Focused Deterrence Strategies and Crime Control: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of the Empirical Evidence
Abstract
Research Summary Focused deterrence strategies are increasingly being applied to prevent and control gang and group‐involved violence, overt drug markets, and individual repeat offenders. Our updated examination of the effects of focused deterrence strategies on crime followed the systematic review protocols and conventions of the Campbell Collaboration. Twenty‐four quasi‐experimental evaluations were identified in this systematic review. The results of our meta‐analysis demonstrate that focused deterrence strategies are associated with an overall statistically significant, moderate crime reduction effect. Nevertheless, program effect sizes varied by program type and were smaller for evaluations with more rigorous research designs. Policy Implications The available empirical evidence suggests these strategies generate noteworthy crime reduction impacts and should be part of a broader portfolio of crime reduction strategies available to policy makers and practitioners. Investments still need to be made, however, to strengthen the overall rigor of program evaluations and improve our understanding of key program activities associated with observed crime reduction impacts.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
A systematic review of focused deterrence strategies found that reductions in firearm activity ranged from 17% to 44% and typically declined over time, with the longest evaluation period being 5 years.
“A systematic review of focused deterrence strategies found that reductions in firearm activity ranged from 17% to 44% and typically declined over time, with the longest evaluation period being 5 years.48”
From The Peacemaker Fellowship and Urban Gun Violence in Richmond, California (2026) · cites this paper as [48]
Cites
Tyler, T. R. (2006) · doi:10.1515/9781400828609 · Cited by 5,156 · see citing works
A Nonparametric “Trim and Fill” Method of Accounting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.2000.10473905 · Cited by 2,955 · see citing works
Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.
Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference (1999) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.54.8.594 · Cited by 2,791 · see citing works
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.48.12.1181 · Cited by 2,033 · see citing works
P-curve: A key to the file-drawer.
Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2014) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/a0033242 · Cited by 1,500 · see citing works
Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research
Morgan, S. L., & Winship, C. (2007) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804564 · Cited by 1,146 · see citing works
BRAGA, A. A., KENNEDY, D. M., WARING, E. J., & PIEHL, A. M. (2001) · Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency · doi:10.1177/0022427801038003001 · Cited by 589 · see citing works
Self-citationProcedural Justice and Legal Compliance
Nagin, D. S., & Telep, C. W. (2017) · Annual Review of Law and Social Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113310 · Cited by 409 · see citing works
Crime Prevention and the Displacement Phenomenon
Reppetto, T. A. (1976) · Crime & Delinquency · doi:10.1177/001112877602200204 · Cited by 374 · see citing works
The Effects of “Pulling Levers” Focused Deterrence Strategies on Crime
Braga, A. A., & Weisburd, D. L. (2012) · Campbell Systematic Reviews: Better Evidence for a Better World · doi:10.4073/csr.2012.6 · Cited by 204 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Effects of Problem-Oriented Policing on Crime and Disorder <sup/>
Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., Hinkle, J. C., & Eck, J. E. (2008) · Campbell Systematic Reviews: Better Evidence for a Better World · doi:10.4073/csr.2008.14 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Self-citationWilson, D. B. (2009) · Journal of Experimental Criminology · doi:10.1007/s11292-009-9085-5 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Welsh, B. C., Peel, M. E., Farrington, D. P., Elffers, H., & Braga, A. A. (2011) · Journal of Experimental Criminology · doi:10.1007/s11292-010-9117-1 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An Integrated Public Health Approach to Interpersonal Violence and Suicide Prevention and Response
Decker, M. R., Wilcox, H. C., Holliday, C. N., & Webster, D. W. (2018) · Public Health Reports® · doi:10.1177/0033354918800019 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
The Peacemaker Fellowship and Urban Gun Violence in Richmond, California
Bruno, A., Darling-Hammond, S., Cabrera, J. R., Mujahid, M. S., & Corburn, J. (2026) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.31298 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Braga, A. A., Weisburd, D., & Turchan, B.
- Affiliations
- Northeastern University (US)
- George Mason University (US)
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
- Corresponding author
- Braga, Anthony A.
- Venue
- Criminology & Public Policy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-01-31
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 205-250
- ISSN
- 1538-6473 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-9133
- OpenAlex
- W2792351957
- Cited by
- 261
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 11
- FWCI
- 66.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Criminology & Public Policy (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Keywords
- focused deterrence, crime control, gang violence, drug market, repeat offenders, crime reduction, criminal justice policy
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
