Statistical Analysis with Missing Data

Social desirability is one of the most common sources of bias affecting the validity of experimental and survey research findings. From a self-presentational perspective, social desirability can be regarded as the resultant of two separate factors: self-deception and other-deception. Two main modes of coping with social desirability bias are distinguished. The first mode comprises two methods aimed at the detection and measurement of social desirability bias: the use of social desirability scales, and the rating of item desirability. A second category comprises seven methods to prevent or reduce social desirability bias, including the use of forced-choice items, the randomized response technique, the bogus pipeline, self-administration of the questionnaire, the selection of interviewers, and the use of proxy subjects. Not one method was found to excel completely and under all conditions in coping with both other-deceptive and self-deceptive social desirability bias. A combination of prevention and detection methods offers the best choice available.

Methods of coping with social desirability bias: A review.

Survey questions asking about taboo topics such as sexual activities, illegal behaviour such as social fraud, or unsocial attitudes such as racism, often generate inaccurate survey estimates which are distorted by social desirability bias. Due to self-presentation concerns, survey respondents underreport socially undesirable activities and overreport socially desirable ones. This article reviews theoretical explanations of socially motivated misreporting in sensitive surveys and provides an overview of the empirical evidence on the effectiveness of specific survey methods designed to encourage the respondents to answer more honestly. Besides psychological aspects, like a stable need for social approval and the preference for not getting involved into embarrassing social interactions, aspects of the survey design, the interviewer’s characteristics and the survey situation determine the occurrence and the degree of social desirability bias. The review shows that survey designers could generate more valid data by selecting appropriate data collection strategies that reduce respondents’ discomfort when answering to a sensitive question.

Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review

Crime fell sharply in the United States in the 1990s, in all categories of crime and all parts of the nation. Homicide rates plunged 43 percent from the peak in 1991 to 2001, reaching the lowest levels in 35 years. The Federal Bureau of Investigation’ s (FBI) violent and property crime indexes fell 34 and 29 percent, respectively, over that same period. These declines occurred essentially without warning: leading experts were predicting an explosion in crime in the early and mid-1990s, precisely the point when crime rates began to plunge. Although experts failed to anticipate the decline, there has been no shortage of hypotheses to explain the drop in crime after the fact. Table 1 presents a tally of a Lexis-Nexis search of the most frequently cited reasons for the crime decline in articles in major newspapers over the period 1991‐ 2001. The single most frequent explanation given is the innovative policing strategies put into place. The crime decline is also frequently attributed to increased imprisonment, changes in the market for crack cocaine, the aging of the population, tougher gun control laws, the strong economy and increases in the number of police. In this paper, I attempt to sort out why crime declined in the 1990s. I begin with a review of the facts. I then analyze the leading explanations for why crime fell, looking at possible determinants that changed in some substantial way in the 1990s. Most of the supposed explanations listed in Table 1 actually played little direct role in the crime decline, including the strong economy of the 1990s, changing demographics, better policing strategies, gun control laws, concealed weapons laws and increased use of the death penalty. Four factors, however, can account for virtually

/pdf/understanding-why-crime-fell-in-the-1990s-four-factors-that-ek5935ldqf.pdf

Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s: Four Factors that Explain the Decline and Six that Do Not

EIGHT members of the Yale Institute of Human Relations have co-operated to produce this book The result is not a mere juxtaposition of uncoordinated viewpoints but a unity of aim and consistency in presentation which make the multiple authorship almost undetectable Whatever judgment one may make about the value of the hypothesis elaborated in the book, there can be little doubt that the intimate collaboration of a team of specialists, each with a distinctive training, is a profitable way of examining a problem which has no clear-cut frontiers and which does not fall neatly into one of the conventional compartments of social study Frustration and Aggression By John Dollard Neal E Miller Leonard W Doob O H Mowrer Robert R Sears, in collaboration with Clellan S Ford, Carl Iver Hovland and Richard T Sollenberger (International Library of Sociology and Social Reconstruction) Pp ix + 150 (London: Kegan Paul and Co, Ltd, 1944) 10s 6d net

Frustration and Aggression

Survey research is useful in studying a variety of problems but asking respondents direct questions about controversial topics may not lead to honest answers. Is it possible to get good estimates of behavioral frequencies when a behavior is severely disapproved of and perhaps even criminal? One can get honest answers but not by asking naive questions. This monograph describes an innovative survey method designed for sensitive or threatening inquiries. The 1st part of the monograph discusses error sources especially in responses to sensitive disapproved or criminal behaviors and attitudes. The authors consider traditional strategies for protecting anonymity and confidentiality and note that these protections are either limited or perceived by respondents to be ineffective. The monograph focuses on describing the randomized response method and how it can be used to effectively and efficiently protect respondents thus minimizing survey bias. Randomized response can be used to 1) estimate parameters of both qualitative and quantitative measures 2) test subgroup differences and 3) perform bivariate and multivariate analysis. The authors consider survey design and include sample questions and research examples. An appendix contains sample instructions to respondents.

Randomized Response: A Method for Sensitive Surveys

Mass shootings at a Connecticut elementary school, a Colorado movie theater, and other venues have prompted a fair number of proposals for change. Advocates for tighter gun restrictions, for expanding mental health services, for upgrading security in public places, and, even, for controlling violent entertainment have made certain assumptions about the nature of mass murder that are not necessarily valid. This article examines a variety of myths and misconceptions about multiple homicide and mass shooters, pointing out some of the difficult realities in trying to avert these murderous rampages. While many of the policy proposals are worthwhile in general, their prospects for reducing the risk of mass murder are limited.

/pdf/mass-shootings-in-america-moving-beyond-newtown-r6axrt5fx6.pdf

Mass shootings in America: Moving beyond Newtown.

Over the past decade the topic of multiple homicide-serial and mass murder-has attracted increased attention in the field of criminology. Though far from the epidemic suggested in media reports, it is alarming nonetheless that a small number of offenders account for so much human destruction and widespread fear. The serial killer is typically a white male in his late twenties or thirties who targets strangers encountered near his work or home. These killers tend to be sociopaths who satisfy personal needs by killing with physical force. Demographically similar to the serial killer, the mass murderer generally kills people he knows well, acting deliberately and methodically. He executes his victims in the most expedient way-with a firearm. Importantly, the difference of timing that distinguishes serial from mass murder may also obscure strong similarities in their motivation. Both can be understood within the same motivational typology-power, revenge, loyalty, profit, and terror. The research literature, s...

Multiple Homicide: Patterns of Serial and Mass Murder

Preface Acknowledgments PART I. Multiple Murder 1. America's Fascination With Multiple Homicide The Gein Legacy Multiple Murder in Popular Culture The Selling of Multiple Murder Craving Attention Killer Communication Killer Groupies The Impact of Celebrating Murderers Sensitize, Not Sanitize 2. Defining Multiple Murder Mass, Serial, and Spree A Typology of Multiple Murder PART II. Serial Murder 3. An Anatomy of Serial Murder Prevalence of Serial Murder Extraordinarily Ordinary A Profile of the Typical Serial Killer 4. With Deliberation and Purpose When Killing Is Thrilling On a Deadly Mission of Terror or Revenge Killing for Expediency For Love and Loyalty 5. Murder Without Guilt Self-Control and Social Control The Sociopathic Personality The Culture of Sociopathy Empathy and Serial Killers Borderline Personality Disorder Normalcy in Serial Murder Rehumanizing the Victims 6. Partners in Murder Insanity in the Relationship Partners for Profit Partnerships of Men and Women 7. Killing for Company Placing the Blame Killing for Companionship The Functions of Cannibalism Desire for Total Control and Ownership 8. Fantasyland Keeping Souvenirs Normal and Abnormal Fantasies The Impact of Pornography 9. The Making of a Serial Killer Childhood Suffering Testimony Under Hypnosis Child Abuse and Murder Inordinate Need for Power Animal Cruelty and Violence Against Humans Challenges of Predicting Serial Murder Biological Predisposition Blaming the Family 10. Nonsexual Control Power Over Patients Female Serial Killers Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy 11. Killing Cults Killing for a Cause The Appeal of Dangerous Cults Suicide or Homicide? Satanism and Serial Murder 12. So Many Victims Vulnerable Victims Preferred Catching the Serial Killer Behavioral Profiling Reducing Linkage Blindness Lucky Breaks PART III. Massacres 13. For Love, Money or Revenge Relative Obscurity A Profile of Mass Killers Selective and Methodical When Love Kills Sweet Revenge Profiting From Mass Murder Explaining Mass Murder The Great Equalizer Contributing Factors 14. Family Annihilation A Profile of the Family Annihilator Impact of Unemployment Murdering Moms The Defiant Son 15. Firing Back Profile of the Workplace Avenger The Impact of Frustration Mixed Motives Workplace Murder by Proxy Romantic Obsession Externalizing Responsibility Social Isolation Screening Out Problem Workers Going Postal 16. Schooled in Mass Murder Student Massacres On to College Shooting for Infamy Overstating the Copycat Effect 17. Fighting City Hall Attacking the System Legal Battles Filing a Grievance Increasing Alienation 18. Hate-Motivated Mass Murder Choice of Victims A Life of Frustration Blaming Women The Killer as Victim Settling a Grudge With a Gun Minority Against Majority 19. Going Berserk Paranoid Thinking Confused State of Mind Long-Standing Mental Illness Civilian Battlefields Brain Abnormalities Deadly Weapons PART IV. Epilogue 20. Remembering the Victims References Credits and Sources Index About the Authors

Extreme Killing: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder

/pdf/trends-in-juvenile-violence-a-report-to-the-united-states-2n6fruf934.pdf

James Alan Fox

Papers

Randomized Response: A Method for Sensitive Surveys

Mass shootings in America: Moving beyond Newtown.

Multiple Homicide: Patterns of Serial and Mass Murder

Extreme Killing: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder

TRENDS IN JUVENILE VIOLENCE A Report to the United States Attorney General on Current and Future Rates of Juvenile Offending