SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Walton JS. J. Forensic Pract. 2018; 20(1): 1-9.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Emerald Group Publishing)

DOI

10.1108/JFP-08-2017-0032

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

PURPOSE
The need for random assignment in sexual offending programme evaluation is clear. Decades of high dependence on weak-inference methodology, that of observational studies, has inhibited professional agreement regarding the effects of programmes. Observational studies have a place in evaluation research when more rigorous scientific designs precede them, as occurs in neighbouring fields of drug development and health. If, however, observational studies remain the only method used to evaluate sexual offending programmes, the field will continue to endure uncertainty with confident causal inferences regarding their effects remaining elusive. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Design/methodology/approach
The paper takes the form of a literature review and discussion.

Findings
The case for random assignment is made alongside a rebuttal of arguments against their use.

Originality/value
This is an original look at the need for random assignment in sexual offending programme evaluation taking into account existing studies and discussion topics.

Keywords:
Sexual offending, Selection bias, Confounding, Observational studies, Random assignment, Sexual offending programme outcome research

© Emerald Publishing Limited 2018


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print