.1 ttat,-.L.lit tti i \2 i I ;;^riUir:U lli i J I !-, 1+SiiLlilA i ri r,r i * t-ti - {iI - i),} u r t :i: #tii * Ti | * i1;, ,, ,. l 1 ,. ,.. n , , {1{1*i ., r; n{ f, ,.i n i.1rir: jit4,:11 1t1 I r..t...r,Jtl\,r f.it.r!tt 1t3 I \.i\/ t 1!.tlt i.tlilt..!\r..i., t,, ri,l l. 1 .) tt tri r. n,t l,, fi r *, + i fi ,> r* t r \.1 t..t I i l.J t-,t,!) 1, t i/ ?j I i-J Y 1 I \) \t i 1.,i\: ! | \ P:i1t i i tilil!,1 Belmont Report: !1 t.. I lll l\i*1t+qm1 tt:.*.rntF 1 tt. I L4 itl..t! t{l}l.M t11t11iltr:\:ii11lt\ i.r \ \J !l\LiMlr-Ll \lr.a,:t{ittt}i)i\J11 t,,.t 4r, n t) rntnr.ii fl {t iii Drrrrrn r, lvi ii,lt i lrJLL,ttLl,)li t{1 ilrlllit-\1 t. tr., r, ti<. *{ *,, rrr,tr:tli o,:tit1!llil?al I \ ill ll!rit:lt.J tr1J l\.) \/ i.j 1.. 1 t..t 1 \Jt 1 l\jUilrii ^.^.1 f\ ^r- ^. . .-.. i f\. ; i\{ 1 ?<fi lirt \t i iti:t 1 i4 *+ hli r i ;1 i ii{: {: I I 1l1xi rit:i x*l i *?i a il i ii * r. I j:i.l i 4 t:i{ii t.;,ii i.}| i !1 i:i\iiLit i i}i ;i-....,....^^.i,, -. i., .^,, ^. i i^,..*. ^. ^ltJt-) lii 11i:*\l1!i\li ,11 lllilli,Jll \-i it.! lj 1 r.! 1.\.) \.. i.1i., 1i \.j i t 11.11| ti.l1 i , : , ,,t...tr., r, -,i r. t t nl. r..; r11 ,-1 i.r..q|,,1 t,.,-! \)tJ lJ i1;\-,1) | 1i1iji\-i\j-lit\t t I t,\i:i:1.1 ti i, { i, {,. {.;: i\, rt i: l-, ;,, r, *it i, p ri ? i, ir it ri t \J 1.. r. ! | v.._ | t,,..) \ 1 IJ n t i v t-: 1 1.t | 1 i1 it:*ii*r:,, Bespect for persons: -f,... -+; I t \r\2.itt1r) l.!,.! \r\)tt\) ?i tit fi ii * t i1* LJ liff it i i1, E 1 t z iJ ij i ii1* i ii { : U ili c} :itir,i il.l t .1..,-. ,.,,.S, -.i -.,^.. ^,--..,1,.1 11 i 1i i i i I i tlrl d.rlit l i itJl i iV. Beneficence: :it ;., ;,,., i..,i..,..,,..,..,;1.,i r. h^, t.rt,t,t\tl t i 1t,l : II r Ii 1 I i I ll !L t:I i v 1 1 t 1 | 1 i t : t.. I 1 i )i l_i v ;:r ;:1 I * ! t:r I i (.t I i i 1 \.1 ..^- ^l .^^.-.,;.-.,-:.,^. 1 ^,. ^{,.t,.1i1tJ ilJ.l, lllrJ ; lrli 1 !iL\11L1!iii t.t. i I r-i I i t i.i r, i I I I I r. 1 i t.:3 t j \.J i 1, 1 I i 1 t i. CHAPTER 3 T ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH 63 Exhibit 3.3 Ttrskegee Syphilis Experiment Respect for Persons The Department of Health and Fluman Services (DHHS) and the Food and Drug Administration then translated these principles into specific regulations that were adopted in l99L as the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects also known as the Common Rule (Title 45 of Code of Federal Regulations [CFR], Part 46). This policy has shaped the course of social science research ever since by requiring organizations that sponsor feder ally funded research-including universities- to establish committees that review all research proposed at the institution and ensure compliance with the federal human subjects requirements when the research is conducted. This policy has shaped the course of social science research ever since, and you will have to take it into account as you design your own research investigations. Professional associations such as the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences (ACJS), university review boards, and ethics committees in other organizations also set standards for the treatment of human subjects by their members, employees, and students, although these standards are all designed to comply with the federal poliry. This section introduces these regulations. After 25 years, the Common Rule was revised, with modifications that were supposed to be implemented in January of 2018 but were delayed at the last minute, and the effective date was moved toJuly 19,2018 (Allen 2018). The revisions relaxed some requirements for social science research and made several other important changes that are consequential for both medical and social science researchers. These regulations, as revised, inform the discussion that follows (Chadwick 2017). TheACJS and theAmerican Society of Criminology (ASC), like most professional social science organizations, have adopted ethical guidelines for practicing criminologists that are more specific than the federal regulations. The ACJS Code of Ethics also establishes proce- dures for investigating and resolving complaints concerning the ethical conduct of the orga- nizations members. The code of ethics of the ACJS (2000) is available on the ACJS website (rttp://www.acjs.org). The ASC follows the American Sociological Associations (ASA 1999) code of ethics, which is summarized on the ASA website (trttp://www.asanet.orglabout/ethics .&). ETHICAL PRINCIPLES Achieving Valid Results Achievingvalid results is the necessary starting point for ethical research practice. Simply put, we have no business asking people to answer questions, submit to observations, or participate in experimenal procedures if we are simply seeking to veri$z our preexisting prejudices or convince others to take action bn behalf of our personal interests. It is the pursuit of objec- tive knowledge about human behavior-the goal of validity-that motivates and justifies our investigations and gives us some claim to the right to influence others to participate in our research. Knowledge is the foundation of human progress as well as the basis for our expecta- tion that we, as social scientists, can help people achieve a brighter future. Ifwe approach our research projecs objectively, setting aside our personal predilections in the service oflearn- ing a bit more about human behavior, we can honesdy represent our actions as potentially contributing to the advancement of knowledge. Justice (in research); *i*irinuti *u brnrfits and ri,lt$s *t r*r:*rtrr:h fairlU, Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (Common Bule): {*d*ral ruguillisfi* est,th!i*h*d in lfi*1 thatrsr* f:rtr,*rj ** tlt* flrifitiF:leg tf thr: ***trsrifr*p*r\, Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences (ACJS) Code of Ethics: Ilre ff*rJc {rt f!nir;* r,t thv, fr,*adsnt,t *f ff ri rr i nal Justi rc fir,i*n*x* tfr{),}#} **t* t*rlh {:3} Lthit:itl fitarzdar** t*at und*rli* tu*ttsb*rs *{ thc ht atl*nrys p rfi f fi s* i ttnei t **p tt {\ yiy}iliti * * t,n r} cr:ndu*1, sltnfi yrith i$) th* V*\ir,i** and ?r****L*** t*r *ntr:rci ng ih{Jse prir*r:tSsi*; n n rJ *tnn rj ?,r *t), l,{1 *rslt * r *l* trt in r.h**,r:ad*ntU r:l *rininal Jt:*i,ir:* $* i * n *cs c t]fiI ffi it;l i r i {tiv i duxl ffi *ntf} * { * !* arlfttlrrt trs th* A*J$ trd* *t t{tfil r, :t i n rJ *l *r r *i ni n U *tli r;al hehnvirr irtth* *r:nI*Ht r,lf lh* tr *v * tu {}dy {s r *i **:*i rs nal r,r;tiuiti*s. 64 SECTION I . FOUNDATIONS FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH ExhibitS.4 Belmont Report Principles The details inZimbardos articles and his book (2007) on the prison experiment make a compelling case for his commitrnent to achieving valid results-to learning how and why a prison-like situation influences behavior. In Zimbardos (2009) own words, Social-psychological studies were showingthathumannaturewas more pliable than pre- viouslyimagined and more responsive to situational pressures thanwe cared to adorowl- edge. . . . Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation . . . ofgood people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. . . . I decided that what was needed was to create a situation in a controlled experimental set- ting in which we could array on one side a host ofvariables, such as . . . coercive rules, power differentials, [and] anonymity. . . . On the other side, we lined up a collection of the best and brightest ofyoung college men. . . . I wanted to know who wins-good people or an evil situation-when they were brought into direct confronation. Zimbardo (Ilaney et al. 1973) devised his experiment so the situation would seem realistic to the participants and still allow carefirl measurement of imporantvariables and observation of behavior at all times. Questionnaires and rating scales, interviews with participants as the research proceeded and after it was over, ongoing video and audio recording, and logs main- tained by the guards all ensured that very litde would escape the researchers ga.ze. Zimbardos (Ilaney et al. L973) attention to validity is also apparent in his design of the physical conditions and organizati_onal procedures for the experiment. The prison was CHAPTER 3 o ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH 65 constructed in a basement without any windows so that participants would not have a sense of where they were. Their isolation was reinforced by the practice of placing paper bags over their heads when they went with a guard to use the bathroom, which was in a corridor apart from the prison area. Meals were bland, and conditions were generally demeaning. This was a very different situation for the participans; it was no college dorm experience. However, not all social scientists agree that Zimbardos approach achieved valid results. British psychologisc Reicher and Haslam (2006) argue that guard behavior was not so con- sistent and that it was determined by the instructions Zimbardo gave the guards at the start of the experiment rather than by becoming a guard in itself. For example, in another experiment, when guards were trained to respect prisoners, their behavior was less extreme (Lovibond, Mithiran, and Adams I 979). In response to such criticism, Zimbardo (2007) has pointed to several replications of his basic experiment that support his conclusions-as well as to the evidence of pafterns of abuse in the real world of prisons, including the behavior of guards who tormented prisoners atAbu Ghraib. Do you agree with Zimbardos assumption that the effects of being a prisoner or guard could fi:uitfully be studied in a mock prison with pretend prisoners? Do you find merit in the criticisms? Will your evaluation of the ethics of Zimbardos experiment be influenced by your answers to these questions? Should our ethical judgments differ when we are confident a studys results provide valid information about imporant social processes? We cant answer these questions for you, but before you dismiss them as inappropriate when we are dealing with ethical standards for the treatment of human subjects, bear in mind that both Zimbardo and his critics buttress their ethical arguments with assertions about the validity (or invalidiry) of the experimental results. It is hard to justify any risk for human sub- jects,or any expenditure of time and resources, if our findings tell us nothing about the reality of crime and punishment. Honesty and Openness The scientific concern with validity requires in turn that scientists be open in disclosing their methods and honest in presenting their findings. In contrast, research distorted by political or personal pressures to find particular outcomes or to achieve the most marketable results is unlikely to be carried out in an honest and open fashion. To assess the validity of a researchers conclusions and the ethics of his or her procedures, you need to know exacdy how the research was conducted. This means that articles or other reports must include a detailed methodology section, perhaps supplemented by appendices containing the research instruments or websites or an address where more information can be obtained. Philip Zimbardos research reports seemed to present an honest and open account of his methods. His initial article (Ilaney et al. 1973) included a detailed description of study procedures, including the physical aspects of the prison, the instructions to participanrc, the uniforms used, the induction procedure, and the specific data collection methods and mea- sures. Many more details, including forms and pictures, are available on Zimbardos website (htrp://www.prisonexperiment.org) and in his recent book (Zimbardo 2007). The act of publication itself is a vital element in maintaining openness and honesty. Otlers can review and question study procedures and so generate an open dialogue with the researcher. Although Zimbardo disagreed sharply with his critics about many aspects of his experiment, their mutual commitrnent to public discourse in widely available publications resulted … Learnrng q imilar to the research methods we examined in Chapter 10, the dataused for\) the methods described in this chapter often rely on secondary data.Impor- tantly, the methods covered in this chapter can be used both for investigative purposes and for basic research purposes. The rise of social media platforms such as Facebook and Tivitter have provided both researchers and practitioners with an abundance of data from which to draw inferences. In this chapteq we will first introduce you to social nenvork analysis and demonstrate how it has been applied to research as well as law enforcement investigative practices. We next discuss mapping generally (and crime mapping specificrll, and examine how this technique has also been applied to police practice as well as general research. And finally, we will conclude the chapter with an introduction to the concept of big data, which you will learn is not merely an extremely large and dynamic set of data but also refers to techniques used to extract information from these datasets. SOCIAL N ETWOR K ANALYSIS It is virtually impossible today not to be part of social networks. Everyone you interact with, including those in the virtual as well as in the real world ) are part of your social network. We inherently think about the world in terms of these networks, including such networks as familial and friendship nenvorks, other students in your major in college, people who work out at the samo time as you at the Wm, and the many friends you llr,ay not actually know in real life on platforms such as Facebook or those who similarly liked some- thing on Twirter. The method of social network analysis (SNA) has increas- ingly been used since the Internet and these social media platforms emerged. There are entire textbooks devoted to SNA, so the goal of this chapter is to introduce you to the basics, along with a few case studies that highlight their applicability in the field. SNA is not one type of method but is an approach to analysis and a set of methodological techniques that help researchers describe and explore relationships that individuals and groups have with each other (Scott 2017). Social networks are tFpes of relationships that can include many dif- ferent forms, such as face -to-face and online interactions, digital economic transactions, interaction with a criminal justice agenqr, geopolitical relations among nation states, and so on. As you can see, there are numerous tFpes 1,, 2i, ffi.ffii -fl*H Understand how social network analysis and crime mapping can be used for intelligence-Ied policing as well as basic research. Describe the different research questions crime mapping can answer. , Understand how computer technology has ushered in t .a. our ability to analyze big data and the effects this has had on criminal justice- related research. :!: Be able to see the connection between research and investigative policing. l.. , 1 An ai:prtath io a*al,rsis and a s*t *f rrethr:d*lr:$ir:al i*clinir;ues that help r*s*arrh*r-q de $rrihe anri *xpltr* r* I ati t ii s lr r ps ih at i:at ir i ri rl i v i rl u a I s a;r d 0rri.Jt]. havr uviih *ar:h r:ther, : :, Il$es of relaiionsitips t*;ii tari irtr:lurit iil.fin1i rJiffrre ni l*rrns, n*t:h as fa*e-r*-fam ilnd *irlinr intrra*ti*ns, riigital e c*n*mir t r ait s ar: i i r: r.t s, i li i * ra cl i * nr,, i t ii a * ff {ii {tii ; uslic* i1#*nl;y, il**pr:l itr*al r* latir:rns ai?1finfi naiicrn stat*s, and s* rn. SOCIAL N ETWORK A NALYSIS, CRIME MAPPING, AND BIG DATA of networks available for analysis. The most important component of any network is that it is relational. That is an important assumption. So far in this book, we have talked about variables that measure attributes of the units of analysis, such as the behavior of people, the crime rates of cities, and so on. Relational data measure the contacts, connections, attachments, and ties that relate one unit to the next (Scott 2017).Ar a result, these relation al data are not properties of any particular unit (e.g., individual, group, .ity) but arerelational systems of units that are created by connecting pairs of interacting units. Importandy, then, it is the technique used to describe and examine relational data that is the key to SNA. Many of the traditional methods that we have already discussed in this book can also be used to collect relational data. For example, surveys, interviews, participant observation, and secondary data can all be used to generate relational data for SNA as we will see in the case studies that follow. Although literally thousands of articles examined aspects of social structure in the early twentieth century, one of the first graphical applications of social networks was created by Jacob Moreno to examine friendship choices. In his classic book,LVho Shall Suntiae? Moreno (1953) describes his definition of sociometry as being in accordance with its eqrmology from Latin and Greek, with the emphasis . . . on the second half of the tem,metrum,meaning measure, but also on the first half, socius meaning companion (51). Instead of focusing exclusively on the individual or exclusively on an aggregate entity, Mereno believed that the relationship between individuals within a group must also be examined. Using a sociometric test, which required individuals to choose their associates from a group in which they were a member, attractions ar,d.repubions were determined. For example, if your instructor wanted to understand the social strucflrre of the class you are in right now, she or he might ask each stu- dent to hypothetically choose among the students whom they wanted to have sit next to them (attraction) and whom they would like to have moved to another class (repulsion). Responses received from each individual in the group could then be graphed in asociogram, which is a way of representing social configurations, with individuals (or some other unit) represented by points and their social relationships to one another depicted by lines (Moreno 1953). The formal terminology that describes these graphs as well as the units and relationships therein are called several things, depending on the discipline. The social sciences generally call the basic unis in a graph nodes (sometimes called actors or aertices) and nodes are connected by relations (sometimes called. ties,links, arcs, or edges). As noted above, relationship data such as these can be collected from many places, such as ofEcial records, Facebook friends, and so on ffang, Keller, and Zheng 2017). SNA usually consists of at least two datasets. The first is called the nodelist, where all of the units of observation are stored. The second defines the relations between these units. One of the most common t)apes of relations data is called an adjacency matrix (sometimes called nenlork matix), wherein the nodes constitute both the rows and the columns and the cells specif, if and what kind of relationship exists between the nodes at the intersection of each row and column. We are going to stick with the simplest case of a binary network, which only distinguishes whether a relation does or does not exist between a pair of nodes (Yang et al. 2017). An example of a network graph and the nodelist and adjacenry matrix upon which it is based is presented in Exhibit 11.1. fu you can imagine, nodes and relations can be much more complicated than this simple example, and special software is required to mathematically describe the numerous networks that emerge from such data. A discussion of these issues is beyond the scope of this text, but we want to provide you with some excit- ing case studies of how SNA is being used in research related to criminology and criminal justice. Belational data: l,fi*,t.gu r*$ ihs *oiltact$, * # fi il o ct i * rz*, atta*hrfi e nt$, arsd,li** tha+, r*la.tfr olifi ilnit tc thc noxl, Sociogram: h grast?t rspr*$e*linU th* s*r ia I {r*ilfi # * ralicns, with individuai* {*r **fflfr rslltrl unil} re pro$*ntoii by tr:aints nnr| t**i r st:*ial r*latir:nsh i ps ir *rl* afiilth*r *,r,pi*r,*rlbu ! ! n*s, Nodes: The hasic ufiits ie,$,, p**tJl*\ in a sr:cial n*t,u*rk gravh, sfiffistiff1** {:all*r} a#*rs *r {#rtlc#s, Belations: Th* c*nn*tti*n* i* a n*tul*rk #r ,r$h, g t){t1*,lifft *,* {:dll * d i i * *q, liuks, fr{{;s, frr xdgss, Nodelist: Th* data **t {;t}rfi.dirrirrU thr nr:d*$ iufiits rst rsb**rttxti**1 f*r a stcial n*trt*rk anal *in, Adjacency matrix: fi, rlala,s*t ra nta i n i n g i nf * r ntali rs n ab rs trt tlt * r*latir.rns hrhrs*n th* units cf c rne rv atitsrt,sorilot i rilo$ r,ail*rj a fiatw#rk ffiatrix, Binary network: *isir nU u ishe*,ruh*th*r rr rrlati*nslrip d*cs ar d*cs n*t exist lietwc#r] rifid{ir, t:::: iii:::t::.::;:t: ::: ::: ::: ::: ::: ::: ::::: :::,::::::i!:i.i:!:t!:::!:!:i.::i.i:i:::i:;:i:i:i:::i:!:i.i:i.i:i i::.i::!::!: :. :!: :l : [i *E, ffi.iiiri:.ii.ii.ii.i,.ii..i.i.ii.r,.i.,.,,i.,.i.,.,.,r,,.i .i. :ii:i:ii:::::l:i::t:l::ii:ra:a:::;:l;i:::ii:i:::i::::i::::,:i::i::ittiiiii:ii:i::t:ti::::::i:iilitli:lt::a::ilil:ilii;:: .:.::i:.::j.:::.:::::,:::.::i::::.:::.:.:.:::::1:::i::j:::.:::.:::::::.::::::ii:::.:::.:::::::.j::.:::.:::j:::::.::::..:::i.:::: ::::i:i : :l:::::j::::::::::t: ::: :: :::ri.:il::l::i::1:: : i :i::i::: :::::i:1:: :::: : : : : ::: : i::: ::: :::.:::.:: .l:: ::i:.: i:ii:::t:it:iti::tit::i;i::::::j:ti:i!::i!:i::i:ii:i::i::it:i::i::i:ii:i:lli::i:i::i:i,:iii:i:tit|t::iiiji;::i:l:i:i i::i::::i:i:i::l:r::i::i::::::i:u:j;:i:::::i:l::::i:::;:t::11:jiil:i::itiiij:1il:r::::::t::;:::iitilij:t::tjj:ii:t::; i::::::::i:t::i:l::::::!:::::::li::l::i::ir::::;i:l:i:::i:i::i:i;it;i:::lt:i:i:ti:it:iiiliiiti:ii:ir:i:tiilii:i:::i:i::i::!lti:t:r: ::.::::: ::j::: ::. . :r:::+1 ::::: : : : ::1: :1 : :::!:::i :i :ll:::::il:i:::i:::ii.i.i:li:;:i:::!:i:i:i:i. :!. ::: : .: .. ::: -. ouve learned, tcards, hapter content, CHAPTER 11 . SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS, CRIME MAPPING, AND BIG DATA 329 Nodelist A Andrei B Barbara C Chris D Den n is E E rica F Fannv G Gal ina H H ans I oor J Jennv Adiacencv Matrix A B C D E F G H I J A n 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 B 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 U C 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 U 0 D 0 il 0 U 0 tl 0 il 0 n E 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 1 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 1 0 il 0 n U 0 U 0 0 I 1 U IJ 0 0 1 0 U 0 1 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Source: Adapted from Yang, Ke1ler, and Zheng2017 . CASE STUDY Networks of Terrorist Cells On September 1 l, 2001, nineteen members of the Islamic extremist group al-Qaeda hijacked four airplanes and carried out suicide crashes into four places in the United States.The targets included the north and south towers of the World Tiade Center, the Pentagon, and Wash- ington, D.C. (in the last instance, the passengers fought the hijackers, preventing the plane from hitting its target and causing it to crash into an empty field in Pennsylvania instead). Almost 3,000 people were killed, including all of the passengers on the planes along with the 19 hijackers and many hundreds ofpeople in the targeted buildings, which included rescuers. About a month before the 9/ll attack Zac*ias Moussaoui, a French citizen of Moroccan descent, and sometimes referred to as the 20th hijacker,was arrested after he raised suspicion at a flight school in Oklahoma by requesting information on flying a 747. Motssaoui was eventually indicted and found guilty in 2006 of six charges, including conspirary to com- mit acts of terrorism. Information from his indictrnent (United States of Arnerica o. Zacarins 330 SECTION lV . TOPICAL RESEARCH DESIGNS Exhibit L1.1 Example of a Network Graph With lts Nodelist and Adjacency Matrix Moussaoui 2001), along with other information uncovered by Tbe Nera York Times and the Washington Post have been used to conduct social network analyses of the terrorist cell that carried ofig/ll. One of the first attempts was made by Krebs (2002), who created one of the first network graphs of the terrorist network. An adapted snippet of his graph is displayed in Exhibit 11.2. Without going into the advanced statistical analysis performed by Krebs to describe the strength of the relations for the terrorists, many conclusions can be drawn from this graph, including the meticulousness with which the hijackers kept their identities unknown even from each other. Krebs explains, Many pairs of team members were beyond the horizon of observability. . . . Keeping cell members distant from each other, and from other cells, li*.ii ffi\iin *ed Belras il,nnJ,N*,*)* ,r,,,, \ \ fi;Alr,[\ ilitiiiiili nl I I I lglrl I\l.lq,lll lLr! q,l ffifur=-fu Mamduh Mahmud Salim Mamoun Dar kazanli jed Moqed lid AI - Mihdhar Bandar Alhaz mi Mohammed Abdullah Faisal Al Salmi ,al- Marabh Flaed HijaZi Ahmed Alnami Mohamed Abdi ! Flight AA#1 1 - Crashed into WTC North ffi Flight AA#77 - Crashed into Pentagon ffi Flight UA#93, - Crashed into field in Pennsylvania Hlrii Flight UA#1 75, - Crashed into WTC Southl+;4i+X v $l$+i Associated with Hijackers Source:Adapted from Krebs 2002, Figure 4, p. 50. -Bin al-shibh Stam Suqami Y/ Ahtfud.Al Alhaz mi CHAPTER 11 . SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS, CRIME MAPPING, AND BIG DATA 331 Exhibi t 77.2 Partial Network Graph of the gt77 Terrorist Attackers r El Mot assadeq minimizes damage to the network if a cell member is captured or otherwise compromised (2002,46).Krebs graph also confirms the fact that MohamedAtta was the likely leader of the cell, as he has the most relations with other nodes. Krebs analysis shows the benefits of SNA when putting together a case for prosecution. It also highlights the inherent difficulty of using SNA for preventing or uncovering secret illegal networls. Krebs concludes, The best solution for network disruption may be to discover possible suspects and then, via snowball sampling, map their ego networks-see whom else they lead to, and where they overlap. To find these suspects it appears that the best method is for diverse intelligence agencies to aggregate their information-their individual pieces to the puzzle-into a larger emergent map. (51) While using SNA for investigative purposes has its challenges, our next case study demon- strates the merits of doing so. CASE STUDY Finding a Serial Killer The Green River serial killer (GRK) killed his first victim, 16-year-old Wendy CofEeld, in Kings County, Washington. Her body was found inJuly of 1982 in the Green River, which became the name given to the then-unidentified killer. After 48 other murders, Gary Leon Ridgway was finally charged as the serial killer in September 2001, despite the fact that he was on the list of suspecrc much earlier. Media interest of the cases generated thousands of leads, and these leads compounded with every new victim, which resulted in a huge amount of data to examine. However, large amounts of data are not the only hindrance to solving a case. Like all of us, police detectives can have cognitive biases (see Chapter 1 for a list of common biases), and when combined with an overabundance of information coming from the public, both reliable and unreliable, investigations can go awry. In a recent papeg Bichler, Lim, and Larin Q0l7) have demonstrated how SNA can be used to aid in connecting the pieces ofa growing body ofevidence. Bichler and her colleagues col- lected data about the Green River murders from multiple sources, including newspaper reports, bools, and court transcrips of Ridgways trial. They then performed a SNA analysis of the evi- dence over time to determine if SNA could have prevented investigators from keeping another man on top of their suspect list instead of Gary Ridgway. They state, We argue that by identify- ing which actors shift in structural position during the investigation, it may be possible to reduce the damaging effects of tunnel vision, emphasis on specific evidence, and intuition (141). The goal of their analysis was to find the connections between the victims and the suspects, along with the places they frequented. Because these murders Iikely involved strangers, Bichler et al. (2017) explain that other sources of information must be added to find clusters. They state, People sharing social space will emerge when we link wimesses, friends, and associ- ates to the places they frequent, but finding individuals positioned between different ::mmff ;ffi ffi:-,iff :x[;i;,H:*tHsuspectinacrimeseries The categories of the data Bichler and her colleagues examined included victims, suspects, investigatory involvement (e.g., witnesses, body finders), family and associates, body disposal sites, last seen locations, and other investigative material. Because there were different levels of SECTION lV . TOPICAL RESEARCH DESIGNS332 geographical aggregation (e.9., a red light district, a specific hotel), all data points were placed within a census track Without going into the statistical deails of the study, they were particu- larly interested in middleman rtrho connected others not direcdy linked to each other. This is statistically measured with a betweenness centrality score. The researchers also created multiple graphs using data over time, beginningwith graphs using data thatwas available from the beginning of the investigation and creating more graphs until the data were exhausted (about 30 months into the investigation). Exhibit 1 1.3A displays a graph using data from the first six months of the investigation while Exhibit 11.3B depicts the investigation at 18 months, after which there was not much new data to incorporate. Line thiclness indicates the number of shared places between pairs, diamonds depict suspects, gray circles indicate victims, and other circles represent other case nodes (e.g., witnesses, body disposal sites). Source: Adapted from Bichler, Lim, and LarinQAfl),Table 3,p.1,46. Betweenness centrality sc0re: A rtatisti * that rn*ax*r** lltr: *xle*ttr y;hi*h nurk* **nrz**tl* r,sinr,r rgsd** t*al arr n*t rlir*r,,,,,,1 link*rlt* ***lt *lh*r itt s,**i*l **ttit*rk analysis, (A) CHAPTER 11 . SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS, CRIME MAPPING,,AND BIG DATA 333 Exhibit 11.3 Network Graph of Nodes in the Green River Killer Investigation at 6 and 18 Months CASE STUDY Using Google Earth to Track Sexual Offending Recidivism While the GIS software that was utilized by Fitterer et al. (2015) has many research advan- ages for displaying the spatial distributions of crime, other researchers have begun to take advantage of other mapping tools, including Google Earth. One such endeavor was con- ducted by Duwe, Donnay, and Jbwksbury (2008), who sought to determine the effects of Minnesotas residency restriction statute on the recidivism behavior of registered sex offend- ers. Many states have passed legislation that restricts where sex offenders are allowed to live. These policies are primarily intended to protect children from child molesters by deterring direct contact with schools, day care centers, parks, and so on. Most of these satutes are applied to all sex offenders, regardless oftheiroffending history or perceived risk ofreoffense. The impact of such laws on sexual recidivism, however, remains unclear. Duwe et al. (2008) attempted to fill this gap in our knowledge.They examined224 sexoffenders who had been reincarcerated for a new sex offense between 1990 and 2005 and asked several research questions, including Where did offenders initially establish contact with their victims, and where did they commit the offense? and What were the physical distances between an offenders residence and both the offense and first contact locations? (488). The research- ers used Google Earth to calculate the distance between an offenders place of residence, the place where first contact with the victim occurred, and the location of offense. Duwe and his colleagues (2008) investigated four criteria to classifr a reoffense as pre- ventable: (1) the means by which offenders established contact with their victims, (2) the cHApTER 11 . SOCTAL NETWORK ANALYStS, CRTME MAPPING, AND BtG DATA 339 Big data: h,i#{i lar7* datasel t*,rJ,,r:* ni* i ns th r: r: ran d* oi cases), a***ssilslrt i;t c {}ffi{} ute r - r * ?Ld,?Ll:l * f * r n, th at is tls*rl t* re,t*al patt*rir$, tr*nris, and ass**iatirrrs l;e1tru**n ur.uriabl*s ruilh **w c * m fi u te l +, **hn*l * g;, distance between an offenders residence and where first contact was established (i.e., 1,000 feet, 2,500 feet, or I mile), (3) the type of location where contact was esablished (e.g., was it a place where children congregated?), and (4) whether the victim was under the age of 18. To be classified as preventable tfuough housing restrictions, an offense had to meet ceftain criteria. For example, the offender would have had to establish direct contact with a juvenile victim within one mile of his residence at a place where children congreg?.te (.g., pr.lc school). Resuls indicated that the majority of offenders, as in all cases of sexual violence, viaimized someone theyalreadytnew. Oily35\% ofthe sexoffenderrecidivists esablishednewdirectcontact with a victim, but these victims were more likely to be aduls than children, and the contact usually occurred more than a mile away from the offenders residence. Of the few offenders who direcdy esablished new conact with a juvenile victim within dose proximity of their residence, none did so near a school, a parlg a playground, or other locations included in residential restriction laws. The authors concluded that residenry restriction laws were not that effective in prevent- ing sexual recidivism among child molesters. Duwe et al. (2008) stated, Why does residential proximity appear to matter so litde with regard to sexual reof- fending? Much of ithas to do with the pattems of sexual offendingin general. . . . Sex offenders are much more likely to victimize someone they know. For example, one of the most common victim--offender relationships in this study for those who victim- ized children] was that of a male offender developing a romantic relationship with a woman who had children. . . . Theyused their relationships with these women to gain access to their victims. . . . It was also common for offenders to gain access to victims through babysitting for an acquainance or co-worker. (500) Clearly, the power of mapping technologies has changed not only the way law enforcement ofiicials are preventing crime but also the way in which researchers are examining the factors related to crime and crime control. BIG DATA When do secondary data become what is now referred to as big data? Big data is a somewhat vague term that has been used to describe large and rapidly changing datasets and the analytic techniques used to extract information from them. It generally refers to data involving an entirely different order of magnitude than what we are used to thinking about as large data- sets. For our purposes, big data is simply defined as a very large dataset (e.g., contains thou- sands ofcases), accessible in a computer-readable form, that is used to reveal patterns, trends, and associations among variables. The technological advancements in computing power over the past decade have made analyses of these huge datasets more available to everyone, includ- ing government, corporate, and research entities alike. Importandy, many researchers now contend that big daa holds great promise for improving the efEciency and effectiveness of law enforcement and security intelligence agencies (Chan and Moses 2017,299). Here are some examples of what now qualifies as big data (Mayer-Schcinberger and Cukier 2013): Facebookusers upload more than 10 million photos everyhour and leave a comment or click on a like button almost three billion times per day; YouTirbe users upload more than an hour of video every second; Twitter users are sending more than 400 million nveets per day. If all this and other forms of stored information in the world were printed in books, one estimate in 2 0 1 3 was that these books would cover tfie face of the eath 52 layers thick Thats big. All this information would be of no more importance than the number of grains of sand on the beach except that these numbers describe information produced by people, available to social scientists, and manageable with todays computers. Already, big data anallses are being used to predict the spread of flu, the behavior of consumers, and the prevalence of crime. 340 sEcnoN rv . ToprcAL RESEARCH DESTGNS Heres a quick demonstration: We talked about school shootings in Chapter 1, which are a form of mass murder. We think of mass murder as a relatively recent phenomenon, brit you may be surprised to learn that it has been written about for decades. One way to examine inquiries into mass murder is to see how frequendy the term mass murderhas appeared in all the boolis ever written in the world. It is now possible with the click of a mouse to answer that question, although with two key limitations: We can only examine bools written in English (and in a few other languages) and, as of 2014, we are limited to only one quarter of all books ever published-a mere 30 million books (Aiden and Michel 2013). To check this out, go to the Google Ngrams site ftttps://books.google.com/ngrams), type in mass murder and serial murder, and check the case-insensitizte box (and change the end- ing year to 2015). Exhibit I 1.7 shows the resulting screen (if you dont obtain a graph, try using a different browser). Note that the height of a graph line represents the percentage that the term represents of all words in books published in each year, so a rising line means greater relative interest in the term, not simply more boo[s being published. You can see that mass ruarder emerges in the early 20th century, while serial ruurder did not begin to appear until much later, in the 1980s. Its hard to stop checking other ideas by adding in other terms, searching in other languages, or shifting to another topic entirely. Our next case study illumi- nates how law enforcement agencies are also harnessing big daa to make predictions. Ngrams: F:*q ue*cy g raphs, pr*clu*erJ hy fi**gie .s dataha**, rf all 1,;r:rris *rint*t|in mrre lhatt rtrr* l.ltirrJ *t th* tu*rldn h**ks {}v*t ttmfr (with r*vcrafi* still expanding), 0.0000600\% 0.0000550\% 0.0000500\% 0.0000450\% 0.0000400\% 0.0000350\% 0.0000300\% 0.0000250\% 0.0000200\% 0.0000150\% 0.0000100\% 0.0000050\% 0.0000000\% , -t ,: i ..lii :rti t:: il 1 990 mass murder (All) serial murder (All) 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 Sour ce : Goo gle B o oks Ngram Viewer, http: / h ooks. go o gle. com/n grams. CASE STUDY 1970 1 980 Predicting Where Crime Will Occur If you have seen tlle film Minoity Report, yotrhave gotten a far-fetched glimpse of a world where people are arrested for criminal acts that they are predicted to do, not that they have actually done. FOX also had a television series called Minority Report that was based on the same premise. While crime predictions in tlrese shows are based on clairvoyants (people who can see into the future) and not real data, law enforcement agencies are beginning to use big data to predict both future behavior in individuals and, as we saw with crime mapping, areas where crime is likely to occur in the future. fu we highlighted earlier, crime mapping allows law enforcement agencies to estimate where hot spots of crime are occurring-where they have been most likely to occur in the past. Caplan and Kennedy (2015) from the Rutgers School of CriminalJustice have pioneered CHAPTER 11 o SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS, CRIME MAPPING, AND BIG DATA 341 Exhibit 11,.7 Ngram of, Mass Murder and Serial Murder Risk-terrain modeling (BTM): lvkcl*linu that uses iJata frrnt seJe ral $ourcfis to prcrjici the prohahility i:f rrirn* *c*u rrin7 in the futur#, usir:# the unrierlying ta*t*rs al tlt* *n tir *rtn *rti that ;ir* a$$o{:iat*d with iile;,*l b*hauiar, a new way to forecast crime using big data called risk-temain modeling (RTM). Using daa from several sources, this modeling predicts the probability of crime occurring in the future using the underlying factors of the environment that are associated with illegal behavior. The imporant difference between this and regular crime mapping is that it takes into account features of the area that enable criminal behavior. The process weights these factors (which are the independentvariables) and places them into a final model that produces a map of places where criminal behavior is most likely to occur. In this way, the predicted probability of future crime is the dependent variable. This modeling is essentially special-risk analysis in a more sophisticated form than the early maps ofthe Chicago school presented earlier. Kennedy and his colleagues (2012) explain: Operationalizing the spatial influence of a crime factor tells a story, so to spefi about how that feature of the landscape affects behaviors and attracts or enables crime occurrence at places nearby to and far away from the feature iself. When certain motivated offenders interact with suitable targets, the risk of crime and victimization conceivably increases. But, when motivated offenders interact with suitable targets at cerain places, the risk of criminal victimization is even higher. Similarly, when … THIS PAPER IS TO BE USED AS YOUR GUIDE TO HELP YOU PUT TOGETHER THE DISCUSSION FOR THIS WEEKS LESSON PLEASE LOOK BACK AT YOUR INSTRUCTION AND READING MATERIAL TO HELP YOU……THANKS Week 6 Discussion 1 Ethics Human experimentation is an ethical issue that exists in criminal justice research. It was not uncommon for the military to use its own crew members as volunteers for experiments regarding chemical warfare. In 1944, there was a young Navy man that was subjected to rigorous testing of chemical agents that yield adverse reactions to his body both internally and externally, (pcrm.org, n. d.). The ACJS Code of Ethics would have prevented such brutal treatment of a test subject. First, full disclosure between the subject and researcher should be completely understood and full permission must be given prior to experimenting. Minimal harm to the subject is also an ethical aim when it comes to subjecting people to experimentation. Researchers should inform participants about any aspects of the research that might change a person’s mind about participating, such as physical risks, discomfort, and/or unpleasant emotional experiences. Those found in violation of the ACJS Code of Ethics could result in sanctions all the way to termination of membership. Basically, all you must do is be a decent human being when conducting research like one should in everyday life. If decency is a guiding force, ethical issues won’t be an issue. References Pcrm.org staffers, (n. d.). Human experimentation: an introduction to the ethical issues. Retrieved from http://www.pcrm.org/research/healthcare-professionals/researchcompendium/human-experimentation-an-introduction-to-the