Research and Theories Terrie Gill Unit 1 IP Dear, Police Captain; To start off I would just like to give thanks for my opportunity to join you in your work. As an expert in the Criminal Justice Field, I would like to share my expertise to help you determine a solution to your new citywide crime prevention strategy. The four areas of research theories that I would like to review are deductive, inductive, grounded, and axiomatic. The first thing I am going to do is give a generalization of the four types of theories that I have provided.
The reason for this is so that there can be a basic understanding of each type. Deductive reasoning takes information that is general and gives it a specific instance. An example of deductive reasoning would be that lions sleep twenty hours a day. Knowing that this is true of one we would know that it is true of all the species of lions based on their biology. Inductive reasoning is taking detailed facts to general principles. An example that was on one of the websites I used was that “All the cows that I have ever seen are spotted. Another one would be that the Sun rises and sets every day. It is a simplified version of facts like speed, location, and viewpoints. Grounded Theory is a systematic methodology in the social science involving generation of theory from data. Mainly used in qualitative research, but is also applicable to quantitative data. In simple terms it is a reverse use of the scientific method. You start out collecting data in many different ways and then you propose a hypothesis.
Axiomatic System is any set of axioms (or postulate is a proposition that is not proven or demonstrated but considered to be either self evident or knowing to be true without proof) from which some or all axioms can be used in conjunction to logically derive theorems. In simple terms it knows that the data is factual without having it having to be proven. The similarities of deductive and inductive are that they both involve changing specific and general information around the differences are that deductive takes general information to the specific and inductive take detailed facts and makes them general so you can understand them better.
The similarities of deductive and grounded are that they both go together because you have to use the data collected in grounded to use in deductive. The difference is that in the deductive situation changes the specific information founded and in grounded situation you gather the information before you make the hypothesis. The similarities in deductive and axiomatic is that you are forming opinions the difference is that in deductive reasoning you takes and re explain the facts while in axiomatic you just know it without having proof.
Now that we know the basics of different types of theories we need to discuss the different areas of crime prevention. Four major types of crime prevention are punitive, corrective, and protective, and situational. Punitive crime prevention consists of court rooms, detainment centers, and law enforcement. The definition of punitive is inflicting, or intended as a punishment. This means that they have already done a crime and they have to take the consequences given from those actions. Corrective crime prevention consists of mentoring, education, and counseling.
An example of this would be the D. A. R. E program. The definition of corrective is designed to correct or counteract something harmful or undesirable. Meaning they are trying to prevent criminal activities before they start. Protective crime prevention consists of community policing, homeland security, and neighborhood watch. The definition of protective is adapted or intended to afford protection. This would imply that this is used to protect people from violence and criminal activity to keep them safe before or during the attempts.
Situational crime prevention lessens the opportunities for any criminal to prevent a crime. This theory usually changes criminal thoughts about whether they will be able to get away with a particular crime because the situation may make the crime seem allot harder, and make the crime seem more risky and make them think that they are not going to get anything out of it, by committing this specific crime. The best way to describe situational crime prevention theory is: officials making buildings and streets safer for everyone by making changes to a specific situation.
The public need to ask the police for more help than what they do instead of taking the law into their own hands. If someone is ever in a position that they need to stop a criminal they need to use common sense, such as in neighborhoods, start a neighborhood watch program. But the most important rule of all is working with every agency you can, it is everyone’s job to make crime prevention work. So in all the main theories of any situational crime prevention that everyone should follow are: environmental criminology, rational choice, and lastly routine activities.
Honestly if there was not any type of situational crime prevention theory for people to follow they would buy weapons just to protect themselves as well as their home or business from any type of crime. These irrational people would claim to solve their own business problems no matter what the situation is or was. Then the criminal would try to move the crime to another place to commit a crime, only because they either got caught the first time or had a bad feeling with the first one.
And the innocent will spend massive amounts of money just to make sure themselves and their loved ones and their personal property or business is protected no matter what it takes. The differences and similarities between a hypothesis and theory is that, the similarity of the two is they both deal with a situation that is uncertain, and relies on the investigative process to lead up to potential certainty to identify its objective, it also suggest a rational and more logical and mental model to help qualify, assess the study of the hypothesis or theory.
The difference of the two is that a hypothesis attempts to answer the question when a theory will often start off as a hypothesis in the first place. A variable is an observable characteristic that vary among different people. In layman terms variables may be chosen on the basis of a specious impression of what is actually important. It is obvious that the study of human nature, group or life, calls for a wide range of variables. However, there is an absence of rules, limitations and prohibitions to govern the choice of variable. There is a problem of lacking firmness in choosing a variable in your field.
This lack of firmness is due to neglect of the reduction of problems that should always properly precede the application of any techniques of variables that are used. It needs to require thorough and careful reflection on the situation to make sure that one has identified all its genuine parts. Another variable would be population. With a bigger population it will be harder to implement the crime prevention than it would be for a smaller community. I believe this because there is a wider variety of people in larger cities and usually in smaller population there is not a lot of diversity that would need to be changed.
Also in smaller communities it would be easier to implement because usually if there is a small population than it is a small town that is easier to identify the problem than in a wider range town. Take for instance where I live. I live in a small town where the crime is somewhat lower than what would be, let’s say New York City. That place is huge and vastly spread. The crime rate there would be no match for a small city like Apopka Florida. So with that being said, I would like to say it has been an honor and a pleasure working with you on this paper.
If you need any more assistance please fill free to write or call. Thank you again. Terrie Gill References: http://crimeprevention. rutgers. edu/topics/SCP%20theory/theory. htm Thomas G. and Jam D. (2006) reinventing grounded theory retrieved from the British educational journal 08/28/2011 Glaser& Strauss (1967) the electronic research method retrieved from the journal of applied behavioral science vol. 22 Eric W. Weinstein, Axiomatic System, From Math World–A Wolfram Web Resource. Mathworld. wolfram. com & Answers. com