|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
CRIMINAL
ARK ERS AND
"CAREER
CRIMINALS"
VOLUME
Alfred Blumstein, Jacqueline Cohen,
Jeffrey A. Roth, ant] Christy A. Visher, editors
Pane] on Research on Criminal Careers
Committee on Research on Law Enforcement en c! the
Administration of Justice
Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and
Education
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C. 1986
OCR for page R2
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 CONSTITUTION AVENUE NVV WASHINGTON, DC 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject ofthis report was approved by the Governing Board ofthe National
Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the
National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members ofthe committee responsible
for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a
Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National
Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the
broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of
advising the federal government. The Council operates in accordance with general policies determined by
the Academy under the authority of its congressional charter of 1863, which establishes the Academy as a
private, nonprofit, self-governing membership corporation. The Council has become the principal operating
agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in the conduct
of their services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. It is
administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Engineering
and the Institute of Medicine were established in 1964 and 1970, respectively, under the charter of the
National Academy of Sciences.
This project was sponsored by the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, under Contract
No. 83-IJ-CV-0010. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the grantor agency.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Criminal careers and "career criminals."
Bibliography: v. 1, p.
Includes index.
1. Crime analysis- United States. 2. Crime and
criminals United States. 3. Criminal behavior,
Prediction of. I. Blumstein, Alfred. II. National
Research Council (U.S.~. Panel on Research on Criminal Careers.
HV7936.C88C75 1986 364.3'0973
ISBN 0-309-03684-4 (v. 1)
ISBN 0-309-03683-6 (v. 2)
Printed in the United States of America
86-18282
OCR for page R3
Pane! on Research on Criminal Careers
ALFRED BLUMSTEIN (Chair), School of Urban ancI Public Affairs, Camegie-Mellon
University
ALLEN H. ANDREWS, JR., Superintendent of Police, City of Peoria, Illinois
DELBERT S. ELLIOTT, Department of Sociology and Behavioral Research Institute,
University of Colorado
DAVID P. FARRINGTON, Institute of Criminology, Cambridge University, Englanc!
JOHN ~LAN, School of Law, Stanford University
ROLF LOEBER, Westem Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh
CHARLES F. MANSKI, Department of Economics, University of Wisconsin
NORVAL MORRIS, School of Law, University of Chicago
ALBERT I. REISS, JR., Department of Sociology, Yale University
LEE ROBINS, Washington University Medical School, St. Louis, Missouri
HAROLD ROSE, Department of Urban Affairs, University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee
DANIEL S. SMITH, Department of History, University of Illinois at Chicago
ANDREW L. SONNER, State's Attorney for Montgomery County, Maryland
REGGIE B. WALTON, Associate Judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia
JAMES Q. WILSON, Department of Govemment, Harvard University, and Graduate
School of Management, University of CaTifomia at Los Angeles
MARVIN E. WOLFGANG, Sellin Center for Studies in Criminology and Criminal
Law, University of Pennsylvania
JEFFREY A. ROTH, Study Director
CHRISTY A. VISHER, Research Associate
GAYLENE I. DUMOUCHEL, Administrative Secretary
JACQUELINE COHEN, Consultant, School of Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie
Mellon University
. . .
OCR for page R4
Committee on Research on Law Enforcement
and the Administration of Justice
NORVAL MORRIS (Chair), School of Law, University of Chicago
RICHARD LEMPERT (Vice Chair), School of Law, University of Michigan
ANTHONY V. BOUZA, Chief of Police, Minneapolis, Minnesota
JONATHAN D. CASPER, Department of Political Science, Northwestern University,
and American Bar Foundation, Chicago, Illinois
SHARI S. DIAMOND, Deparknent of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago,
and SicIley and Austin, Chicago, Illinois
NAMES LOWELL GIBBS, JR., DuBois Institute, Harvard University
JOSEPH KADANE, Department of Statistics, Camegie-Mellon University
CHARLES F. MANSKI, Department of Economics, University of Wisconsin
ALBERT J. REISS, JR., Department of Sociology, Yale University
NAMES F. SHORT, JR., Social Research Center, Washington State University
PATRICIA MCGOWAN WALD, Jucige, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit
STANTON WHEELER, Amateur Athletic Foundation of Los Angeles, on leave from
School of Law, Yale University
JAMES Q. WILSON, Department of Government, Harvard University, and Graduate
School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles
ALFRED BLUMSTEIN (`ex officio), Chair, Panel on Research on Criminal Careers
SAMUEL KRISLOV (`ex officio), Cochair, Pane] on Statistical Assessment as Evidence
in the Courts
ANN WITTE (ex officio), Chair, Pane} on Taxpayer Compliance Research
V
OCR for page R5
Contents
CONTENTS, VOLUME II
PREFACE ......
SUMMARY .........
INTRODUCTION: STUDYING CRIMINAL CAREERS
The Criminal Careers Concept, 12
Crime Control Policies, 15
Dimensions of Criminal Careers, 17
Using the Criminal Career Paradigm, 22
Scope of the Panel's Report, 28
2 PARTICIPATION IN CRIMINAL CAREERS
Study Designs and Participation Estimates, 33
Participation Among Males, 35
Participation Estimates by Sex, Race, and Age, 40
Other Factors Associated with Participation, 42
Summary, 53
3 DIMENSIONS OF ACTIVE CRIMINAL CAREERS
Individual Frequency Rates, 55
Seriousness, 76
Termination and :Length of Criminal Careers, 85
Conclusion, 94
4 METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES IN CRIMINAL CAREER RESEARCH
Observational Approaches: Self-Reports ant! Official Records, 96
v
.
.
· ~
· e
- V11
... 1X
1
- 12
31
.. 55
... 96
OCR for page R6
v!
Sampling Issues, 101
Use of Cohort and Cross-Sectional Data, 104
Problems of Confounded Effects, 105
Explicit Models of Offending, 106
5 CRIME CONTROL STRATEGIES USING CRIMINAL CAREER
KIT Ur\~U
CONTENTS
Ale ~ ~ e ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ e ~ e ~e ~e e ~109
Strategies to Prevent Participation, 110
Career Modification Strategies, 114
Incapacitation Strategies, 122
Technical Note, 143
USE OF CRIMINAL CAREER INFORMATION IN CRIMINAL
JUSTICE DECISION MAKING 155
Introduction, 155
Criminal Career Perspectives in Criminal Justice Decision
Making, 157
Issues in Prediction-Based Classification, 163
Explicit Classification Scales, 178
Adult, Juvenile, and Non-Justice System Records and Their
Integration, 190
Conclusions, 195
7 AN AGENDA FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 198
Background, 198
A :Longitudinal Study of Criminal Careers, 199
Specific Research Questions, 202
Supportive Organizational Arrangements, 208
APPENDICES
A PARTICIPATION IN CRIMINAL CAREERS 211
Christy A. Visher and Jeffrey A. Roth
B RESEARCH ON CRIMINAL CAREERS: INDIVIDUAL
FREQUENCY RATES AND OFFENSE SERIOUSNESS.............
Jacqueline Cohen
C WORKSHOP ON RESEARCH ON CRIMINAL CAREERS:
PROGRAM AND PARTICIPANTS ...............................
D BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES, PANEL MEMBERS AND STAFF
REFERENCES
INDEX
419
423
429
451
OCR for page R7
Contents, Volume IT
ISSUES IN THE MEASUREMENT OF CRIMINAL CAREERS
Joseph G. Weis
THE IMPACT OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE ON CRIMINAL CAREERS
Eric D. Wish and Bruce D. Johnson
THE RELATIONSHIP OF PROBLEM DRINKING TO INDIVIDUAL OFFENDING
SEQUENCES
James]. Collins
CO OFFENDING INFEUENCES ON CRIMINAE CAREERS
Albert J. Reiss, Jr.
THE RAND INMATE SURVEY: A REANAEYSIS
Christy A. Visher
ACCURACY OF PREDICTION MODEES
Stephen D. Gottiredson and Don M. Gottiredson
SOME METHODOEOGICAE ISSUES IN MAKING PREDICTIONS
John B. Copas and Roger Tarling
PURBEIND JUSTICE: NORMATIVE ISSUES IN THE USE OF PREDICTION IN THE
CRIMINAE JUSTICE SYSTEM
Mark H. Moore
DYNAMIC MODEES OF CRIMINAE CAREERS
Christopher Flinn
RANDOM PARAMETER STOCHASTIC PROCESS MODEES OF CRIMINAE CAREERS
John P. Lehoczky
vii
OCR for page R8
OCR for page R9
Preface
In 1983, when the Panel on Research on Criminal Careers was convened, the
U.S. prison population had experienced a rapid] growth more than doubling
from 196,000 in 1972 to 437,000 in 1983-and the crime rate had just passed its
1980 peak of 13 million reported inclex crimes, or almost 6,000 crimes per
100,000 population. There was strong policy interest in finding alternatives to
rapidly escalating imprisonment costs and what was perceived as relatively
ineffective crime control.
One approach that was widely considered was to direct attention at "career
criminals," high-rate or long-duration offenders who contribute most to total
crime rates. Research at the Rand Corporation had highlighted the extreme
variability in individual rates of criminal activity: in surveys of prisoners, the
worst 10 percent of offenders reported committing more than SO robberies or
200 burglaries per year, but half the prisoners reported committing fewer than
5 burglaries or robberies per year. This extreme variation enhancer] the appeal
of being able to distinguish high-rate from low-rate offenders. To this end, a
number of prediction scales have been proposed to distinguish the high-rate
offenders from the more numerous ordinary offenders.
Any prediction of an individual's future offending must draw on research on
criminal careers, the characterization of the sequence of individual criminal
activity: initiation of criminal activity, variation over the career in the frequency
of offending and in the kinds of crimes committed, and, finally, termination of
criminal activity. Any attempt to'-identify the career criminals in a population
requires examination of the criminal careers of all offenders to find the
characteristics that distinguish the most serious offenders: those having the
longest remaining careers, the highest frequencies of offending, and commit-
ting the most serious kinds of offenses.
ax
OCR for page R10
XPREFACE
The pane] was convened at the request of the National Institute of Justice to
evaluate the feasibility of predicting the future course of criminal careers, to
assess the effects of prediction instruments in reducing crime through incapac-
itation (usually by incarceration), and to review the contribution of research on
criminal careers to the development of fundamental knowledge about crime
and criminals. Ultimately, such knowledge is necessary for unclerstanding the
dimensions of the crime problem, for isolating factors that contribute to
criminality, and for developing effective crime control strategies. In particular,
many commonly held perceptions of correlates of crime that derive from
aggregate or macroanalysis do not hold at the individual or micro level. As
knowledge about criminal careers develops, the insights into individual of-
fending that emerge will certainly stimulate refinements to criminological
theory. They will also lead to improved criminal justice decisions, both by
drawing attention to some variables that are not adequately appreciated and by
directing attention away from other variables that are incorrectly perceived as
important. Criminal career information is also necessary for estimating the
effects of changes in incarceration policy on crime and on prison populations.
In reviewing the scientific evidence on criminal careers, the pane] members
were in general agreement about the findings and conclusions, but there were,
however, divergent views on the ethics of how such information should be used
in dealing with offenders. At one end of a spectrum is the view that no actions
taken by the criminal justice system should take any account of individual
differences in anticipated future offending; from this perspective, any use of
predictive information would be objectionable. At the other end of the spec-
trum is a desire to see even weak results put to use as quickly as possible;
advocates of this position point to the shortcomings of current decisions ant]
emphasize that any contribution conic! improve the quality of decisions and
thereby recluce crime. In the middle, most pane! members view prediction of
future offending as a legitimate consideration in criminal justice decisions,
particularly since it is currently being done implicitly at some level in practice.
This view also maintains, however, that the role of precliction must be rigor-
ously constrained and, in particular, that it not result in punishments or
restraints that are unjust in terms of the offense committed. Although the pane!
viewed the making of pronouncements on ethical issues as outside its role, we
(lid devote considerable attention to ethical considerations to be sure that our
conclusions were sensitive to them. The scientific concern that is central to the
panel's role is that any use of prediction be based on correct information
intelligently used. We found a number of instances in which prediction rules
were naively generated, with poor methods, or violated fundamental tenets of
validity testing. Thus, it became important to call attention to more appropriate
methods and to identify useful information both information that contributes
to identifying "career criminals" as well as information that is frequently used
but should not be used.
Many aspects of the work of the pane! can be viewed as a follow-up to earlier
OCR for page R11
PREFACE
Xt
work by the Pane} on Research on Deterrent and Incapacitative Effects, whose
report was published in 1978. That report noted that any assessment of
incanacitative effects or improvement ofthem was severely handicapped by the
paucity of substantive research findings on individual offending patterns that
could contribute to estimates of the magnitude of incapacitative effects. That
pane} thus recommended that priority be assigned to research on criminal
careers and that "the most immediate empirical investigation should be di-
rected at estimating the individual crime rate and the length of a criminal
i,
career.
Pursuit of these issues has been a major feature of the Crime Control Theory
Research Program of the National Institute of Justice, directed by Richard
Linster and Joe] Garner. It is always disappointing to find that knowledge does
not accumulate as fast as one would like and that the measurements of those
criminal career parameters are still short of definitive. In the context of the
earlier review, however, it is impressive how much additional research has
accumulated that provides internally consistent measurement ofthe key climen-
sions of criminal careers and of their relationships to other relevant variables.
Criminal justice is a field of social science research that is heavily beset by
ideological considerations. In such a setting, any individual study is properly
met with some skepticism and concern about the author's particular ideological
bent and the degree to which that perspective may have had an excessive
influence in shaping the results. A pane} such as this one, which brings together
individuals with a full array of the requisite disciplinary perspectives and
technical skills, and with a diversity of ideological stances, thus represents an
important vehicle for assessing the current evidence in the field and for
identifying promising research directions.
Given its charge to assess the evidence on criminal careers and to point to
future research directions, the pane} pursued two intensive efforts. First, the
panel's staffreviewed the relevant literature, and these reviews are included as
annendices in this volume: Appendix A by Christy Visher and Jeffrey Roth
reviews the literature on participation in criminal careers; Appendix B by
Jacqueline Cohen reviews the literature on the inclividual freouenev of of-
fending and on the mix of offense types by active offenders.
~ ~ e1 1 · · 1 1 ~ al ~
Second, the panel commissioned a number ot papers that were presented and
discussed at a workshop in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, on July 2~25, 1984
(see Appendix C for the program and list of participants). Several of the papers
review major bodies of literature: on prediction and its uses (by Stephen and
Don Go~fredson); on the influence on criminal careers of alcohol (by James
Collins) and of drugs (by Eric Wish and Bruce Johnson); and on group patterns
in offending (by Albert I. Reiss). Because of the considerable interest generated
by the second Rand inmate survey, the pane! also asked Christy Visher to
undertake a reanalysis of the data from that survey. Two commissioned papers,
one by Joseph Weis and another by John Copas and Roger Tarling, address
methodological and measurement issues; a paper by Mark Moore addresses
OCR for page R12
All
PREFACE
relevant normative issues; and two papers introduce new models of criminal
careers that derive from recent advances in economics (by Christopher Flinn)
and in stochastic processes (by John :Lehoczky). These papers constitute
Volume Il. They are the responsibility of their authors ant] do not necessarily
represent the views of the panel, but they were valuable resources for the pane!
in its discussions ant] represent important contributions to the literature on
criminal careers.
The pane! members represent a diverse group (see biographical sketches in
Appendix D). The pane! benefited particularly from the sensitivity, sophistica-
tion, ant! challenges offered by the practitioners, who conveyed insights about
the current state of their professions-needs, strengths, shortcomings-and the
operational constraints that limit the application of research findings. The
academic members of the pane] are all distinguished researchers. Some are
working in areas relater] to criminal careers, while others brought specialized
expertise in particular disciplines, methoclolop;ies, jurisprudence, or policy
~ . ~ · · . 1 . ~ 1 1 - 1 ~ 11 ~ · . .
analysls. L'lscusslons at panel meetings were always lively, lull 01 lntereStlng
ideas; disagreements were consistently isolates! and dealt with directly. It was
indeed a pleasure working with so able and committed a group.
The dedicated efforts of the staff have been central to the work of the panel.
Jeffrey Roth was the study director from the inception of the pane] and
contributed considerably in terms of managing the affairs of the panel, in
drafting significant segments of the report, and in his careful review of all
materials. Christy Visher began her association with the panel as a National
Research Council Fellow, undertook the review of the second Rand inmate
survey. and brought significant criminological background and experience to
~ . - v
. ~ lo1 . . r.1 1. ~ . ~ r~ a
the work ot the panel in its review ot tne literature and in clrattln~ and eclltln~
major sections of the report. Jacqueline Cohen of Camegie-Mellon University
built on her experience as a consultant to the prior Pane} on Research on
Deterrent and Incapacitative Effects, her extensive research on criminal careers
and incapacitation, and her extensive knowledge of the related literature; her
diligent contributions to all aspects of the work of the panel, especially in
reviewing the literature and in drafting major portions of the report, are very
much appreciated. The task of editing; the large volume of material assembled
~ ~ , ~ ~
1 .1 1 1 1 · 1 1 1 TO · `_ 1 a1 · ~ 1
by the panel has been considerable. ~ugenla Frogman' the associate director
for reports of the Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Educa-
tion, not only sharpened our language but also challenged our assertions when
they were insufficiently developed or documented, and in doing so made an
excellent and important contribution to the report of the panel. lean Shirhall
was also very effective in editing the appendices to this volume and the papers
in Volume IT.
The pane! has benefited considerably from the administrative and secretarial
work of Gaylene Dumouche} at the National Research Council and Elizabeth
Kiselev at Carnegie-Mellon University.
An important feature of the panel s work has been the support and encour
OCR for page R13
@ ~ ~
Ha
agement oftbe sponsor the Nstiona1 Institute of Justice. Hichard Linster kept
in dose ~ucb gin Me panel Shutout in work, and James SO Be
director oftbe Nations Institute of Justice provided the kind of encouragement
and support tub teas cbaracterized his stewardship ofdbe instituted research
program.
ALFRED BLD~S1~) Calf
Panel on Research on Criminal Cheers
OCR for page R14
OCR for page R15
C~RIMINAL
ARK ERS AND
"CAREER
CRIMINALS"
VOLUME I
OCR for page R16
