Read the following transcript in which dr. james chip coldren disc

1. Read the following transcript in which Dr. James Chip Coldren
discusses the need for methodological rigor in studies of
policing, highlighting "Smart Policing."
Summary: Dr. James Chip Coldren discusses the need for
methodological rigor in studies of policing, highlighting "Smart
Policing."
·
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, PHD: Hi. My name is Dr. James
Chip Coldren. [Dr. James Chip Coldren, PhD, Managing
Director for Justice Programs, Center for Naval Analyses
(CNA)] I'm the managing director of Justice programs at the
CNA Institute for Public Research. For today's case study, we're
going to look at research in policing, and look at several
different ways that are being attempted to advance the science
of police research. So I'll talk a little bit about the state of the
art in police research.
· 00:38
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: I'll provide some
recent examples of attempts to improve the quality of research
in policing. Then, we'll spend just a little bit of time talking
about the ongoing needs and challenges in policing
research. [The Maryland Scientific Scale] Now, before we start
to talk about the state-of-the-art in policing research, we need
to talk about the Maryland Scientific Scale. This is a scale that
was developed by Larry Sherman, [Larry Sherman] and his
colleagues at University of Pennsylvania in the late 1990s to
assess
· 01:11
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: the methodological
rigor [methodological rigor] of research designs. The scale goes
from one to five, with a score of one indicating a low rigor
descriptive study, and a score of five indicating the most

2. rigorous study that you can attempt, which is a randomized
controlled experiment. [randomized controlled
experiment] Typically, in the world of criminal justice and
social science research, a score of a three or higher on the
Maryland Scientific Scale
· 01:40
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: will indicate a
rigorous methodology with a comparative design. So for
example, if your study scores at level three, that means that
your study involves a comparison between two or more
comparable units of analysis, such as groups of individuals or
police beats or neighborhoods; one group experiencing the
program or intervention, and another group not experiencing. So
it's a comparative design. A score of level four includes a
comparison between multiple units within and without the
program or intervention, controlling for other factors
· 02:17
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: or using
comparison units that evidence only minor differences. And a
level five, as I indicated before, is a randomized controlled
experiment, where you have treatment and control units that are
and are not receiving the program or intervention. Now, let me
go back to level four for a second. Typically, when a study
scores for on the Maryland Scientific Scale, that means that
there's a comparative design with matched units. They're not
randomly assigned, but let's say, for example,
· 02:47
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: that you pick a
number of neighborhoods to implement a new policing
program. To introduce the comparison, you would find another
set of neighborhoods that are very similar and characteristics to
the neighborhoods that you assigned the treatment or the
intervention to. So that's typically called a match design, or a
quasi-experimental design. [Need for Methodological
Rigor] Several years ago, the perception
· 03:19

3. DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: developed that
there was a need for more methodological rigor in policing
studies. This is partly the result of research that was
conducted by David Weisburd and his colleagues [David
Weisburd, et al.] at George Mason University, which was
published in 2010. David Weisburd and his colleagues examined
over 5,000 research reports on the effectiveness of problem-
oriented policing. These were reports that were published in
journals, or they were reports that were issued by government
agencies. But that they identified over 5,000 reports. And they
examined each of those reports
· 03:53
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: for the type of
research methodology and the level of rigor in the research
methodology. What they found is that of those over 5,000
reports, there were only 11 studies with a methodological
rigor of a level three or higher on the Maryland Scientific
Scale. So only a very small percentage of those 5,000
studies actually had a comparative design that allowed you to
assess the impact on the problem that was being worked on with
a comparative design to a neighborhood or a police beat that
· 04:31
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: was comparable to
the place that got the intervention in the first place. So as a
result of this and some of the work that had been done, there
was clearly a perceived need to shore up the research
methodology in research on police effectiveness. [Recent
Advancements] OK. So let's talk about some recent
advancements that have made and some recent attempts at
improving the rigor of research in policing.
· 05:01
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: I'm going to talk
about the Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews of
policing research. I'm going to talk about the Center for
Evidence-Based Crime Policy at George Mason University. I'll
talk a little bit about the National Institute of Justice

4. crimesolutions.gov initiative, and I'll talk about the Bureau of
Justice Assistance Smart Policing Initiative. These are all recent
attempts in the last five to seven years to improve the
methodological rigor of research and policing. [Campbell
Collaboration] The Campbell Collaboration is an international
research network that produces systematic reviews of the effects
· 05:43
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: of social
interventions in crime and justice, education, international
development, and social welfare. So typically, what the
Campbell Collaboration will do is identify a topic something
around policing, and identify as many research reports and
studies as possible to include in their review, look at the
methodological rigor of those studies, and then come up with a
meta-analysis, or an overall assessment of the effectiveness of
that particular approach to policing.
· 06:12
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: Since 2007, the
Campbell Collaboration has conducted 10 reviews of law
enforcement and policing. And several are underway right
now. In 2013, they published a systematic review of
research that has been conducted on police legitimacy. For this
review, they identified over 900 studies on police legitimacy in
the United States, 30 of which had sufficient methodological
rigor to include in their analysis. So here we are again,
identifying a great number of studies of a police topic-- in this
case, police
· 06:48
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: legitimacy-- with
only 30 out of 900 having strong methodological designs. And
in those 30, none of those reached the level five, which is the
experimental design. In 2012, they published a report on a
systematic review of "Hot Spots" policing. ["Hot Spots"
Policing (2012)] This is a very popular approach to policing
these days. It's called place-based policing. Policing that
identifies the small geographic areas that account for a high

5. percentage of criminal activity.
· 07:18
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: And so police
agencies and communities focus their resources on those hot
spots. So they identified actually 19 rigorous studies of hot
spots policing, 10 of which involved randomized
experiments. So here, we have an example where there's more
randomized experiments than we normally find in policing
research. Also in 2012, they published a systematic review of
studies on focused deterrence. [focused deterrence (2012)]
· 07:46
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: Focused deterrence
is an approach that looks at people, rather than
places. Typically, in a focused deterrence approach, you will
identify a number of individuals who are what you would think
of as prolific offenders. The small group of people that are
committing the most violence or the most trouble in certain
neighborhoods or communities. And you focus your efforts on
those people, not necessarily on hot spots or places. And those
efforts typically involve two things: a strong message delivered
by law enforcement and community representatives that explain
to the individuals identified that they are known chronic and
prolific offenders, that the police and probation and corrections
· 08:29
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: and the prosecutors
now have them on a list and are watching them carefully. If they
continue to persist in violent criminal activity, they'll feel the
full force of the law, maybe federal law, and maybe federal
imprisonment. But at the same time, they offer this group of
offenders legitimate opportunities to engage in training and
services and to pursue pro-social legitimate lifestyles. So the
focus is on the offenders, the deterrence is the community
message that's given to them to explain to them why they're
being watched,
· 09:02
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: what will happen if

6. they're caught, and what opportunities they have to change their
behavior. It's a very popular approach in criminal justice these
days. The Campbell Collaboration found 10 rigorous studies of
focused deterrence, but no experiments. So they ended up
determining that focused deterrence was a promising approach
to reducing crime, because in almost each of those 10
studies, they found a reduction in crime and a reduction
· 09:32
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: in criminal
behavior as a result of the focused deterrence strategy. But
since none of those was a level five, a randomized controlled
experiment, they wouldn't go to the level to say that it was a
proven practice. They called it a promising practice. So these
are examples of what the Campbell Collaboration does to
review and assess the methodological rigor of
police research. [Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy] The
Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy at George Mason
· 10:04
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: University conducts
reviews of policing studies along three dimensions. What's the
extent of the proactivity of the policing intervention being
applied versus being reactive, what type of focus does a study
have. Does it have a focus for example, on certain individuals
or certain communities? Or is there a broader focus across
entire neighborhoods or police jurisdictions. And what exactly
is the scope or target of the intervention? Are they trying to
change the behavior of individuals?
· 10:34
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: Are they focusing
on groups or neighborhoods? Or again, police beats or
something like that. So they look at these three dimensions of
police intervention and police approaches. And they look at the
research findings. And they're coming up with some
findings regarding what types of combinations of these
dimensions seem to produce the most effect in terms of positive
benefits. So what they have found generally across a number of

7. studies that they've looked at, is that when police interventions
are highly focused and highly proactive,
· 11:12
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: either on groups,
microplaces or neighborhoods-- not necessarily on individuals--
they tend to have more success. They also found mixed results
when there is a reactive focus on individuals. Sometimes, the
reactive focus on individuals produces a positive effect and a
reduction in crime. Sometimes, it doesn't produce any
effect. And sometimes actually, in a few cases they identified, it
does more harm than good. The individuals that are focused on
in this reactive manner
· 11:43
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: end up committing
more criminal behavior, rather than less compared to a
comparison group of individuals. So this graphic that I'm going
to show you will give you a depiction of how these studies are
reviewed. On the upper left hand side of this matrix, you'll see a
grouping of figures. Each of these figures represents one study
that was reviewed. If it's a dark black circle, that means the
study found a positive effect. If it's a white circle, it means
there was no effect. And if it's a red triangle, it means that there
was a negative effect,
· 12:18
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: that the
intervention applied produced more crime rather than less
crime. And since this cluster of studies is in the upper left hand
corner of this matrix, it means that the interventions were
focused, they were not general, and that they were focused on
individuals, not on groups or neighborhoods or jurisdictions, or
even at the state level. Now, if you look to the right of this
matrix a little bit, you'll see several columns of clusters of these
figures towards the back of the matrix and towards the top. So
since they're towards the top,
· 12:49
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: that means these are

8. studies that were highly focused on groups. And since they're
towards the back of the matrix, it means that they were more
proactive than reactive. And what you see here is a
preponderance of black circles, which indicates that most of the
studies indicated that these policing interventions had a positive
effect. They produced reductions in crime and reductions in fear
of crime, or positive social benefits. So what the Center for
Evidence-Based Crime Policy it's telling us is that if you have a
police intervention that's highly proactive, that's more focused
than general, and that works with groups or microplaces or
neighborhoods,
· 13:33
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: you're much more
likely to have a positive effect than otherwise. This is very
important and very good news. And it's leading the policing
field in to certain types of interventions that we might not have
otherwise focused on. And again, in order to be included in this
matrix, you have to have a study that's got a methodological
rigor on the scientific scale of a three or above, or your study
will not be included. So the existence of the matrix and the
work
· 14:02
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: of the Center for
Evidence-Based Crime Policy is promoting rigor and policing
science. [Crime
Solution
s] This is a US Department of Justice sponsored
program through the National Institute of Justice that again,
reviews programs and practices, looks at methodological
rigor, looks at findings. And based on certain rigid standards,

9. upon review, a program or a practice might be placed
· 14:37
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: on the
crimesolutions.gov website as a proven or a promising
practice. So there are two types of review that the
crimesolutions.gov initiative engages in. There's what's called a
program review, which is a review of an individual
program. For example, the Shawnee, Kansas police
department implemented a program called data-driven
approaches to crime and traffic safety. That's one instance of
one program that was evaluated by crimesolutions.gov.
· 15:04
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: There's also what's
called a practice review, which is a review of a group of similar
programs. So if there were a number of jurisdictions that had
tried the DDACTS approach, the data-driven approach, then
crimesolutions.gov would have gone through a practice review,
rather than a program review. They're actually very similar, but
one looks at individual programs, the other looks at groups of
programs as a practice review. Like the other initiatives I
mentioned, in order to be included in a review by
crimesolutions.gov,
· 15:36
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: you have to have a
rigorously designed study that's at a level III or above on a

10. scientific scale. There have to be crime-related outcomes
measured as part of the study. The report has to be published in
a peer-reviewed journal or in a government report of some
type. And it must have been done after the year 1980. So as of
July 2016, the crimesolutions.gov program
· 16:03
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: had reviewed 72
law enforcement programs. 17 of those 72 were found to be
effective, or 24%. If a program is found to be effective in
crimesolutions.gov, it means that there is very strong evidence
to indicate that they achieved their intended outcomes
when implemented with fidelity. And by strong evidence, they
mean a randomized controlled design, or quasi-experimental
design which is a level IV or a level V on that scientific
scale. 46 of the programs were found to be promising, which is
64%. When they say promising, they mean
· 16:36
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: there is some
evidence to indicate that the programs achieved their intended
outcomes. But it's not supported by the most rigorous
research. So what crimesolutions.gov is saying is that this looks
promising, but we're not ready to say it's a proven
practice. Interestingly, 9 of the 72 programs were found to have
no effect, or 12%. This means that there is strong evidence
indicating that they had no effects or had harmful effects when

11. implemented with fidelity. [Smart Policing Initiative] Smart
policing was established by the Bureau of Justice Assistance in
2009. [Bureau of Justice Assistance] Under this initiative, the
federal government gives grants to police agencies to develop
and test
· 17:21
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: innovative and
cost-efficient approaches to crime control and prevention. Two
key factors influence the development of smart policing. The
first was the economic downturn in 2008. During this time, the
cost of policing were rising dramatically and local government
budgets were shrinking. So the police had to find a way to do
more with less, and the federal government was interested in
finding ways to help them through the testing of new innovative
strategies through research. The other influence on smart
policing
· 17:54
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: goes back to what I
mentioned about the work of David Weisburd and his colleagues
before. The Bureau of Justice Assistance knew that policing
research was not being conducted with strong methodological
rigor. So they included in the smart policing initiative a
mandate that the police agencies receiving federal funding for
their innovative practices, test them through research
partnerships and strong methodological designs.

12. · 18:20
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: Since 2009, the
federal government has provided funding to over 45 police
agencies. [Examples] So the Los Angeles Police
Department instituted a program called LASAR, which stands
for the Los Angeles Strategic Extraction and Restoration
Program. Los Angeles used pretty advanced analytics and the
decentralization of field intelligence analysts, meaning they
took intelligence analysts out of headquarters and put them in
the local district offices
· 18:53
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: to work directly
with detectives and police officers working on violent crime
problems. And they used a problem-oriented policing
approach. And using a quasi-experimental research design, they
found statistically significant reductions in homicide and
violent crime. And these have been sustained over some
time. Since the introduction of smart policing in Los
Angeles, they have expanded it to five additional
police districts from the original one that it was tested out
in. And recently, Charlie Beck, the chief of police in Los
Angeles,
· 19:25
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: publicly announced
that he's going department-wide with smart policing and the

13. LASAR program. Shawnee, Kansas, as I mentioned
earlier, implemented a test of the data-driven approaches to
crime and traffic safety. This is a unique approach to crime
analysis, where you identify places where crime and traffic
safety problems co-exist. And through a focused presence of
police, traffic police, and other police, pretty much the police
presence
· 19:58
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: and the focus on
these particular problems drives crime and traffic safety
problems down. So they implemented DDACTS in a test
jurisdiction. They compared it to a comparison jurisdiction. So
this is again, a quasi-experimental design as a result of the
implementation of DDACTS in Shawnee, Kansas. They saw
over 80% reductions in targeted street crimes, and a 24%
reduction in crashes.
· 20:26
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: In Kansas City,
Missouri, they institute a focused deterrence approach called the
no violence alliance, or NOVA. This was the identification of
over 120 chronic gang members who were involved in
homicides and violent crime over several years, and addressing
them with that focused deterrence approach. The strong
surveillance, the strong message from law enforcement that
their behavior will no longer be tolerated. And if they continue

14. their criminal behavior, they'll be subject to the full extent of
the law. And if they want to, they can take
· 20:57
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: advantage of pro-
social and social treatment opportunities to change their
lifestyle. Kansas City NOVA was evaluated with a quasi-
experimental design, and an interesting application of social
network analysis to the study of gangs. Social network analysis
is actually a mathematical procedure through which you can
identify groups and individuals in groups, measure the strength
of their associations, the frequency of their contacts, and
identify who the central people are in these groups and these
networks, so you can focus your efforts on those individuals
who
· 21:32
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: are the most
influential and those groups and those networks. Kansas City
NOVA also experienced statistically significant reductions in
violent crime as a result of their focused deterrence
approach. Boston, Massachusetts undertook a very
interesting detailed analysis of violent crime in micro-hot spots
in Boston. A micro-hot spot is basically a street segment or a
street intersection. It's a very small geographical space. And
through their analysis, they identified a small percentage of
micro-hot spots in Boston that we're accounting for 40% to 50%

15. of the violent crime in that city,
· 22:13
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: and had
consistently accounted for that level of crime in those small
spots for well over 25 or 30 years. So the violence problem in
Boston was entrenched in a number of very small places that
were accounting for a great percentage of violent crime in the
city. They identified those spots, they developed "Safe Street
Teams" that were enforcement-oriented but with community and
problem-oriented policing approaches. They worked those
areas. And again, through a quasi-experimental research design
where they matched hot spots that did not
· 22:46
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: get this Safe Street
Team's intervention to the ones that did. And they found strong
statistical reductions in violent street crimes. Interestingly in
the case of Boston, they didn't see reductions in homicide. So
this is a good example of what happens in smart policing. The
police executives and the police analysts and the researchers
follow the data. They were pleased with the reduction in violent
street crimes, but they were not pleased with the lack of
reduction in homicides. So since then, the Boston Police
Department has undertaken a thorough re-examination and
reorganization of its homicide unit,
· 23:25

16. DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: and is currently
working on increasing the clearances of homicide cases. The
results are not out from that research yet, but all indications are
pointing to again, very positive results from this. [Challenges to
Rigorous Research in Policing] So I'm going to step back a bit
now and just talk a little bit about challenges to this need for
rigorous research and policing. We've seen several examples
and several initiatives that have worked very hard to increase
· 23:57
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: the level of
methodological rigor in policing science and policing
research. The truth is, this is a very challenging endeavor for
several reasons. It is difficult to integrate rigorous research--
research in which the scientist is primarily in control of the
study-- into real life policing in the field, in police
organizations and communities. The conduct of rigorous
research like randomized experiments or quasi-experimental
designs actually
· 24:30
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: requires that the
police somehow adjust their operations to meet the needs of the
researcher. That's difficult to do in real life. As you can
imagine, there are ethical concerns about subjecting individuals
and communities to randomized conditions. This happens in
several ways. Some people, when a police department starts to

17. focus on certain individuals and certain communities, even if
the data show that those communities and those individuals are
accounting for the greatest percentage of crime, it feels like
unfair targeting.
· 25:01
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: It feels like a
biased approach to policing, and people get concerned about
that. On the other hand, people also get concerned when they
see some communities receiving the benefits of these new
interventions, and other communities not receiving them. And
so they get concerned about the fact that some people are
getting new police resources and some are not. So these
concerns happen on both sides of the coin. Some are concerned
about the way policing is being done, some are concerned that
the police are not spreading their resources evenly across the
community. These concerns come up even though people
generally
· 25:37
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: understand that
randomized experiments are the best way to find out what
works. Even with that understanding, there are these ethical
concerns. In my experience, I think it's also true that research
capacities are not evenly distributed across communities and
across police departments. So for the Bostons and the Chicagos,
and the New Yorks, and the Miamis and the Los Angeles' of our

18. country, it's not hard to find a local university with a strong
cadre of very experienced sociologists and criminologists who
are
· 26:10
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: interested and
capable of doing the type of research that needs to be done. And
that have sufficient analytical information systems and data
capacities within their own departments. When you get down to
mid-size and small-size agencies which account for more than
60% or 70% of the police departments in this country, their data
analytics and their information systems and their access to
researchers who are experienced in doing this kind of work is
not always what it needs to be.
· 26:39
DR. JAMES CHIP COLDREN, [continued]: Even though we
want to increase these capacities, we want more rigorous
research. There are challenges to doing this across the board in
small and medium-sized communities. And it's also true …
Fashion Merchandising and Design
FMD 456 Historic Perspectives of Dress
MUSEUM REPORT

19. Visit an online museum whose collection includes paintings or
sculpture that show clear examples
of historic costume and dress from one of the following museum
websites.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art
The Getty
The Louvre
The Prado
REQUIREMENTS:
1. Artifacts or exhibition must be representative of historic
fashion of the Western world (that
is, European or American) from before 2000.
2. Minimum length: four full double-spaced pages, with one
inch margins and 12-point font.
3. The body of the report should discuss the garments,
accessories, hairstyles—all pertinent details
represented in the artifact(s).
5. Analyze three different pieces thoroughly. In the case of

20. works of art, list the title of the work,
the artist and the year. You may select items from a single time
period or several different periods.
6. Use and explain appropriate costume terminology.
7. Discuss why this piece is indicative of its time period. You
may want to consider the social,
political, economic, geographic and religious forces at play.
Compare the museum's examples
with your source materials and cite those sources using
approved APA citation style.
8. Provide an APA bibliography at the end of the paper and
APA references in the text. For
reference styles try the Owl Website.
9. Remember, this is a research paper. Effective use of outside
sources is required. Neither your
class lecture notes nor term handouts are acceptable as sources;

21. however, you may use one edition
of the course text. Should you choose to do so, a minimum of
five additional costume-related
sources is required. (To clarify: The use of the course text is not
required; however, should you
choose to use it, your bibliography must total six sources.)
7. Assignments must be submitted via the Drop Box on
BeachBoard by the due date at 11:59 PM.
Late papers are not accepted.
https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa
_formatting_and_style_guide/general_format.html
https://www.museodelprado.es/en
https://www.louvre.fr/en
https://www.getty.edu/museum/
https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works/