Premium
CONSENSUS IN CRIME SERIOUSNESS: EMPIRICAL REALITY OR METHODOLOGICAL ARTIFACT? *
Author(s) -
CULLEN FRANCIS T.,
LINK BRUCE G.,
TRAVIS LAWRENCE F.,
WOZNIAK JOHN F.
Publication year - 1985
Publication title -
criminology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.467
H-Index - 139
eISSN - 1745-9125
pISSN - 0011-1384
DOI - 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1985.tb00328.x
Subject(s) - seriousness , artifact (error) , psychology , task (project management) , social psychology , empirical research , criminology , political science , epistemology , economics , law , philosophy , management , neuroscience
Miethe (1982) has recently argued that the consistent findings of wide‐spread consensus in the rankings of the seriousness of crimes may be more a rejection of the methodological approaches used by past researchers than of actual public sentiments. Building on Miethe's insights, this paper examines the extent to which the nature of the techniques employed to analyze data influences seriousness evaluations. The results indicate that consensus is affected by such factors as the rating task given to the subjects, how consensus is measured, and the type of offense under investigation. In turn these methodological considerations caution against using existing research as the bask either for the verification of consensus theories of justice or for the formulation of sanctioning policy.