Citation

Travers M. Aust. N. Zeal. J. Criminol. 2005; 38(1): 39-58.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2005, Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1375/acri.38.1.39

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This article is intended to stimulate reflection and debate about the relationship between pure and applied research in criminology. The central argument is that evaluation research, which has almost become a dominant paradigm in researching criminal justice, has lower methodological standards than peer-reviewed social science. It considers this case in relation to quantitative and qualitative methods, and examines examples of a 'flagship' and 'small-scale' evaluation. The article concludes by discussing the implications for evaluators (who are encouraged to employ a wider range of methods), funding agencies and criminology as an academic discipline.

Language: en