警察种族歧视测试的方法挑战与机遇

IF 6.3 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Annual Review of Criminology Pub Date : 2019-01-14 DOI:10.1146/ANNUREV-CRIMINOL-011518-024731
Roland Neil, Christopher Winship
{"title":"警察种族歧视测试的方法挑战与机遇","authors":"Roland Neil, Christopher Winship","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-CRIMINOL-011518-024731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A large body of empirical research exists that attempts to determine whether or not police discriminate on the basis of race. We investigate whether the methods used typically produce valid inferences. We find that they often most likely do not and that results may diverge from reality in either direction, indicating discrimination when it is not present or alternatively indicating a lack of discrimination when it is in fact present. The reason for this is that tests make assumptions about police behavior that are often implausible. Because of this, the simplest forms of benchmark and outcome tests should not be used, although the problem is more general. We discuss several possible ways to improve inferences about the absence or presence of discrimination, such as employing matching or weighting techniques and using novel, computationally intensive methods.","PeriodicalId":51759,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Criminology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1146/ANNUREV-CRIMINOL-011518-024731","citationCount":"38","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodological Challenges and Opportunities in Testing for Racial Discrimination in Policing\",\"authors\":\"Roland Neil, Christopher Winship\",\"doi\":\"10.1146/ANNUREV-CRIMINOL-011518-024731\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A large body of empirical research exists that attempts to determine whether or not police discriminate on the basis of race. We investigate whether the methods used typically produce valid inferences. We find that they often most likely do not and that results may diverge from reality in either direction, indicating discrimination when it is not present or alternatively indicating a lack of discrimination when it is in fact present. The reason for this is that tests make assumptions about police behavior that are often implausible. Because of this, the simplest forms of benchmark and outcome tests should not be used, although the problem is more general. We discuss several possible ways to improve inferences about the absence or presence of discrimination, such as employing matching or weighting techniques and using novel, computationally intensive methods.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51759,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annual Review of Criminology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1146/ANNUREV-CRIMINOL-011518-024731\",\"citationCount\":\"38\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annual Review of Criminology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-CRIMINOL-011518-024731\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Review of Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-CRIMINOL-011518-024731","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 38

摘要

存在大量的实证研究,试图确定警察是否基于种族歧视。我们调查是否使用的方法通常产生有效的推论。我们发现,他们通常很可能不会这样做,结果可能在任何一个方向上偏离现实,当歧视不存在时表明歧视,或者当歧视实际上存在时表明缺乏歧视。这样做的原因是,测试对警察行为的假设往往是不可信的。因此,不应使用最简单形式的基准和结果测试,尽管问题更为普遍。我们讨论了几种可能的方法来改进关于不存在或存在歧视的推断,例如采用匹配或加权技术以及使用新颖的计算密集型方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Methodological Challenges and Opportunities in Testing for Racial Discrimination in Policing
A large body of empirical research exists that attempts to determine whether or not police discriminate on the basis of race. We investigate whether the methods used typically produce valid inferences. We find that they often most likely do not and that results may diverge from reality in either direction, indicating discrimination when it is not present or alternatively indicating a lack of discrimination when it is in fact present. The reason for this is that tests make assumptions about police behavior that are often implausible. Because of this, the simplest forms of benchmark and outcome tests should not be used, although the problem is more general. We discuss several possible ways to improve inferences about the absence or presence of discrimination, such as employing matching or weighting techniques and using novel, computationally intensive methods.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annual Review of Criminology
Annual Review of Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
2.90%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The Annual Review of Criminology provides comprehensive reviews of significant developments in the multidisciplinary field of criminology, defined as the study of both the nature of criminal behavior and societal reactions to crime.
期刊最新文献
Parental Legal Culpability in Youth Offending Joan Petersilia: A Life and Legacy of Academic and Practical Impact Group Threat and Social Control: Who, What, Where, and When Desistance as an Intergenerational Process Code of the Street 25 Years Later: Lasting Legacies, Empirical Status, and Future Directions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1