NCJ Number
110131
Journal
Criminology Volume: 26 Issue: 1 Dated: (February 1988) Pages: 75-85
Date Published
1988
Length
11 pages
Annotation
This article provides a third-party perspective on the debate between Blumstein et al. and Gottfredson and Hirschi regarding the value of and prognosis for selective incapacitation policy, the empirical validity of an invariant age/crime association, the relative usefulness of longitudinal and cross-sectional data, the wisdom of programmed research by government agencies, and the theoretical significance of criminal careers research.
Abstract
The value of and prognosis for selective incapacitation policy is a matter of taste, philosophy, or political orientation and merits little attention by scholars. The empirical validity of an invariant age/crime association cannot yet be determined because there is not sufficient evidence. Debating whether longitudinal data are to be preferred over cross-sectional data is like asking whether hammers or saws are more useful to carpenters. Each has value depending on the problem to be addressed. Programmed research, particularly that done in the service of a specific policy option, is less likely to produce good science or good policy than is research funded or undertaken on its scientific/theoretical merit. Regarding the theoretical import of the criminal career concept, Gottfredson and Hirschi have no sufficient basis for concluding the concept is without theoretical import, and Blumstein et al. contend that the criminal careers concept and associated research are significant but without showing how. 21 references.