An experimental comparison of two self-report methods for measuring lambda

Julie Horney, Ineke Haen Marshall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Criticisms of the RAND Second Inmate Survey have implied that missing and ambiguous responses and problems related to trying to measure self-reported crime rates over extended periods of time may have led to inflated estimates of λ. In the present study, the authors randomly assigned prison inmates to two groups, one to be interviewed using the RAND method for measuring crime rates, and one to be interviewed using the authors' modified month-by-month reporting method. The authors expected that their month-by-month method would produce lower estimates of λ. They found that the two distributions of λ did not differ significantly from each other, suggesting that the RAND results are very robust.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)102-121
Number of pages20
JournalJournal of Research in Crime and Delinquency
Volume29
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1992

Fingerprint

Self Report
Crime
Prisons
Surveys and Questionnaires

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Psychology

Cite this

Horney, Julie ; Marshall, Ineke Haen. / An experimental comparison of two self-report methods for measuring lambda. In: Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 1992 ; Vol. 29, No. 1. pp. 102-121.
@article{90f59101206147988542e859c88ed7f6,
title = "An experimental comparison of two self-report methods for measuring lambda",
abstract = "Criticisms of the RAND Second Inmate Survey have implied that missing and ambiguous responses and problems related to trying to measure self-reported crime rates over extended periods of time may have led to inflated estimates of {\^I}». In the present study, the authors randomly assigned prison inmates to two groups, one to be interviewed using the RAND method for measuring crime rates, and one to be interviewed using the authors' modified month-by-month reporting method. The authors expected that their month-by-month method would produce lower estimates of {\^I}». They found that the two distributions of {\^I}» did not differ significantly from each other, suggesting that the RAND results are very robust.",
author = "Julie Horney and Marshall, {Ineke Haen}",
year = "1992",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0022427892029001006",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "102--121",
journal = "Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency",
issn = "0022-4278",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "1",

}

An experimental comparison of two self-report methods for measuring lambda. / Horney, Julie; Marshall, Ineke Haen.

In: Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 29, No. 1, 01.01.1992, p. 102-121.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - An experimental comparison of two self-report methods for measuring lambda

AU - Horney, Julie

AU - Marshall, Ineke Haen

PY - 1992/1/1

Y1 - 1992/1/1

N2 - Criticisms of the RAND Second Inmate Survey have implied that missing and ambiguous responses and problems related to trying to measure self-reported crime rates over extended periods of time may have led to inflated estimates of λ. In the present study, the authors randomly assigned prison inmates to two groups, one to be interviewed using the RAND method for measuring crime rates, and one to be interviewed using the authors' modified month-by-month reporting method. The authors expected that their month-by-month method would produce lower estimates of λ. They found that the two distributions of λ did not differ significantly from each other, suggesting that the RAND results are very robust.

AB - Criticisms of the RAND Second Inmate Survey have implied that missing and ambiguous responses and problems related to trying to measure self-reported crime rates over extended periods of time may have led to inflated estimates of λ. In the present study, the authors randomly assigned prison inmates to two groups, one to be interviewed using the RAND method for measuring crime rates, and one to be interviewed using the authors' modified month-by-month reporting method. The authors expected that their month-by-month method would produce lower estimates of λ. They found that the two distributions of λ did not differ significantly from each other, suggesting that the RAND results are very robust.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026582598&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026582598&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0022427892029001006

DO - 10.1177/0022427892029001006

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0026582598

VL - 29

SP - 102

EP - 121

JO - Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

JF - Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

SN - 0022-4278

IS - 1

ER -