Lawrence W. Sherman – författare

Research evidence can and should have an important role in shaping public policy. Just as much of the medical community has embraced the concept of "evidence-based medicine," increasing numbers of social scientists and government agencies are calling for an evidence-based approach to determine which social programs work and which ones don't. It is an irony not lost on the social scientists writing for the September volume of The Annals that the first use of experimental methods in medicine (to test the effects of Streptomycin on tuberculosis in the late 1940s) was actually conducted by an economist. But while more than one million clinical trials in medicine have been conducted since that time, only about 10,000 have been conducted to evaluate whether social programs achieve their intended effects.

Authors of the September volume argue that this level of investment in the "gold standard" of research designs is insufficient for a wide range of reasons. Randomized controlled trials, for example, are far better at controlling selection biases and chance effects than are other observational methods, while econometric and statistical techniques that seek to correct for bias fall short of their promise. The volume dramatically demonstrates that alternative methods generate different (and often substantially wrong) estimates of program effects. Some research based on nonexperimental research designs actually mislead policy makers and practitioners into supporting programs that don't work, while ignoring others that do.

Authors of this volume also directly address critiques of experimental designs, which range from questions about their practicality to their ethics. Some of these arguments are well taken, but addressable. The authors, however, reject other arguments against controlled tests as unfounded and damaging to social science..

Policymakers will find these articles invaluable in better understanding how alternative research methods can mislead as much as enlighten. Students and researchers will be confronted with powerful arguments that question the use of nonexperimental techniques to estimate program effects.

This volume throws the gauntlet down. We challenge you to pick it up.

Research evidence can and should have an important role in shaping public policy. Just as much of the medical community has embraced the concept of "evidence-based medicine," increasing numbers of social scientists and government agencies are calling for an evidence-based approach to determine which social programs work and which ones don't. It is an irony not lost on the social scientists writing for the September volume of The Annals that the first use of experimental methods in medicine (to test the effects of Streptomycin on tuberculosis in the late 1940s) was actually conducted by an economist. But while more than one million clinical trials in medicine have been conducted since that time, only about 10,000 have been conducted to evaluate whether social programs achieve their intended effects.

Authors of the September volume argue that this level of investment in the "gold standard" of research designs is insufficient for a wide range of reasons. Randomized controlled trials, for example, are far better at controlling selection biases and chance effects than are other observational methods, while econometric and statistical techniques that seek to correct for bias fall short of their promise. The volume dramatically demonstrates that alternative methods generate different (and often substantially wrong) estimates of program effects. Some research based on nonexperimental research designs actually mislead policy makers and practitioners into supporting programs that don't work, while ignoring others that do.

Authors of this volume also directly address critiques of experimental designs, which range from questions about their practicality to their ethics. Some of these arguments are well taken, but addressable. The authors, however, reject other arguments against controlled tests as unfounded and damaging to social science..

Policymakers will find these articles invaluable in better understanding how alternative research methods can mislead as much as enlighten. Students and researchers will be confronted with powerful arguments that question the use of nonexperimental techniques to estimate program effects.

This volume throws the gauntlet down. We challenge you to pick it up.

Crime prevention policy and practice is, on the whole, far from objective. Instead of being based on scientific evidence, the crime policy agenda is seemingly driven by political ideology, anecdotal evidence and programme trends. Evidence-Based Crime Prevention seeks to change this by comprehensively and rigorously assessing the existing scientific knowledge on the effectiveness of crime prevention programmes internationally. Reviewing more than 600 scientific evaluations of programmes intended to prevent crime in settings such as families, schools, labour markets and communities, this book grades programmes on their scientific validity using the ''scientific methods scale''. This collection, which brings together contributions from leading researchers in the field of crime prevention, will provide policy-makers, researchers and community leaders with an understandable source of information about what works, what does not work and what is promising in preventing crime.

Crime prevention policy and practice is, on the whole, far from objective. Instead of being based on scientific evidence, the crime policy agenda is seemingly driven by political ideology, anecdotal evidence and programme trends. Evidence-Based Crime Prevention seeks to change this by comprehensively and rigorously assessing the existing scientific knowledge on the effectiveness of crime prevention programmes internationally. Reviewing more than 600 scientific evaluations of programmes intended to prevent crime in settings such as families, schools, labour markets and communities, this book grades programmes on their scientific validity using the ''scientific methods scale''. This collection, which brings together contributions from leading researchers in the field of crime prevention, will provide policy-makers, researchers and community leaders with an understandable source of information about what works, what does not work and what is promising in preventing crime.

Publishing the 600th volume of The Annals provides the perfect opportunity to celebrate the achievements of the social sciences, review past and current challenges, and look toward future possibilities that await scholars, practitioners, and policymakers alike in using the social sciences to help improve the quality of human life and advance the public good.

Certainly, The Annals and its parent organization, the American Academy of Political and Social Science, have changed over the 115 years. So too have disciplines and fields of study within the social sciences. Yet the hope to "enlighten public opinion and inform public policy" has remained constant, even as the Academy and the social sciences have pursed both a "science project" and "national political project," occasionally in tandem and, at other times, separately.

This special issue is dedicated to reflecting on how selected disciplines and fields of study have promoted their use and usefulness in advancing and informing public policy. With an impressive array of experts in their respective fields, this volume examines how anthropology, behavioral genetics, criminology, economics, international relations, sociology, psychology, and political science have advanced or strayed from that agenda.

Much more than a historical overview, the articles here provide honest and at times, provocative assessments of the development of the social sciences and their impact on public policies and the publics they study. Social scientists, practitioners, and policymakers willing to advance the use and usefulness of the social sciences will upon the lesions of this volume for many years to come.