Prisons & Criminal Justice
I would add that offenders should also be supported in learning about money and finance, improving their confidence, developing their understanding of supportive relationships, dealing with issues that may arise or previous traumas. Reform is about equipping someone with the tools to successfully navigate life’s difficulties without resorting to crime.
Life after prison is the final theme on the website and this is the support needed by prisoners once they are released. This includes working with probation services. They highlight the need for services that support prisoners from the transition ‘through the gate’. The main factors being employment and accommodation. When looking at the statistics for prisons achieving their target for accommodation on the first night following release, this is only 17.3%. When we look at employment targets within the first 6 weeks of release, this was at 4%, which is very low. These statistics raise concerns as to whether prison is successful in rehabilitation. Or is it merely a punishment that puts people’s lives on hold?
Criminological arguments against prisons
Part 1
The first argument would be that prisons do not work. Those advocating for prison reform highlight reoffending statistics as an example of the ineffectiveness of prisons.
The adult reoffending rate for the October to December 2018 cohort was 27.5%.
Almost 101,000 proven re-offences were committed over the one-year follow-up period by around 25,000 adults. Those that reoffended committed on average 3.97 re-offences. [Source – Home Office – Proven reoffending statistics for England and Wales, published October 2020].
Research shows that long prison sentences have little impact on crime. Time in prison can actually make someone more likely to commit crime — by further exposing them to all sorts of criminal elements. Prisons are also costly, using up funds that could go to other government programs that are more effective at fighting crime.
Additionally, there are arguments that prison does not rehabilitate prisoners. While there are some opportunities in prison, this does not always meet the needs of the prisoners and does not help them on their release due to the views people in society have about imprisonment and criminal records. On release, three-fifths of prisoners have no “identified employment or education or training outcome”. If prison punishes people through the experience itself but then does not offer those individuals the opportunity to improve and change their lives once they are released, can we realistically expect people to be rehabilitated and not return to crime?
The prison system is like a river.
The wider it gets, the faster it flows – and the harder it becomes to swim against the tide. Rather than being guided to safer shores, those in the middle are swept into deeper currents of crime, violence and despair. What began as a trickle turns into a torrent, with problems in prisons spilling into the towns and cities around them.”
In conclusion, when we think about the prison, and imprisonment as a punishment and reform option, there is a lot to consider. We need to assess the overall effectiveness of prisons and the need for justice against the harm imprisonment can have on an individual. We must consider the long-term impact the prison has on an individual, not just mentally, but also considering the impact it will have on their life chances and their ability to reintegrate into society.
Part 3
Similarly, specialty jurisdictions exist for offenders with mental health issues. For example, the Assessment and Referral Court List in Victoria deals with accused persons who have a mental illness or cognitive impairment, lining them out with treatment agencies to deal with the underlying causes of offending.
Not all forms of offending can be traced to underlying mental health issues, but for those offenders who do require treatment, it is the single most effective way to reduce reoffending.
For other forms of offending, a financial penalty may be more effective than a prison sentence. For example, many forms of “white-collar crime” are motivated by pursuit of status. Public naming and shaming, hefty fines and bans on certain forms of professional practice are more likely to deter white-collar offending than prison.
Moreover, victim-centred alternatives to standard prison sentences can provide empowerment for victims of crime. Restorative justice is a system of criminal justice that focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large.
This can involve victims being able to confront their attackers, seek financial restitution and to have a say on the programs the offender must undertake. While not suitable for all forms of offending, restorative justice measures have been shown to provide healing outcomes for both victims and offenders.
What makes some jails safer and more effective than others?
Part 1
These are challenging times to live and work in prisons, with rising drugs, violence and self-harm and overcrowded, squalid conditions in many jails. Reoffending rates remain stubbornly high, at almost 37%, and the proportion of prisoners recalled to prison is 13% higher than it was a year ago. Amidst these pressures, most prisons are struggling to provide any kind of activity to reduce the likelihood that people will end up back inside.
Yet a small number of prisons are safe and calm, and have created more positive cultures that encourage prisoners to take part in employment and education that should help them to secure employment on their release. A new report, Improving behaviour in prisons, by HM Inspectorate of Prisons has explored what these prisons have in common, and what learning there may be for other prisons.
Prisons Don’t Work
Part1
Counter-argument for potency of prisons is failure of prisons, that is, prisons don’t work. Criminologists have argued that a prison doesn’t alter criminal behaviour and there’s a very high likelihood that inmates will re-offend once they finish their term and leave prison. People have encountered brutality and unfairness in prisons. According to Frank, Beirie and Mackenzie (2010: 93) prisons don’t alter criminal behaviour, but they rather often promote criminality.
They are generally delegitimizing. Prisons are considered schools of crime. Emotions play crucial role in phase of incarceration. Some researchers have indicated that criminals don’t cope well in prisons whereas critics have argued prisons do cope criminals (Frank et al, 2010: 93). According to research conducted by Hurd (2005: 26-27), prisons don’t work at all. Increase in imprisonment doesn’t reduce crime.
He used England and Wales as an example. Number of prisoners increased from 44,000 to 60,000 from 1986 to 1997, but no reduction in crime was recorded. Offenders were being numbered up into jails but crime was still going up. Other scholars have argued the same thing. Sinead Hanks have argued the same point.
Education
One woman I interviewed explained that none of the education options in the prison were suitable. She already had a degree, so did not need the English and maths classes that were provided. To her, the prison just wanted to tick a box to show people in prison were engaging in some form of education rather than helping black women progress and gain educational skills that were tailored to an individual’s needs and current level of education.
However, another Black woman said that being in prison had forced her to take level 1 and 2 English and Maths. She had been putting it off when she was in society but being in prison allowed her to take the time to do it. She passed and felt that she would have better prospects leaving the prison than when she came in. Additionally, she had been trained on how to clean up chemical spills and learnt all about the control of substances hazardous to health (COSSH). Again, she learnt new skills that she felt she would be able to use in the outside world.
Racism
The final example I want to give comes from several women that highlighted the systemic racism they felt was occurring in the prison. The women stated that many of the officers stereotyped them as aggressive, loud troublemakers because of their race. This had a knock-on effect because it affected how long it took for women to get moved from a closed prison to an open prison, be released for day visits, to work and see family. It also meant that they felt like they could not be themselves. For these women, prison was not effective because they were dealing with the disadvantage of being black and female. They had fewer opportunities for employment progression and they had few supportive relationships with staff. When we think about examples like this, we must determine how effective the prison would be for these women. It would be a punishment but would it help rehabilitate them or leave them bitter, angry, frustrated and no better off than before they entered the prison?
Part 2
Some believe that the whole prison system is an oppressive institution governed by the powerful that cages the marginalised and powerless. They would argue that prison further damages people because it causes further trauma, exposes them to further violence, reinforces disadvantage and creates further crime and social harm. The prison also does very little to tackle the underlying causes of crime in communities. However, some have argued that by reducing the prison population, we are still widening the net and criminalising people, as community sentences and alternatives to custody would be increased rather than looking at some of the structural inequalities that may lead to crime and criminal behaviour.
Others argue that prison mainly holds those that are from lower socio-economic backgrounds and ethnic minorities, punishing poverty and disadvantage while protecting the crimes of the powerful. For example, where are the imprisoned individuals from corporations that cause widespread harm, such as those that need to be held accountable for the Grenfell Tower fire, multi-million corporations and so on?
There are many arguments for abolishing prison, and then there are arguments that recognise prison cannot be abolished completely but needs reforming
Crime & Environment
Crimes that Affect the Environment take on many forms; just two of these are forest crimes and minerals crime, which in themselves have many forms. Forest crime includes but is not limited to illegal harvesting of non-timber forest products, arson, illegal deforestation and illegal logging. Minerals crime is equally varied ranging from illegal mining to soil pollution. Each of these forms of CAE are perpetrated by a diverse of array of actors that are different depending on the geography and the environmentally sensitive commodity that is being, in these instances, extracted. In these first studies, the aim is to provide the state of knowledge of the nature and scope of the CAE, and what is known about the actors, the modus operandi, the supply chains and their vulnerabilities, and the existing and potential responses.
Part 2
Firstly, if people pose a risk to the community, they should be heavily monitored and controlled, but this can be done outside standard prison environments. Community corrections are already a part of Australia’s criminal justice system and have been found to effectively control and treat offending behaviour.
Offenders regularly report back to a case manager, who is tasked with funnelling the offender through educational programs, community work and treatment programs designed to correct anti-social thinking and behaviour. Community corrections is no “soft touch” and the risk of imprisonment looms large over programs if an offender breaks the rules.
Similar to community corrections but more therapeutic are the various non-custodial treatment orders available for offenders whose offending relates to alcohol or illicit drug use or is connected to an underlying mental health condition.
Drug courts have operated in Australia since 1999 and have been found to reduce recidivism more effectively than conventional custodial sentences. The key to effective drug courts is the ability to make drug treatment orders, calling for the intensive treatment and monitoring of offenders with substance issues.
Part2
The report, which drew on fieldwork in eight prisons, found a number of common features underpinning more positive cultures. These included setting very clear rules and boundaries for prisoners, with a shift in the focus of behaviour management strategies to reward rather than punishment. For example, prisoners were motivated by and would work hard to earn extended family visits or the possibility of moving to a better wing with more privileges.
Work and education opportunities with clear links to life after release from prison also encouraged them to take part, with the Halfords workshop at Drake Hall prison extremely popular with women as it offered good chances of well-paid employment on release. Taking up peer worker roles gave prisoners responsibility, helped them to develop confidence and leadership skills, and created a sense of community that in turn encouraged more positive behaviour.
The barbering, I can do that when I’m released, I’m really enjoying that. I was in a bad mindset [before] coz I didn’t have anything to lose. But now, I have been given all these opportunities, I’m not going to sacrifice that… I’m doing better than I have ever done in jail before.
Part2
The author used England and Wales as an example. In February 2008, there were about 82,000 people in prison, highest ever in the country. But crimes were still up as more than half of offenders were reoffending within two years after being released from prison (Hurd, 2005: 26-27). Many prisoners have indicated that they have learned more on how to commit crimes during their imprisonment. Hanks (2008: 95-96) argued that prison has been considered as dumping ground, that is, people who have mental health issues, drug addiction problems, are homeless and illiterate are offenders.
The author also argued that since imprisonment rates have gone up, overcrowding is a big concern in prisons. This problem further leads to problem of less rehabilitation and higher reconviction rates. The cycle perpetuates itself. It was also discussed that it’s really expensive to keep the offenders in prison and more than half of the offenders are back within two years or so, thus putting extra burden on the budget (Hanks, 2008: 95-96).
Penal Policy is an important weapon in fighting crime. Article written by Mathews (2003), former inmate, suggests that maximum security prison doesn’t rehabilitate prisoners, it rather makes them worse.
Relationships
Many women stated that they could speak to their loved ones regularly on the phone, which allowed them stay connected. However, some of the women complained about how costly phone calls were. Also, transport to the prison was an expense that many women’s families could not afford. Therefore, in some cases, relationships with families were put on hold.
One woman talked about her drug recovery and explained how supportive her drug worker had been. They helped her through her recovery and were a source of support and consistency during her prison experience. Even when she moved onto another wing, she mentioned how this staff member still came to check on her. She believes if she had not come to prison, she would still be addicted to drugs. In this case, imprisonment was effective and helped her to rehabilitate.
Criminological arguments for prisons
One argument for prison is that it is an effective deterrent. Prison can be seen as a tough type of punishment because it takes away your freedom, potential support networks and in many ways, it strips away your identity. The thought of prison is enough for some people to not even contemplate committing a criminal act.
Prison sentences are also a message to the wider public that this is what will happen if you commit a crime. Prison advocates would say this is a message to wider society about what is right and wrong and what will happen if you commit a crime.
Additionally, prison advocates argue that prison is such a difficult time for people that the experience should then deter them from committing any further offences. However, we know that is not the case because many individuals who have committed an offence and go to prison then commit further offences. This makes us question, is prison a) effective and b) enough of a deterrence?
Another argument for prison is that by putting people in prison, we protect the public by ensuring these individuals cannot commit any further offences. Additionally, prison sentences provide a sense of justice to the victims affected by the crime and the public.
United Nations
- Human rights, as prison is a deprivation of the basic right to liberty.
- Imprisonment disproportionately affects individuals and families living in poverty. From the potential loss of income from an individual going to prison, lawyer costs, costs to visit and communicate with that individual, the lack of employment opportunities when released, the marginalisation and so on.
- Public health consequences – It is argued that many prisoners have poor health and existing health problems when entering the prison. These problems are exacerbated due to; overcrowding, poor nutrition, lack of exercise and fresh air. Then there are also the infection rates, self-harm and poor mental health. The argument is that staff will be vulnerable to some of these diseases, and so will the public once these individuals are released.
- Detrimental social impact – Imprisonment disrupts relationships and weakens social cohesion.
- Costs – The cost of each prisoner for their upkeep, but also the social, economic and health costs mentioned previously, which are long-term.
Prison doesn’t work
Part 1
Whether for violence, public disorder or wage theft – there is no shortage of calls for more people to be sent to prison, and for longer.
However, decades of research have shown that prison is the least effective place to rehabilitate offenders. Studies have indicated that a stint in prison increases the likelihood that inmates will reoffend.
There are many reasons for this: whether because they have been rendered incapable of functioning on the outside by the trauma of incarceration or because being housed with the country’s worst-of-the-worst has rubbed off. Ultimately, prisons institutionalise inmates into a highly regulated way of life completely foreign to the real world.
Young people are particularly ill-suited to prison – detention renders them more likely to graduate from low-level juvenile offenders to lifetime criminals via a stint in corrections.
Moreover, despite being seen as the ultimate “stick” to ensure social order, prison is not a deterrent for most forms of offending. Crime is largely impulsive or driven by complex external factors on decision-making – the notion that offenders are “rational agents” weighing up the cost and benefits of offending has been largely debunked.
So, if prison doesn’t work, what are the alternatives?
Finally, given our understanding of prison has a perverse mechanism to create more dangerous individuals, it’s worth reassessing the scope of our current criminal law.
Part3
They are learning leadership, responsibility, how to behave, and now they don’t want to lose stuff that they’ve worked hard for. I never worked a day in my life outside… I never wanted to go for a job interview, but now, I’m confident that I could go there… This type of thing helps me do that… it shows people they can do things they never thought they could do.
Other common factors included clear communication, and some governors made a point of being visible on the wings and knowing prisoners by name to help model the kind of respectful relationships they wanted to encourage in their jails.
We hope that our report inspires prison leaders to look for what is achievable within their own establishment. But there is no magic wand that can remove the pressure of rising populations, failing infrastructure and a dearth of experienced staff, and we have been calling for some time now for a serious conversation about who we send to prison, for how long and what we want to happen during their time in custody to reduce future victims of crime.
Part3
He further added that inmates spend twenty hours a day in their cell in total isolation and it’s hard for them to function properly in society after spending that amount of time in total isolation, without any human contact. Most prisoners have developed some sort of psychological illness and those who had it before, their situation is even worse.
Prisoners are abused most of the time. Criminologists argue that this type of incarceration is inflicting punishment rather then rehabilitating those individuals.
Individuals also face administrative separatism (Mathews, 2003: 41). This article has received a lot of attention from various scholars, researchers, criminologists, sociologists and more research is being done on maximum security aspect of prison.
It has also been argued that people who have spent more time in prison feel more comfortable in prison rather then being out in community. Longer prisons are totally ineffective because sometimes low- risk offenders are exposed to high-risk offenders, and likelihood of learning other ways to commit crimes is very high.
Further studies have revealed that even most offenders prefer probation over incarceration. Studies further revealed that prisons don’t always carry out through its provisions and some of them have even failed to meet their performance targets (The Economist, 2003).
Part4
Some of them even say it that it’s totally inhumane and degrading. Roger Matthews, Professor at London South Bank University, mentioned that looking at recidivism figures, it certainly looks like that prison isn’t totally effective. Instead of rehabilitating prisoners, it adds up to government’s budget (Matthews, 2005). People learn more about crime in prisons. Studies have revealed that prison time can help offenders in enhancing their criminal skills, described as prisonization effect (Tremblay, 2009).
Other research studies have revealed that incarceration is not meeting up the expectations. According Griffiths (2007: 279-280), incarceration is not an effectual restraint but being caught and punished is a deterrent.
There are bunch of other challenges faced by prisons. Prison Violence is still prevalent. It can be between inmates or between inmates and staff members (Goff, 2004: 275). No body knows what happens inside the walls but official data disclosed that prison violence has gone up since 1989-90. Prison suicide is another challenge faced by correction facilities.
Criminal Justice
Part5
No particular details are available why prisoners commit suicide but it has been said that mostly white males commit suicide in prison (ibid: 275-276). Rising cost of prisons is viewed as another trend in institutional corrections (Griffiths, 2007: 323). As per the statistics, in 2003-04, average cost of inmate housing was approximately $ 87,000 in federal prisons, and approximately $ 51,000 for provincial/territorial prisons.
This further raises question on effectiveness and rehabilitation of prisoners (ibid: 324). Overcrowding is another issue and has been considered as a leading cause of violence. In federal prisons, about 25 percent of inmates share their room with another inmate (ibid: 324). Over-representation of black and aboriginal people has definitely raised concerns.
It has been said that criminal justice system is biased against them and systematic discrimination against aboriginals prevails (ibid: 292-293).
The collective term for public bodies, such as the police, the Crown Prosecution Service, the courts, HM Prison Service and the Probation Service, that work to uphold the law, take action against people who commit crimes and protect the innocent.
Top of the list is recruitment and a lack of young people able to practise criminal law. Unless there are enough lawyers, there will be repercussions for the whole system, he says. They also consider the need for investment, research on rape convictions and the broadcasting of sentencing.
t is as follows: The purpose of the police service is to uphold the law fairly and firmly; to prevent crime; to pursue and bring to justice those who break the law; to keep the Queen’s peace; to protect, help and reassure the community; and to be seen to do this with integrity, common sense and sound judgement.
Courts & Prison
Part1
Those arrested and charged with criminal offenses face fines, probation, incarceration, death, and other sanctions, as well as collateral consequences, such as losing the right to vote, deportation, and being denied a barber’s license (Council of State Governments 2018).
Having a criminal record diminishes the chance of getting called back for an interview. Some states have passed Ban-the-Box legislation prohibiting employers from asking about criminal records in applications and in interviews, expecting, in part, a reduction in racial disparities in employment.
However, Agan & Starr (2018), in a randomized job application study, found that the racial disparity grew after implementation of a Ban-the-Box law. Before the law, black and white applicants without criminal records had similar callback rates, 13.4% versus 14.1%.
Do Prison Sentences Deter Crime?
Part 1
Randomising cases to defenders is a matter of necessity in Philadelphia to manage capacity constraints. Randomising sentences to convicted offenders is difficult logistically and ethically. However, courts regularly randomise cases to judges.
Those judges can vary greatly in the severity of sentences they impose. For example, in 1982, in Hennepin County, Minnesota, two judges were responsible for sentencing drunk drivers (Martin et al. 1993).
Even though county policy required a two-day jail sentence for all first-time driving while intoxicated (DWI) offenders, one judge assigned a two-day jail sentence to 73% of first-time DWI offenders, while the other judge gave a two-day jail sentence to 14% of first-time DWI offenders.
The county appeared to distribute cases between the two judges “approximately at random through normal assignment procedures,” according to the authors (p. 562). Furthermore, the authors found no evidence of differences in the two judges’ caseloads in terms of the defendants’ charges, blood alcohol content, and prior traffic violations.
As a result, the judge assignment is an instrument, strongly associated with incarceration sentences and independent of future offending except through the sentence
Justice
This chapter examines justice in an absolute sense, and also justice in the context of the criminal justice system. The criminal justice system is the set of rules and practices under which government institutions and agencies act in order to prevent or control crime, to deal with those who break the law, and to support victims. ‘Justice’ in the context of ‘criminal justice’ refers to the extent to which the system aims to prevent or reduce offending; ensures that those who are accused, convicted, and sentenced are treated fairly (justly); and works to support victims and communities.
Justice should be guaranteed by the law, especially the criminal law, in any state and should be clearly present in all decisions about crime and social issues made by those working for the state. As such, justice is core to almost every aspect of the criminal justice system.
The chapter also considers broad definitions of justice; frameworks called criminal justice models on which understandings of justice in the criminal justice system can be anchored; philosophical ideas about the concept of justice; and the main systems used to bring about criminal justice.
Part2
After the law passed, callback rates for black applicants declined to 10.3% while white callback rates increased to 14.8%.
The law did benefit the black applicants with criminal records, increasing the call back rate from 8.0% to 10.3%, but it increased the call back rate for white applicants with criminal records from 8.7% to 14.8%.
The primary beneficiary of Ban-the-Box laws appears to be white applicants with criminal records, while black applicants with no criminal record lose the most. Employers seem to infer criminal records from race, exaggerating their relationship.
With so much at stake concerning mass incarceration, its costs and effects (NRC 2014), and the problems criminal records create, our courts and sentencing need an in-depth examination. This section discusses how criminologists are using innovative designs and statistical methods to study the effect of courts and sentences.
Part 2
While the finding that jail time provides no specific deterrent effect is important, the most profound impact of this study was the idea to use cases randomised to judges to study the effect of sentences. Martin et al. (1993) had a small set of 383 DWI cases, but they prompted numerous subsequent studies with larger samples and different offender populations.
Green & Winik (2010) studied 1,003 defendants charged with drug offences using the judge randomisation as an IV and found no effect of prison or probation on rates of rearrest.
Nagin & Snodgrass (2013) studied 6,515 offenders convicted of crimes in six Pennsylvania counties that randomized cases to judges and found “no evidence that incarceration impacts the rate at which offenders would be rearrested in the next year, the next 2 years, the next 5 years, or the next 10 years” (p. 621).
Loeffler (2013) studied 20,297 cases in Cook County, Illinois, where a computer program known as the randomiser distributed new cases to 25 judges (with imprisonment rates varying from 26% to 47%) and found no significant relationship between imprisonment and the rate of felony rearrest within five years.
He found no effect on unemployment five years later, either, replicating other judges-as-IVs studies of prison and employment
Criminology’s impact on the development of criminal law
By evaluating the law as it currently stands and ensuring the legal system evolves along with society, the work of criminologists plays a significant role in criminal law. You could work to address inequality within the justice system, highlight prejudice or injustice, help reform the law, or give a voice to marginalised communities.
For example, Luke Hubbard, one of our Senior Criminology Lecturers explained, “As a queer criminologist, I seek to explore and challenge how the criminal justice system has been and continues to be, used to oppress and criminalise members of the LGBTQ community… I want to research and advocate for these people to ensure their voices and experiences are heard and acknowledged.”
Alternatively, you could work to make sure the law is more reflective of the times we live in. Consider crimes such as stalking, hate crimes, sexual abuse and blackmail. Technology has changed how many crimes are committed, and some laws are no longer reflective of our new digital world. Your research could help change laws and create new ones, which better address the crimes of today.
The influence of criminologists is felt throughout policing and criminal law. If you choose to study a criminology degree, you too could play a vital role in reshaping society, reforming the law, rehabilitating criminals and protecting victims
Does a Good Defence Matter?
Research has suggested that a case’s outcomes can depend on the type and quality of legal representation; the belief that public defenders do not mount as vigorous a defence is widespread (Champion 1989).
However, as with previous topics in this review, answering the research question must surmount the problems of selection and simultaneity.
Perhaps public defenders take on the cases that private attorneys will not take. Perhaps those who can afford private attorneys are charged with crimes with less serious criminal penalties and are easier to defend.
Anderson & Heaton (2012) noted that the court randomises 20% of Philadelphia indigent homicide defendants to have the Defender Association of Philadelphia, a nonprofit public defender organisation, provide legal defence.
For the remaining 80% of indigent defendants, the court appoints local private lawyers for defence, typically from sole-practitioner law offices.
Anderson & Heaton (2012) used randomisation to conclude that “compared to appointed counsel, public defenders in Philadelphia reduce their clients’ murder conviction rate by 19% and lower the probability that their clients receive a life sentence by 62%. Public defenders reduce overall expected time served in prison by 24%” (p. 154).
While we aspire to have a fair justice system that judges the defendants based on the facts of their case, this study shows that luck can have an outsized role. Defendants randomly assigned public defenders in Philadelphia can expect to get out of prison one year earlier than those assigned private counsel.
More importantly, the striking findings prompted Anderson & Heaton to dig deeper to find the reasons for the observed differences. They found that a flat-fee payment schedule that incentivizes private counsel to minimize hours per case, a comparatively low per-hour trial rate (less than $100 per hour) for private attorneys encouraging quick resolution of cases, excessive caseloads to maintain a viable business, professional isolation, and limited access to experts and investigators were contributing factors. These issues did not apply to the salaried public defenders working in a structured organisation with mentors, colleagues, and a more robust infrastructure for managing cases.
The randomization of cases Anderson & Heaton (2012) found indicates that there must be other randomized stages in the justice system; we must be able to find these and leverage them to further understand the workings of the system.
Criminologists do?
Criminologists work to prevent crime and reduce reoffending. It involves researching the root causes of criminal behaviour, for instance, social and economic inequality, and how they can influence criminal behaviour. They ask questions of the justice system, if it’s working as effectively and as fairly as it should, and create strategies to help with crime prevention and criminal rehabilitation.
If you choose to study a criminology degree you’ll discover the key concepts and theories at the heart of this fascinating subject and equip yourself with the key disciplines you’ll need to develop a career in this diverse field.
Methods of criminology
Criminology is a scientific field, so you’ll need to use a variety of research methods to shape and inform your work and gain criminological insight.
Qualitative research is measurable, objective, and driven by numbers and statistics. You’ll use quantitative research to gain an insight into a large number of people at once. You’ll record data through several strategies, such as experiments or surveys, and identify potential trends and links in the information collected.
Alternatively, you can also use qualitative methods of research which can offer a more general understanding of the landscape of crime and criminal behaviour. This might involve detailed interviews, case studies or observation. This approach is certainly more interpretative than qualitative research, however, it can allow you a better insight into the complexities of criminal behaviour.
There are many research approaches used when studying criminology, which is why our criminology degrees include the Research Methods module. Not only does the module cover the kinds of research used, but it also covers how research and studies can be designed, and the ethical considerations you’ll need to think about as a criminologist.
The role of criminology in shaping policing strategies
The research carried out by criminologists can help shape policing and crime prevention strategies. First of all, there is the research which could help inform policing on a practical, operational level. Consider, for example, if research can identify high crime areas then this could be used to inform officer deployment. An increased police presence could reduce criminal activity. You could also help reshape law enforcement practices or create new crime prevention strategies.
However, there are more challenging aspects of policing which could be improved through your research as a criminologist. You could work at the junction of theory and practice, helping identify potential precursors to criminal activity and creating strategies to address these. Alternatively, you could work to help improve the police service. For instance, the perception of the police service and its officers can differ from individual to individual, you could help identify potential ways to rebuild public trust.