The research reported in this article sought to estimate the feasibility of measuring patterns of forgetting and forward telescoping in victimization survey data. It was suggested that ifthese twosourcesof memory bias could be accurately and reliably measured, victimization survey data could be adjusted to produce improved estimates of both the amount of crime andof changes in the crime rate over time. Examination of the data suggests that the likelihood of developing a general model for correcting mnemonic bimes is very low. l l~i s conclusion follows from: ( I ) evidence indicating differential victimization survey recall across reported and unreported crime events; (2) the apparent dissimilarities of telescoping1 forgetting patterns across samples and seasons; and (3) the lack of astable comparison estimate of the "true" distribution of incidents with which to calibrate a correction model. ne of the most fundamental purposes of victimization surveying is 0 to measure the amount of crime in a specified geographical area.Efforts to use official crime statistics as a measure of the amount or distribution of crime or of change in crime rates are beset with difficulties, particularly if the focus of the research is to test the effectiveness of crime reduction policies or programs (Schneider, 1975).
Key points• A total of 4% of REF2014 submissions were published by university presses.• A total of 85% of all university press publications submitted for REF2014 were in the arts and humanities.• A total of 97% of university press outputs funded by AHRC in REF2014 were in the UK and USA.• Success can be found in the partnership between public investment and publisher support brokered by leading researchers. CONTEXTThe Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) is one of the seven UK Research Councils. It has an annual budget of ca. £100 m and has over 30% of all research-active staff in the UK -according to REF2014 -within its subject remit. Disciplines supported by the AHRC range from creative and performing arts to archaeology and linguistics, law, literature, languages, and heritage. Publishing is also one of the AHRC's research areas, and recent funding has been directed towards supporting a joint initiative with the British Library on the 'academic book of the future' (https://academicbookfuture.org/). For the last two years, in preparation for the UK Government Spending Review in 2015 and partly alongside its celebration of the tenth anniversary of its Royal Charter, the AHRC began to take a new look at the evidence sources and data available to support the arguments for investment in the arts and humanities as part of the wider science and research funding case. As part of that work, the AHRC was able to draw on its existing evidence sources -funding applications, grants awarded, narratives, and numeric information about the delivery and impact of AHRC research -which have previously been utilized in successive Impact Reports (AHRC, 2016). We also commissioned new pieces of research, such as the analysis by Deloitte on the economic, social, and cultural benefits of one AHRC scheme that has a specific emphasis on the 'follow-on' benefits arising from previous funding. Looking across these multiple and different sources of information, AHRC staff were struck by the kinds of information that researchers were drawing on for these different data submissions. We discovered details about outputs and impacts of AHRC funding that could be charted and documented in the REF impact case studies, which researchers had not included in relation to the same grants in terms of research output submissions to the AHRC via researchfish©. The AHRC's Impact Report for 2014/ 2015 (AHRC, 2016) was able to provide different kinds of approaches to the evidence available, partly drawing on the REF2014 submissions but more often using this as the basis for new conversations with the researchers themselves to update, expand, clarify, and enhance their information to our own corporate case. In several cases, this information related to the kinds of publications-related data captured and collected by publishers, including university presses.This level of information has both surprised and delighted us, not least because it reflects the different contributions that
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.