Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Crime & Delinquency
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Graebsch, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Legal Issues of Randomized Experiments on Sanctioning

Christine Graebsch

In 1981, the Federal Judicial Center proposed guidelines for balancing risks of experimentation against their supposed benefits. The ethical rules were supposed to be within the scope of American legal and constitutional justification. These guidelines would not fulfill the same criterion in Germany, especially if risks to the individual are weighed against benefits toward the society. Randomization in criminal law cannot be justified by the constitutional principle of freedom of research or by the need to gain empirical knowledge about the effectiveness of sanctions. Unequal treatment in randomized designs can only be justified if randomization is permitted for reasons other than experimentation and if the individuals give their free and informed consent. The principle of informed consent must be extended from a procedural to a material content, which guarantees that participants are not forced to take part in an experiment.

Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 46, No. 2, 271-282 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0011128700046002008
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social ScienceHome page
I. Chalmers
Trying to do more Good than Harm in Policy and Practice: The Role of Rigorous, Transparent, Up-to-Date Evaluations
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, September 1, 2003; 589(1): 22 - 40.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
D. B. Marlowe, D. S. Festinger, P. A. Lee, M. M. Schepise, J. E. R. Hazzard, J. C. Merrill, F. D. Mulvaney, and A. T. McLellan
Are Judicial Status Hearings A Key Component Of Drug Court? During-Treatment Data From a Randomized Trial
Criminal Justice and Behavior, April 1, 2003; 30(2): 141 - 162.
[Abstract] [PDF]