The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk
The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk
The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
esearch design, outcomes, and different levels <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> each moderator variable. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g>refore,<br />
we focus <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong> bivariate comparis<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> each moderator, and do not attempt to model<br />
outcomes any further. This is a limitati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> our moderator analysis: the results we<br />
present do not c<strong>on</strong>trol for the presence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> any additi<strong>on</strong>al moderators.<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> analog to the ANOVA is based <strong>on</strong> the Q-statistic calculated as part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
main random effects model. Q is the weighted sum-<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>-squares <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> each effect size around<br />
the grand mean. It represents the extent to which differences between the effect sizes are<br />
statistically related to differences in moderators (a statistically significant Q-statistic<br />
indicates evidence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> between-study heterogeneity). We use the random effects analog to<br />
the ANOVA (also called a ‘mixed effects’ model), which assumes there is still<br />
unmeasured variability after moderators are modeled. We justify this <strong>on</strong> the basis <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> our<br />
limited set <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> moderators, which are unlikely to explain all the variability between<br />
studies. 11<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> relevant formulas are presented in Appendix C. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g>se analyses are also<br />
performed using the STATA macros.<br />
Due to the greater risk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> bias in n<strong>on</strong>-randomized studies, experimental and quasiexperimental<br />
results are treated separately in all analyses. Randomized experiments that<br />
indicate large baseline differences between participants <strong>on</strong> characteristics likely to be<br />
related to outcomes (such as prior <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fending history), or which experienced substantial<br />
attriti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> participants or other implementati<strong>on</strong> problems are analyzed with the quasiexperiments.<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>cern with such experiments is that the attriti<strong>on</strong> may be caused by<br />
reas<strong>on</strong>s related to the treatment and/or outcome; for example, higher-risk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders may<br />
be more likely to absc<strong>on</strong>d from probati<strong>on</strong> and be subsequently lost to follow-up, thus<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fending outcomes for the remaining lower-risk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders are biased.<br />
23