CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 47Crime Patterns and InterventionsPolicing Practices and PerceptionsCriminal Justice and Penology

Risk‐Focused Policing at Places: An Experimental Evaluation

Weisburd, David, Morris, Nancy A., Ready, Justin·2008·Justice Quarterly
DOI 10.1080/07418820801954647
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Drawing upon literature from developmental criminology and place‐based policing, the Redlands, California Police Department developed the Risk‐Focused Policing at Places (RFPP) approach to preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency. The RFPP program is a community‐oriented policing and problem‐solving strategy that targets risk and protective factors related to delinquency and problem behaviors of youths living in census block group areas. We used a matched block randomized experimental design to evaluate the effects of the program on youths living in 26 census block groups in Redlands. We find that the RFPP program did not influence self‐reported delinquency, or perceptions of risk and protective factors and police legitimacy. We argue that the primary explanation for the absence of a program effect centers on the unit of analysis used for the program. The census block group is too large a geographic unit of analysis to achieve the kind of targeted and focused interventions that lead to positive crime‐prevention outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07418820801954647

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Weisburd et al. study was the only study for which any data were imputed to calculate the effect size.

    “The Weisburd et al. study was also the only study for which we imputed any data to calculate the effect size (see Appendix 2).”

    From Legitimacy in Policing: A Systematic Review (2013) · cites this paper as Weisburd et al., 2008

  • Only one peer-reviewed study was included in the reoffending outcome (Weisburd et al., 2008).

    “Only one peer reviewed study was included in this outcome (Weisburd et al., 2008).”

    From Legitimacy in Policing: A Systematic Review (2013) · cites this paper as Weisburd et al., 2008

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 75 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Weisburd, D., Morris, N. A., & Ready, J.
Affiliations
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
  • Southern Illinois University Carbondale (US)
Corresponding author
Weisburd, David
ORCID
Venue
Justice Quarterly
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2008-03
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
163-200
ISSN
  • 0741-8825 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-9109
DOI
10.1080/07418820801954647
OpenAlex
W1967219816
Cited by
47
References
75
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
FWCI
12.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Justice Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
Keywords
juvenile delinquency prevention, place-based policing, community policing, problem-solving policing, risk and protective factors, census block groups, unit of analysis, police legitimacy, developmental criminology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review