Close Window    
Home Page Chapter Menu

Learning from SAGE Research Articles

Looking for some interesting research to review? You'll find it here! The following article selection matrix outlines a set of articles that illustrate key concepts introduced throughout The Practice of Reseach in Criminology and Criminal Justice, Third Edition . These articles are also foundational to the Interactive Exercises found on the study site. The headings in the article selection matrix identify the text chapters that are most relevant to each article. The numbers shown in the headings link to the article review questions that you should emphasize when you read the article. Article review questions are listed below the table. The other review articles are also relevant, but the focus should be on those questions with the links. Links are provided to abstracts of the research or to the full text of the articles.

 

First Author Year Topic Theory, Philosophy
(1, 2)
Ethics
(2 and all methods chapters)
Concepts, Measures
(3)
Sampling
(4)
Units, Times
(4, 5)
Causality
(5)
Design
(6, 7, 8, 10, 11)
Analysis
(9, 12)
Bottcher
abstract
article
2005 Types of Research X X X X X X Survey/
Experiment
Quant
Braga
abstract
article
2001 Types of Research   X X X X X Experiment Qaunt
Chang
abstract
article
2005 Types of Research a X   X X     Survey Qaunt
Crawley
abstract
article
2006 Types of Research X   X X     Interviews Qual
Kempinen
abstract
article
2003 Types of Research     X X X X Quasi Experiment Quant
Lane
abstract
article
2002 Types of Research X   X X     Focus Groups Qual
Padfield
abstract
article
2006 Types of Research X   X X X X Focus Groups Qual
Underwood
abstract
article
1999 Types of Research     X X     Secondary Data Analysis Quant
Watkins
abstract
article
2005 Types of Research X   X X     Survey/Secondary Data Analysis Quant
Giblin
abstract
article
2002 Hypotheses X   X X   X Experiment/Survey Quant
Harrison
abstract
article
2001 Hypotheses X   X X   X Interviews Quant
/ Qual
Kerley
abstract
article
2000 Hypotheses X   X X   X Secondary Data analysis Quant
Broidy
abstract
article
2006 Levels of Measurement X X X X     Secondary Data analysis Quant
Huang
abstract
article
2001 Levels of Measurement X   X X X X Longitudinal Survey Quant
Paoline
abstract
article
2004 Levels of Measurement X   X X X   Survey Quant
Piquero
abstract
article
2004 Levels of Measurement X   X X X   Survey/Secondary Data Analysis Quant
Adams
abstract
article
2002 Valid and Reliable Measures X   X X     Survey/Interviews Quant/
Qual
Evans
abstract
article
2002 Valid and Reliable Measures     X X     Survey Quant
Mears
abstract
article
2001 Valid and Reliable Measures X   X X X X Process Evaluation and Outcome Evaluation Quant
Walrath
abstract
article
2001 Valid and Reliable Measures X   X X   X Evaluation/Quasi Experiment Quant
Brown
abstract
article
2004 Sampling Techniques X X   X     Survey Quant
Gottfredson
abstract
article
2002 Sampling Techniques X X X X     Secondary Data Analysis Quant
Gottfredson
abstract
article
2005 Sampling Techniques X   X X     Secondary Data Analysis Quant
Holsinger
abstract
article
2005 Sampling Techniques X     X     Survey Quant
Ruddell
abstract
article
2006 Sampling Techniques     X X X   Survey Quant
Tewksbury
abstract
article
2005 Sampling Techniques     X X X   Survey Quant
Hall
abstract
article
2004 Causation     X X X X Outcome Evaluation/Quasi Experimental Quant
Hendricks
abstract
article
2006 Causation     X X X X Outcome Evaluation/Quasi Experimental Quant
Kempinen
abstract
article
2003 Types of Research     X X X X Outcome Evaluation/Quasi Experimental Quant
Kerley
abstract
article
2000 Types of Research     X X X X Outcome Evaluation/Quasi Experimental Quant
Giblin
abstract
article
2002 Experiments and Threats to Internal Validity     X X X X Outcome Evaluation/Quasi Experimental Quant
Killias
abstract
article
2000 Experiments and Threats to Internal Validity   X X X X X Outcome Evaluation/ Experiment Quant
Barlow
abstract
article
2002 Surveys     X X     Survey/Interviews Quant/
Qual
Henderson
abstract
article
2000 Surveys     X X     Survey Quant
Moon
abstract
article
2000 Surveys X   X X     Survey/Secondary Data Analysis Quant
Bond-Maupin
abstract
article
1998 Qualitative Ethics   X X X     Participant Observation/Interviews Qual
Lucken
abstract
article
1997 Qualitative Ethics   X X X     Content Analysis Qual
Dodge
abstract
article
2001 Qualitative Analysis     X X     Interviews Qual
Halsey
abstract
article
2006 Qualitative Analysis X   X X     Interviews Qual
Kakar
abstract
article
2002 Qualitative Analysis     X X     Focus Groups/Secondary Data Analysis Qual
Stoutland
abstract
article
2001 Qualitative Analysis X   X X     Interviews Qual
Baumer
abstract
article
2006 Evaluation Research     X X   X Secondary Data Analysis/Quasi Experiment Quant
Barbrey
abstract
article
2004 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research     X X     Crime Mapping Quant
Gore
abstract
article
2004 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research     X X     Crime Mapping Quant
Jiao
abstract
article
2001 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research     X X     Cross National Comparison Qual
Nicolosi
abstract
article
2002 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research     X       Case Study Qual
Odem
abstract
article
1991 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research     X X     Secondary Data Analysis Qual
Payne
abstract
article
2001 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research     X X     Content Analysis Qual/
Quant
Turner
abstract
article
2006 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research     X       Case Study Qual
Welch
abstract
article
2000 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research     X X     Content Analysis Qual/
Quant
Kazemian
abstract
article
2006 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research X   X X X X Secondary Data analysis Quant
Ortmann
abstract
article
2000 Content Analysis and Other Types of Research     X X X X Outcome Evaluation/Experiment Quant
Bonta
abstract
article
2000 Research Report Goals     X X X X Outcome Evaluation/Quasi Experiment Quant
Maeve
abstract
article
2001 Research Report Goals   X X X     Participatory Action Research Qual/
Quant
Sanford
abstract
article
2005 Research Report Goals     X       Review Article  
Silvergleid
abstract
article
2006 Research Report Goals     X X   X Interviews Qual
Sullivan
abstract
article
2005 Research Report Goals X X X X     Participatory Action Research Qual

Links to the home pages for each journal are provided below:

Journal Web Sites

Article Review Questions

The questions below are designed to guide your reading of an entire research article.

1. What is the basic research question, or problem? Try to state it in just one sentence. (Chapters 1, 2)  top

2. Is the purpose of the study explanatory, evaluative, exploratory, or descriptive? Did the study have more than one purpose? (Chapter 1)  top

3. What prior literature was reviewed? Was it relevant to the research problem? To the theoretical framework? Does the literature review appear to be adequate? Are you aware of (or can you locate) any important studies that have been omitted? (Chapter 2)  top

4. Was a theoretical framework presented? What was it? Did it seem appropriate for the research question addressed? Can you think of a different theoretical perspective that might have been used? (Chapter 2)  top

5. How well did the study live up to the guidelines for science? Do you need additional information in any areas to evaluate the study? To replicate it? (Chapters 1, 2)  top

6. Did the study seem consistent with current ethical standards? Were any trade-offs made between different ethical guidelines? Was an appropriate balance struck between adherence to ethical standards and use of the most rigorous scientific practices? (Chapter 2 and all Methods Chapters)  top

7. Were any hypotheses stated? Were these hypotheses justified adequately in terms of the theoretical framework? In terms of prior research? (Chapter 2)  top

8. What were the independent and dependent variables in the hypothesis(es)? Did these variables reflect the theoretical concepts as intended? What direction of association was hypothesized? Were any other variables identified as potentially important? (Chapters 2, 3)  top

9. What were the major concepts in the research? How, and how clearly, were they defined? Were some concepts treated as unidimensional that you think might best be thought of as multidimensional? (Chapter 3)  top

10. Did the instruments used, the measures of the variables, seem valid and reliable? How did the authors attempt to establish this? Could any more have been done in the study to establish measurement validity? (Chapter 3)  top

11. Was a sample or the entire population of elements used in the study? What type of sample was selected? Was a probability sampling method used? Did the authors think the sample was generally representative of the population from which it was drawn? Do you? How would you evaluate the likely generalizability of the findings to other populations? (Chapter 4)  top

12. Was the response rate or participation rate reported? Does it appear likely that those who did not respond or participate were markedly different from those who did participate? Why or why not? Did the author(s) adequately discuss this issue? (Chapter 4)  top

13. What were the units of analysis? Were they appropriate for the research question? If some groups were the units of analysis, were any statements made at any point that are open to the ecological fallacy? If individuals were the units of analysis, were any statements made at any point that suggest reductionist reasoning? (Chapter 4)  top

14. Was the study design cross-sectional or longitudinal, or did it use both types of data? If the design was longitudinal, what type of longitudinal design was it? Could the longitudinal design have been improved in any way, as by collecting panel data rather than trend data, or by decreasing the dropout rate in a panel design? If cross-sectional data were used, could the research question have been addressed more effectively with longitudinal data? (Chapter 5)  top

15. Were any causal assertions made or implied in the hypotheses or in subsequent discussion? What approach was used to demonstrate the existence of causal effects? Were all five issues in establishing causal relationships addressed? What, if any, variables were controlled in the analysis to reduce the risk of spurious relationships? Should any other variables have been measured and controlled? How satisfied are you with the internal validity of the conclusions? (Chapter 5)  top

16. Was an experimental, survey, participant observation, or some other research design used? How well was this design suited to the research question posed and the specific hypotheses tested, if any? Why do you suppose the author(s) chose this particular design? How was the design modified in response to research constraints? How was it modified in order to take advantage of research opportunities? (Chapters 6-10).  top

17. Was this an evaluation research project? If so, which type of evaluation was it? Which design alternatives did it use? (Chapter 11)  top

18. Was a historical comparative design used? Which type was it? Were problems due to using historical and/or cross-national data addressed? (Chapter 10)  top

19. Did the analysis rely on secondary data? Did the author(s) take into account the limitations due to use of secondary data? Did they provide an adequate description of the strengths and weaknesses of the original study? (Chapter 10)  top

20. Summarize the findings. How clearly were statistical and/or qualitative data presented and discussed? Were the results substantively important? (Chapters 9, 12)  top

21. Did the author(s) adequately represent the findings in the discussion and/or conclusions sections? Were conclusions well grounded in the findings? Are any other interpretations possible? (Chapter 13)  top

22. Compare the study to others addressing the same research question. Did the study yield additional insights? In what ways was the study design more or less adequate than the design of previous research? (Chapter 13)  top

23. What additional research questions and hypotheses are suggested by the study's results? What light did the study shed on the theoretical framework used? On social policy questions? (Chapters 2, 13)  top