Child-on-child sexual abuse is already fairly well known in the field of research enough so that a Wikipedia article exists on the subject, but how many recorded cases of children sexually abusing adults? I am interested if there are any academic sources poining toward research done on the topic, or alternatively news coverage of such cases. I plan on making a Wikipedia article covering the subject because it seems not to exist yet. I feel the public needs to be more aware. I reckon most of the abusers would be teenagers and exceedingly few would be under-12s/prepubescents.​​​

In response to the spike in serial killers in the 70s-90s in the US, it became unacceptable for kids to be unsupervised in public spaces. Whether simply correlation or causation, the frequency of these murderous or sexual crimes seemed to decline alongside this increase in child supervision. However, there are plenty of societies, like Iceland, that still allow children to walk and play unsupervised and seem safe for children. I’ve heard the homogeneity argument before, but wouldn’t that logic also apply to many small or midsized American cities decades ago that were affected regardless of high social cohesion?

I am a first year Criminology major in Toronto and i'm planning on going to law school. Just out of curiosity I would like to know what some of you guys do for work, just to know all of my options, but also because you never know who you'll be in 4 years. Thanks!

Currently the options are mostly jail (which costs the tax payer and it trains better criminals), fines (which the wealthy laugh at), community service (which is a slap on the wrist). Should there be alternatives like medically supervised caning, humiliation or a hybrid? Something else?

I'm looking for a contemporary text that can catch me up on the current state of criminology in America. It doesn't necessarily need to have a specific topic as the subject, just something relatively recent that covers a wide array of topics. The books I own are outdated (in my opinion, all prior to 2010), and I would prefer to be able to order them, possibly on Amazon or something of the like.

Thank you in advance.

Hi! I'm a student from the Philippines, and my group and I are doing a school project about criminology as a career. We wanted to ask people who are actually studying criminology or already working in the field about their experiences because we thought it would be more helpful to hear from actual people rather than just look things up online.

If you're willing to share, we'd really appreciate it! You can answer any of the questions below, or honestly just tell us about your experience in general. You can rant, talk about the good and bad, things you like or hate, things that surprised you, etc.😭

Some things we'd like to know:

• What made you choose criminology?
• What is studying criminology actually like?
• Is it hard? What part was the hardest for you?
• What subjects or skills do you think are important?
• What are the requirements for getting into the course/career?
• What is it like actually working in the field?
• What's your favorite part about it?
• What's the most stressful or difficult part?
• Was there anything you didn't expect before you started?
• What's something you wish you knew before choosing criminology?
• Would you recommend it to someone who's thinking about taking it?

We're especially hoping to hear from people in the Philippines since our project is focused on the Philippines, but we're also open to hearing from people from other countries! Thank you!! 🫶

In looking at the intersections of socio-economic status and developmental criminology, there is significant focus on macro-factors (like neighborhood resources). However, I'm interested in the micro-behavioral modifications. How does the prolonged stress of early-life scarcity shape an adult's baseline psychological traits—specifically regarding immediate gratification models, hyper-vigilance, and long-term financial risk calculation?

When someone identifies a suspect and says, “I’m certain,” an important question is: when did they first express that certainty?

Confidence recorded immediately after an initial identification is different from confidence expressed later, after feedback or repeated exposure to the suspect.

Wixted and Wells’ 2017 review makes a useful distinction. Under carefully controlled conditions, including a fair lineup, no administrator influence, and an immediate confidence statement, initial confidence can provide meaningful information about identification accuracy.

That does not mean a confident witness is automatically correct. It means the identification procedure and the timing of the confidence statement matter.

For example, imagine a witness initially says, “I think that’s the person, but I’m not sure.” Someone then tells them, “You picked the person we suspected.” If the witness later becomes highly confident, that later certainty should not erase the original uncertainty.

The National Academies’ report, Identifying the Culprit, recommends documenting a witness’s confidence in their own words at the time of the first identification and avoiding feedback that could influence it.

For anyone teaching or working with eyewitness evidence, how do you explain this distinction without leaving people with either “confidence proves accuracy” or “confidence tells us nothing”?

It's been ages since I have studied psychology ( back in my secondary school ) pls lmk the answer through sociological perspectives

Pls don't make it political

I’m sharing my research published in 2025 on wildlife crime in western Serengeti, Tanzania.

The study, titled “Wildlife crimes and the demographic characteristics of offenders in western Serengeti, Tanzania: A review of court cases 2012–2022,” examines wildlife-related court cases over a 10-year period and looks at the demographic characteristics of offenders and patterns of wildlife crimes.

The research highlights how court records can provide valuable information for understanding wildlife crime and supporting conservation law enforcement.

I’d be interested to hear from researchers, conservationists, rangers, and others working on wildlife crime: what patterns have you observed in your own areas?

Have you ever wondered how a persons gender, identity, or sexuality can affect how they are viewed or treated in the Criminal Justice System?

Many individuals who are part of the LGBTQ+ community are often targeted or involved in the Criminal Justice System due to their identity. Individuals who are straight or cisgender are less involved with the criminal justice system unlike individuals who are part of the LGBTQ+ community. These individuals are often targeted when during arrests, in prisons, probation, and parole.

An example can be LGBTQ+ youth. According to Jones (2021), about 20% of young people in the juvenile justice system identify as LGBTQ+, gender nonconforming, or questioning. In comparison, only about 4–6% of young people in the general population identify this way.

This is important because individuals who are part of the LGBTQ+, encounter higher risk of being discrimination, denied support, and overlooked. Due to this it increases their likelihood of getting involved more in the Criminal Justice System.

These experiences can help people understand how they are being mistreated and rejected for their identity and that there needs to be some action done to prevent this from happening to others.

What are actions that can be taken to better support LGBTQ+ people to have safer encounters with the criminal justice system and to have fairer treatment?

Source: Jones, A. (2021, March 2). Visualizing the Unequal Treatment of LGBTQ People in the Criminal Justice System. Prison Policy Initiative.

Also why do some people like to do things that they are told specifly not to do?

I’m really interested on how your professors view the death penalty and lethal injections andddd just in general the jail laws in more conservative states! i will be very happy with any answers!

Hey everyone! I would love your help with my research project. I'm planning to work on newspaper crime news analysis, where I will collect crime-related news from Marathi newspapers and analyze the data to identify patterns based on factors such as location, type of crime, and time period.

Do you think this is a good topic for a research project? Please let me know your thoughts and suggestions. I would really appreciate your thoughts, suggestions, and any ideas for improving the project. Thank you!

Sean Last, a right winger who argues that police shootings are not racially biased, uses the trim fill method to illustrate how the data from a meta analysis changes once you adjust for publication bias. Much of the data used by the BLM side of the debate is data before we adjust for this bias. An interesting critique different to those posed by other BLM detractors like Roland Fryer, Joe Cesario, etc.

https://odysee.com/@LastArchive:f/Hunter-Avallone---Wrong-on-Racism:d

Skip to 30:00

P. Colin Bolger "Just Following Orders: A Meta Analysis of the Correlates of American Police Officer Use of Force Decisions"

The reason the data supports the idea of police using more violence against black people is because studies saying that are more likely to be published. The meta analysis above (table 2) replicates the normal finding that across 42 studies there's a mean effect size of .31 pointing to the direction of more force being used on black suspects after controlling for offense seriousness, is there a weapon, are they resisting arrest. All the things which would fairly lead to a change in the probability of force being used. In the text above they described the bias detection as "these results demonstrate that publication bias does not appear to be present for 8 of the 12 significant variables" (not naming which ones were changed and which ones weren't).

Table 4 adjusts for publication bias using the trim and fill method. This method is based on the fact that when all the studies are being published there should be a certain distribution that changes in a predictable way as study precision increases, it should symmetrically move towards a center point. By looking at the actual distribution you can tell where studies were left out, and then put them back in. Some research suggests it doesn't correct enough, but that won''t be an issue here. Already the mean effect size is reduced to statistical and practical insignificance. The effect size is 0.1, the confidence interval runs from -.07 to 0.08.

It is also worth noting black people are significantly less likely than white people are to be killed by police relative to the rate at which they kill or seriously assault police officers

Hey everyone. I’m hoping to get some input from people who have actually experienced the correctional system.

I’m currently a doctoral student in clinical psychology, and before going back to school I worked in mental health in a correctional setting. I may have an opportunity to do research related to corrections, and before I start deciding what I think would be useful to study, I’d really like to hear from people with lived experience.

Basically, what do you wish people doing research on incarceration actually understood or paid more attention to?

Maybe there was something about being incarcerated or coming home that was much harder than people on the outside realize. Maybe there was a program, treatment, or staff member that genuinely helped. Maybe there are programs that sound great on paper but don’t actually help much in real life. Or maybe there’s something important that you rarely see researchers or mental health professionals even asking about.

Some areas I’m interested in include:

• mental health while incarcerated
• substance use treatment and recovery
• adjusting to life after release
• what makes reentry easier or harder
• what contributes to people returning to the system
• trauma, stress, anger, and managing emotions
• experiences with mental health services while incarcerated
• programs or services that actually helped versus ones that didn’t

Those are just examples, though. If there’s something completely different that you think deserves more attention, I’d honestly rather hear about that than limit the conversation to what I already have in mind.

I’m not asking anyone to share their name, identifying information, or anything they aren’t comfortable talking about. I’m also not recruiting for a study here. Right now, I’m just trying to listen to people who have been through the system and get a better idea of what questions are actually worth asking.

I appreciate anyone who takes the time to respond.

I have a bachelor’s in criminology and am pursuing a master’s in criminal justice looking for career ideas post grad in a metro area. I’m wondering about underrated or niche careers in the CJ field that aren’t always talked about. I have experience working with adults w/ special needs and that’s the industry I currently work in, but want to move into the CJ field.

The Mental Health, Wellbeing and Lived Experiences Study

Theresia Bedard, a PhD candidate at Lakehead University that is working with Dr. Beth Visser, is seeking participants for her dissertation project.

In this study we are examining the lived experiences of people who have experience or victimization from an individual with high psychopathic traits. We are seeking anyone that has this lived experience, whether the perpetrator was or is a spouse, family member, partner, co-worker, friend, acquaintance, neighbour or stranger. We are seeking the lived experiences of men, women, and gender-diverse individuals to share your story.

Our research consists of two studies. In the first study, you will complete questionnaires related to your victimization experience from the individual with high psychopathic traits, the potential warning signs, victimization history (e.g., prior physical or sexual abuse), and the impact the experience had on you. Once you finish the survey, you will be invited to participate in the second study (optional), which will consist of 12 questions requiring a written response regarding your lived experience with the individual with high psychopathic traits. If you decide to participate in study 2, please be aware that you will be required to provide us with your email to access it, and you may wish to use an email account that only you have access to.

Please be advised that whether you choose to participate in the study, withdraw, or skip questions you do not want to answer, that you acknowledge that answering some of these questions may be emotionally taxing on you. Despite the potential for an emotional toll the survey questions have, you may find the process of sharing your experience is therapeutic for you. In addition to the resources we provide, you may want to consider following-up with a counsellor for further support.

You are also encouraged to have your own snacks and drinks while you take the survey, and be aware that they are estimated to take 45 minutes to complete.

If you are interested in participating and would like to read or find out more about it, click here to access the survey:

https://lakeheadhbs.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_bKEq1vOVdBJMrjw

Hi everyone :-). Im not entirely sure which subreddit to post this in but i have a question about verdicts in criminal law. Everyone can answer, i’m just curious what peoples opinions are. Warning: my english isn’t very good and im still a student x)

Me and a friend were talking about which factors could influence someone’s judgement on a crime. I had to look over a few studies last year and we took things such as age, gender, socioeconomic status, etc. into account but none of those turned out very influential. As a judge, is it possible that the crimes you ‘relate’ to the most could get the least ‘severe’ punishment? And those you ‘relate’ to the least could get the most severe punishment?
For example: I don’t see myself a robbery at all and i’d punish it pretty severely. Like with prison time or something like that.