Criminal Justice Masters Program Comprehensive Exam Information

Criminal Justice Masters Program Comprehensive Exam Information INDEX PAGE 1. Frequently Asked Questions..... 2 2. Schedule of Exams....... 9 3. Reading List........ 18 4. Sample Questions....... 31 1 P a g e

Comprehensive Exam Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) 1) What are the comprehensive exams? They are standardized exams (meaning all eligible students each quarter take the same exam and they are graded by the same graders) taken on designated days of the year (currently administered twice per regular quarter). They are designed to measure students proficiency in the core areas of our discipline. These are (1) research methods and EITHER (a) law enforcement or (b) corrections and (2) theory. 2) What is the purpose of comprehensive exams? The purpose of the comprehensive written exams is to ensure that students have acquired a base level and breadth of knowledge (proficiency) in the areas of Criminal Justice. 3) How many comprehensive exams must a student take? There are two comprehensive exams; students must successfully pass both exams: (1) An exam in research methods combined with (a) law enforcement or (b) corrections. This exam will require the student to demonstrate proficiency in the application of methodological/statistical techniques relevant to the field of (a) law enforcement or (b) corrections, broadly speaking. (2) An exam in criminological theory to demonstrate proficiency in understanding theoretical issues relating to criminology and criminal justice. 2 P a g e

4) When must a student take the comprehensive exams? Once students have completed the required courses, submitted the program plan (or advancement to candidacy), maintained at least a 3.0 grade-point average, and met any additional requirements, they are eligible to take the comprehensive examinations. Note that to complete the masters programs, students enrolled in the online master s program are not eligible for the Traditional Thesis MA option. Rather, online program students are only eligible for the Professional MA option (e.g., the comprehensive examinations). Students planning to take the comprehensive exams must notify the Graduate Coordinator the quarter prior to taking the exams. 5) How should a student decide which area exam to take? Each student should take into consideration their career goals and chosen area of interest (law enforcement or corrections). 6) What is the testing procedure for the comprehensive exams? Students who are eligible to take the comprehensive exams must notify the graduate coordinator the quarter prior to taking the exams. Exams will be administered on two separate days in the Fall, Winter, and Spring quarters. Students will have four (4) weeks to complete all requirements of each comprehensive exam. During the four week process, the student will submit their answer a total of three times. Approximate testing time frame: - Student will have approximately 7 days to complete the exam for first submission. - Feedback from the graders will be returned approximately 5 days after first submission. - Student will have 5 days to revise and resubmit. 3 P a g e

- Feedback from the graders will be returned approximately 5 days after second submission. - Student will have 4 days to revise and submit the final version. - Grades will be returned in approximately 5 days. Two faculty members (graders) will review the materials submitted and upon review determine necessary improvements. Students failing to comply with these required changes will fail the exam. Students must understand that their work must be thorough in terms of research, organization, and grammar. The exams go well beyond the expectations of a class term paper. 7) What is the format of each comprehensive exam? (How many questions are there?) Each examination consists of one in-depth question. Exams will be graded by two graders (Criminal Justice faculty members). The grades for each exam consist of Pass or Fail. 8) Is there a recommendation or requirement to which comprehensive exam is taken first (methods/area or theory)? There are no requirements about which one is to be taken first. Students may choose based on their preparation levels and discussion with the graduate coordinator. 9) How does a student go about studying for the comprehensive exams? Effective study habits vary by student. It may be useful to make notes on readings, for example, by outlining the major theoretical approach, authors arguments, methodology, results, and limitations for each reading. For readings covered in courses, it might be useful to note the professors discussions of the article (e.g., what is its major contribution? What are its limitations? What does it add to the literature or provoke in terms of research topics? Etc.). Students should not wait until the comprehensive exam has been administered to start preparing. 4 P a g e

Sample questions are also provided on the CSUSB Criminal Justice website. These are just a sample of questions that have been asked in the past, they are not the actual questions that you will receive. It is recommended that students attempt to answer these practice questions in preparation for upcoming comprehensive exams. 10) Where can a student find a reading list for the comprehensive exams? A brief reading list can be found below (taken from the CSUSB Criminal Justice Website: http://criminaljustice.csusb.edu/majorsprograms/ma_orientation.htm ) 11) Are the comprehensive exams confined to the prepared reading lists? No, the reading lists are designed to help you with preparation, but are not exhaustive. The reading lists are only to be considered guides to help students prepare, as such, reading lists are not updated on a regular basis. Furthermore, you are expected to find your own sources when completing the comprehensive exams; exams are not summaries of the reading list. It is recommended that students begin reviewing/reading the material on the reading list well before taking the comprehensive exam. 12) Should a student look for additional readings beyond the reading lists? Yes. A good place to start is readings assigned in class. It will also be helpful to look at the table to contents of the major journals for recent years and be familiar with the work published there. Keep in mind that reliance upon course materials and textbooks alone will not be sufficient. 5 P a g e

13) To adequately answer a comprehensive exam question, what type of information should be provided, how many sources of information should be provided, and is there any general length or word count to an adequate answer? There is no cookie cutter response to how comprehensive exam essay answers must look. There are no word count or length specifications for the essays. They should be written in direct response to and comprehensively cover all of the issues raised in, the questions posed and in article or paper format with APA citations and references. Students should provide all important sources related to the question, and the length depends on how succinctly one can provide the relevant information (i.e., it depends on the students writing styles). As a general rule, though, each answer should have no less than 15 relevant sources cited and should be no less than 15 pages. 14) How should comprehensive exam answers be formatted? All answers should be double-spaced, one-inch margins, 12-point standard font, and APA citations and reference page. Use subheadings when appropriate. 15) What happens if a student fails a comprehensive exam? The student will be allowed to take the exam one more time (you are allowed two tries for each exam). At the start of the next round of comprehensive exams, the student will be issued a different question and he/she will repeat the four week process. If the student fails the same exam twice, they will be dismissed from the program. 16) How are the comprehensive exams graded? At the end of the four week time frame, each appointed faculty grader submits a pass or fail written grade for the final submission of each exam question. Both graders must issue a pass for the student to pass the exam. 6 P a g e

17) What will the graders look for in your answers? While each question will vary, some things the graders will be looking at: - Does the student fully, adequately, and correctly answer the question? - Is the literature review exhaustive and up to date? - Is the answer organized in a logical manner and does it flow well? - Does the student appear to be proficient in the topic area? - Does the student support their statements with research/fact and is this information properly cited? - Are there any major flaws and/or deficiencies in the answer? - Spelling, grammar, citations, etc. 18) What happens if you miss a submission deadline? If a student misses a submission deadline during the four week comprehensive exam process, their time for revisions will be shortened accordingly. Students who miss the final submission deadline will fail that particular exam. 19) If a student does a good job on their first submission, do they have to continue with the four week process? Yes. The comprehensive exam process is a process. All students are expected to do well on their first submission, but there is always room for improvement. The purpose of the four week process is to help students improve their work and become more comfortable in accessing knowledge in our discipline. 7 P a g e

20) What sort of feedback will the graders provide? This all depends on the answers the student provides. Overall, graders will provide feedback so that the student can learn from the process and improve their answers (e.g., pros and cons, what needs improvement and/or clarification, deficiencies, etc.). 21) What happens if you do not make any suggested changes? If the student does not revise their answers as suggested and resubmit by the next deadline, the graders will issue a failing grade. 8 P a g e

COMPREHENSIVE EXAM SCHEDULE (Fall 2012 Spring 2015) FALL 2012 Exam 1 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Sept. 21: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Sept. 27: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Oct. 3: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days Oct. 8 Revisions due 8am 5 days Oct. 12: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days Oct. 16: Final draft due 8am 5 days Oct. 22: Grade will be returned Exam 2 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Oct. 23: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Oct. 29: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Nov. 5: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days Nov. 12: Revisions due 8am 5 days Nov. 19: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days Nov. 26 Final draft due 8am 5 days Nov. 30: Grade will be returned **** Please note that exact dates will vary each quarter. Quarter-specific deadlines will be posted on Blackboard and will be provided to each student who plans to register for the comprehensive exams. 9 P a g e

WINTER 2013 Exam 1 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Jan. 9 Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Jan. 15 Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Jan. 22 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days Jan. 28 Revisions due 8am 5 days Feb. 1 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days Feb. 6 Final draft due 8am 5 days Feb. 11 Grade will be returned Exam 2 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Feb. 13 Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Feb. 19 Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Feb. 25 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days March 3 Revisions due 8am 5 days March 8 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days March Final draft due 8am 5 days 13 March 18 Grade will be returned **** Please note that exact dates will vary each quarter. Quarter-specific deadlines will be posted on Blackboard and will be provided to each student who plans to register for the comprehensive exams. 10 P a g e

SPRING 2013 Exam 1 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: April 2: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days April 8: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days April 12: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days April 17: Revisions due 8am 5 days April 23: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days April 27: Final draft due 8am 5 days May 3: Grade will be returned Exam 2 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: May 3: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days May 9: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days May 15: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days May 20: Revisions due 8am 5 days May 24: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days May 29: Final draft due 8am 5 days June 3: Grade will be returned **** Please note that exact dates will vary each quarter. Quarter-specific deadlines will be posted on Blackboard and will be provided to each student who plans to register for the comprehensive exams. 11 P a g e

FALL 2013 Exam 1 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Sept. 20: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Sept. 26: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Oct. 2: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days Oct. 7: Revisions due 8am 5 days Oct. 11: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days Oct. 15: Final draft due 8am 5 days Oct. 21: Grade will be returned Exam 2 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Oct. 22: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Oct. 28: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Nov. 4: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days Nov. 8: Revisions due 8am 5 days Nov. 14: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days Nov. 20: Final draft due 8am 5 days Nov. 26: Grade will be returned **** Please note that exact dates will vary each quarter. Quarter-specific deadlines will be posted on Blackboard and will be provided to each student who plans to register for the comprehensive exams. 12 P a g e

WINTER 2014 Exam 1 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Jan. 8 Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Jan. 14 Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Jan. 21 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days Jan. 27 Revisions due 8am 5 days Feb. 1 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days Feb. 5 Final draft due 8am 5 days Feb. 11 Grade will be returned Exam 2 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Feb. 13 Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Feb. 19 Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Feb. 25 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days March 3 Revisions due 8am 5 days March 8 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days March Final draft due 8am 5 days 13 March 18 Grade will be returned **** Please note that exact dates will vary each quarter. Quarter-specific deadlines will be posted on Blackboard and will be provided to each student who plans to register for the comprehensive exams. 13 P a g e

SPRING 2014 Exam 1 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: April 2: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days April 8: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days April 13: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days April 18: Revisions due 8am 5 days April 23: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days April 28: Final draft due 8am 5 days May 3: Grade will be returned Exam 2 Date: Step Days Until Next Step: May 3: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days May 9: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days May 14: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days May 19: Revisions due 8am 5 days May 24: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days May 29: Final draft due 8am 5 days June 3: Grade will be returned **** Please note that exact dates will vary each quarter. Quarter-specific deadlines will be posted on Blackboard and will be provided to each student who plans to register for the comprehensive exams. 14 P a g e

FALL 2014 Exam 1 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Sept. 26: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Oct. 2: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Oct. 8: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days Oct. 13: Revisions due 8am 5 days Oct. 17: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days Oct. 21: Final draft due 8am 5 days Oct. 25: Grade will be returned Exam 2 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Oct. 27: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Nov. 2: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Nov. 7: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days Nov. 13: Revisions due 8am 5 days Nov. 18: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days Nov. 24: Final draft due 8am 5 days Dec. 1: Grade will be returned **** Please note that exact dates will vary each quarter. Quarter-specific deadlines will be posted on Blackboard and will be provided to each student who plans to register for the comprehensive exams. 15 P a g e

WINTER 2015 Exam 1 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Jan. 13 Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Jan. 19 Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Jan. 23 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days Jan. 28 Revisions due 8am 5 days Feb. 3 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days Feb. 7 Final draft due 8am 5 days Feb. 12 Grade will be returned Exam 2 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: Feb. 13 Exam question made available at 8am 7 days Feb. 19 Completed exam due by 8am 5 days Feb. 25 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty 5 days graders March 3 Revisions due 8am 5 days March 9 Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty 4 days graders March 14 Final draft due 8am 5 days March 19 Grade will be returned **** Please note that exact dates will vary each quarter. Quarter-specific deadlines will be posted on Blackboard and will be provided to each student who plans to register for the comprehensive exams. 16 P a g e

SPRING 2015 Exam 1 Date: Step Approximate Days Until Next Step: April 7: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days April 13: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days April 17: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days April 22: Revisions due 8am 5 days April 27: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days May 1: Final draft due 8am 5 days May 7: Grade will be returned Exam 2 Date: Step Days Until Next Step: May 8: Exam question made available at 8am 7 days May 14: Completed exam due by 8am 5 days May 19: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 5 days May 25: Revisions due 8am 5 days May 29: Comments/suggestions made by the two faculty graders 4 days June 3: Final draft due 8am 5 days June 8: Grade will be returned **** Please note that exact dates will vary each quarter. Quarter-specific deadlines will be posted on Blackboard and will be provided to each student who plans to register for the comprehensive exams. 17 P a g e

Comprehensive Exam Suggested Readings Research Methods General The Maryland Report on Crime Prevention. 1997. http://www.ncjrs.org/works/. Maxfield, Michael G. and Earl Babbie. 1995. Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology. Wadsworth Publishing. CA. Boruch, R. F. (1997). Randomized experiments for planning and evaluation: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.S. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally. Experiments Weisburd, David. 1993. Design sensitivity in criminal justice experiments. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research (volume 17, pp.337-379). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sherman (Ed). 2003. Special issue of The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science on Misleading evidence and evidence-based policy: Making social science more experimental. Sherman, L.W. and E.G. Cohn. 1989. The impact of research on legal policy: The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment. Law and Society Review 23:117-144. 18 P a g e

Farrington, D.P. (2003). A short history of randomized experiments in criminology: A meager feast. Evaluation Review, 27, 218-227. Petersilia, J, & Turner, S. (1991) An evaluation of intensive probation in California. Journal-of-Criminal- Law-and-Criminology, 82, (3), pp. 610-658. Self-Reports Junger-Tas, Josine and Ineke Haen Marshall. 1999. The self-report methodology in crime research. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research (volume 25, pp.291-367). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Piquero, Alex R., R. MacIntosh, and Matthew Hickman. 2002. The validity of a self-reported delinquency scale. Sociological Methods and Research 30:492-529. Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Research Laub, John H. and Robert J. Sampson. 1998. Integrating quantitative and qualitative data. In Janet Z. Giele and Glen H. Elder, Jr. (Eds.), Methods of Life Course Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Crime Trends McDowall, David and Colin Loftin. 1992. Comparing the UCR and NCS over time. Criminology 30:125-132. Steffensmeier, Darrell and Miles D. Harer. 1999. Making sense of recent US crime trends, 1980 to 1996/1998: Age, composition effects, and other explanations. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 36:235-274. Blumstein, Alfred and Richard Rosenfeld. 1998. Explaining recent trends in US homicide rates. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 88:1171-1216. 19 P a g e

LaFree, Gary. 1999. Declining violent crime rates in the 1990s: Predicting crime booms and busts. Annual Review of Sociology 25:145-168. Lynch, James. 2002. Trends in Juvenile Offending: An Analysis of Victim Survey Data. OJJDP Brief Report. http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/ojjdp/191052.pdf. Rand, Micahel R., James Lynch, and David Cantor. 1997. Criminal Victimization, 1973-1995. NIJ Report. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cv73_95.pdf BJS. 2003. Four Measures of Serious Violent Crime. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/cv2.htm Rantala, Ramona. 2000. Effects of NIBRS on crime statistics. NIJ Report. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/encs.pdf. Gove, Walter, et al. 2001. Are the Uniform Crime Reports a Valid Indicator of the Index Crimes? Criminology 23:451-501. Policing All Required Readings for CJUS 632 (see Dr. Famega for listing) and: Brandl, S.G. & Barlow, D.E. (2004). II. Police Discretion. The police in America: Classic and contemporary readings. Wadsworth. Dunham, R.C. and Alpert, G.P. (2010). Critical issues in Policing: Contemporary readings (6 th ed.). Long Grove, Il: Waveland. Walker, S. (2010). Chapter 5 Unleash the Cops. Sense and nonsense about crime, drugs, and communities: A policy guide (7 th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Weisburd, D. and Braga, A.A. (2006). Police innovation: Contrasting Perspectives. Cambridge. 20 P a g e

Corrections Alexander, Michelle (2010). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press, New York. Arrigo, B. A., & Bullock, J. L. (2008). The psychological effects of solitary confinement on prisoners in supermax units: Reviewing what we know and recommending what should change. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 52(6), 622-640. Brcato, Jo and Wagner, Eric, F. (2008). Predictors of Retention in an Alternative-To- Prison Substance Abuse Treatment Program. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35 (1), p. 99-119. Dharmapala, Dhammika, Garoupa, Nuno, and Shepherd, Joanna M. (2009). Legislatures, Judges, and Parole Boards: The Allocation of Discretion Under Determinate Sentencing, Florida Law Review, 62, pp. 1037. Danner, Mark (2004). Torture and Truth. New York Review Books. Gray, Judge James P. (2001). Why our drug laws have failed. Temple University Press, Philadelphia. Hammett, T. M. (2006). HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases among correctional inmates: Transmission, burden, and an appropriate response. American Journal of Public Health, 96(6), 974-978. Hayes, Shawn (2006). The End of Determinate Sentencing. How California s Prison Problem Can be Solved With Quick Fixes and a Long Term Commission. California Prison Reform. Available online at: http://www.law.stanford.edu/program/centers/scjc/workingpapers/shayes_06.pdf Hresko, T. (2006). In the cellars of the hollow men: Use of solitary confinement in U.S.prisons and its implications under international laws against torture. Pace International Law Review, 18, 1-27. Lynch, Michael. J. (1999). Beating a Dead Horse: Is There Any Basic Empirical Evidence for the Deterrent Effect of Imprisonment? Crime, Law and Social Change 31:347-362. 21 P a g e

Lynch, Michael J. () Big Prisons, Big Dreams: Crime and the Failure of America s Penal System. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick. National Drug Court Institute (2008). Quality Improvement for Drug Courts: Evidence-Based Practices. Monograph. Reiman, Jeffrey (2009. The Rich get richer and the poor get prison. Pearson Publishing. SpearIt. (2009). Mental illness in prison: Inmate rehabilitation and correctional officers in crisis. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, 14, 277-302. Sternen, Don and Rengifo, Andres, F. (2011) Policies and Imprisonment: The Impact of Structured Sentencing and Determinate Sentencing on State Incarceration Rates, 1978-2004. Justice Quarterly, 28(1), p. 174-201. Thompson, Anthony C. (2008). Releasing prisoners, redeeming communities. New York University Press. Vodicka, D.J. (2009). The Green Wall. iuniverse. Zhang, Sheldon X., Roberts, Robert E. L., and McCollister, Kathryn E. (2011). Therapeutic Community in a California Prison: Treatment Outcomes After 5 Years. Crime & Delinquency, 57(1), p. 82-101. Zimbardo, Phillip (2007) The Lucifer Effect. Understanding How Good People Turn Evil. Random House Inc., New York. Theories General Cullen, F. & Agnew, R. (2010). Criminological Theory: From Past to Present. Oxford. ISBN: 9780195389555 Tibbetts, S., & Hemmens, C. (2010). Criminological Theory: A Text/Reader. SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA.ISBN: 1412950376 22 P a g e

Bernard, Snipes, & Gerould. (2009) Vold s Theoretical Criminology. ISBN: 9780195386417 Akers & Sellers. (2008). Criminological Theories: Introduction, Evaluation, and Application 9780195332520 Brown, S., Esbensen, F., & Geis, G. (2011). Criminology. 7 th edition. LexisNexis/Anderson. Williams, F. & McShane, M. Criminological Theory. ISBN: 0135154618 Classical School and Deterrence Becarria, C. (1963) On Crimes and Punishment. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company. Bentham, J. (1948) An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Edited with an introduction by Laurence J. Lafleur. New York: Hafner Publishing. Blumstein, A., Cohen,J., and Nagin, D. (1978) Deterrence and Incapacitation: Estimating the Effects of Sanctions on the Crime Rate. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Paternoster, R. (1987) The deterrent effect of the perceived certainty and severity of punishment. Justice Quarterly, 4: 173-217. Saltzman, L.E., Paternoster, R., Waldo, G.P., and Chiricos, T.G. (1982) Deterrent and experiential effects. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 19: 172-189 Rational Choice Akers, R.L. (1990) Rational choice, deterrence, and social learning theory in criminology: The path not taken. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 81: 653-676. 23 P a g e

Cornish, D.B., and Clarke, R.V. (Eds.) (1986) The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer. Grasmick, H.G., and Bursik, R.J. (1990) Conscience, significant others, and rational choice: Extending the deterrence model. Law and Society Review, 24: 837-862. Nagin, D., and Paternoster, R. (1991) The preventative effects of the perceived risk of arrest: Testing an expanded conception of deterrence. Criminology, 29: 561-585. Piliavin, Thornton, Gartner, and Matsueda (1986) Crime, deterrence, and rational choice. American Sociological Review, 51:101-119. Pogarsky, G. (2002) Identifying deterrable offenders: Implications for research on deterrence. Justice Quarterly, 19: 431-452. Pogarsky, G., and Piquero, A.R. (2003) Can punishment encourage offending? Investigating the resetting effect. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40: 95-120. Routine Activities/Lifestyle Theories Clarke, R., and Cornish, D. (1993) Routine Activity and Rational Choice (Advances in Criminological Theory, Volume 5). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press. Cohen, L.E., and Felson, M. (1979) Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44: 588-608. Cornish, D., and Clarke, R. (1987) Understanding crime displacement. Criminology, 25: 933-947. Felson, M. (1987) Routine activities and crime prevention in the developing metropolis. Criminology, 25: 911-931. Felson, M. (2002) Crime and Everyday Life. Third Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kennedy, L.W., and Forde, D. R. (1990) Routine activities and crime. Criminology, 28: 137-152. 24 P a g e

Sherman, L.W., Gartin, P.R., and Buerger, M.D. (1989) Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology, 27: 27-56. Social Disorganization Bursik, R. (1988) Social disorganization and theories of crime and delinquency: Problems and prospects. Criminology, 26: 519-552. Bursik, R., and Grasmick, H. (1993) Neighborhoods and Crime. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Heitgerd, J.L., and Bursik, R.J. (1987) Extra-commuity dynamics and the ecology of delinquency. American Journal of Sociology, 92: 775-787. Reiss, A., and Tonry, M. (1986) Communities and Crime (Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Volume 8). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sampson,R.J., and Groves, W.B. (1989) Community structure and crime: Testing social-disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94: 774-802. Sampson, R.J.. Raudenbush, S.W., and Earls, F. (1997) Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multi-level study of collective efficacy. Science, 277: 918-924. Shaw, C., and McKay, H.D. (1969) Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Biological Perspectives Booth, A.D., and Osgood, W. (1993) The influence of testosterone on deviance in adulthood: Assessing and explaining the relationship. Criminology, 31: 93-117. 25 P a g e