TY - JOUR
T1 - Using meta-analysis under conditions of definitional ambiguity
T2 - the case of corporate crime
AU - Rorie, M.
AU - Alper, M.
AU - Schell-Busey, N.
AU - Simpson, S. S.
N1 - Funding Information:
Many researchers and students, in various capacities, have assisted with this review. We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Patricia Joseph, Rachael Powers, Kerry Richmond, Megan Bears Augustyn, Katheryn Decelles, Cliff Akiyama, Alex Bob, and Nathan Bernstein. We also appreciate the support of the University of Maryland and the University of Pennsylvania. Finally, we benefitted from the input of anonymous reviewers, whose suggestions greatly improved the article.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2018/1/2
Y1 - 2018/1/2
N2 - Given the reliance on meta-analyses to produce criminal justice policy recommendations, it is important to think critically about how this method is being applied in practice. In this study, we use data from a meta-analysis of corporate crime deterrence to demonstrate that applying meta-analytic methods to conceptually ambiguous research domains is problematic. Although meta-analysis is capable of modeling methodological variations in different research projects examining the same construct, analysts should not assume that meta-analytic methods are always appropriate; methodological differences may reflect underlying conceptual dissimilarities–this violates an assumption of meta-analysis. We also offer a critique of the corporate crime field for failing to clearly define its outcome, a critique that can be extended to other areas of criminological study.
AB - Given the reliance on meta-analyses to produce criminal justice policy recommendations, it is important to think critically about how this method is being applied in practice. In this study, we use data from a meta-analysis of corporate crime deterrence to demonstrate that applying meta-analytic methods to conceptually ambiguous research domains is problematic. Although meta-analysis is capable of modeling methodological variations in different research projects examining the same construct, analysts should not assume that meta-analytic methods are always appropriate; methodological differences may reflect underlying conceptual dissimilarities–this violates an assumption of meta-analysis. We also offer a critique of the corporate crime field for failing to clearly define its outcome, a critique that can be extended to other areas of criminological study.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041227614&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041227614&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/1478601X.2017.1412960
DO - 10.1080/1478601X.2017.1412960
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85041227614
VL - 31
SP - 38
EP - 61
JO - Criminal Justice Studies
JF - Criminal Justice Studies
SN - 1478-601X
IS - 1
ER -