Contents

340 PART IV: Applied Researchsocial experimentation, especially that which makes use whenever possible ofrandomized field experiments, policymakers and the community at large maybelieve a treatment works when it doesn’t or vice versa. Such incorrect decisionslead us to allocate money and resources to ineffective programs.Not too many years ago, a show called “Scared Straight” was aired onnational television. It described a juvenile education program implementedat Rahway State Prison in New Jersey. The program involved taking youthfuloffenders into a prison to meet with selected convicts from the inmate population.The goal was to inform juveniles about the reality of prison life and,thereby, the program leaders hoped, dissuade them from further illegal activity.Unsubstantiated claims were made for the effectiveness of the program,including some suggesting a success rate as high as 80% to 90% (see Locke,Johnson, Kirigin-Ramp, Atwater, & Gerrard, 1986). The Rahway program is justone of several similar programs around the country. But do these programsreally work?Several evaluation studies of the exposure-to-prison programs producedmixed results, including positive findings, findings of no difference betweencontrol and experimental participants, as well as results suggesting that the programmay actually increase juvenile crime among some types of delinquents.There is a possibility that less hardened juvenile offenders may increase their criminalactivity after meeting the prisoners. It has been suggested that, because theseless hardened offenders have recently begun a lifestyle wherein they are beingrecognized and reinforced by their peers for their toughness, this image is alsoreinforced by the tough image often projected by the prisoners. On the other hand,hardened juvenile offenders, who have achieved a level of status among theirpeers for some period of time, may be more threatened by the prospects of prisonlife because it would mean loss of that status (see Locke et al., 1986).Attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of this significant social program providegood examples of the difficulties inherent in evaluation research: the difficultyof randomly assigning participants, of getting administrators to cooperatewith experimental procedures, and of dealing with loss of participants duringthe evaluation. Nevertheless, program evaluation based on sound experimentalmethodology offers policymakers at all levels (institution, community, city,state, federal) the information that can help them make informed choices amongpossible treatments for social problems. Because resources inevitably are inshort supply, it is critical that resources be put to the best possible use. Our hopeis that your knowledge of research methods will allow you to participate knowledgeablyand perhaps contribute constructively to the ongoing debate concerning the role ofexperimentation in society.SUMMARYExperimentation in natural settings differs in many ways from experimentationin psychology laboratories. The reasons for doing experiments in natural settingsinclude testing the external validity of laboratory findings and assessingthe effects of “treatments” aimed at improving conditions under which peoplework and live.