Search

Over the past few decades, a body of research has developed examining the academic dishonesty of university and college students. While research has explored academic dishonesty amongst American criminal justice and policing students, no research has specifically focused on investigating the dynamics and correlates of academic dishonesty amongst Australian criminology students. This study drew upon data obtained from a survey of 79 undergraduate criminal justice and policing students studying at an Australian university. Overall, the results suggest that male gender, viewing academic dishonesty as less serious and holding justifications for engaging in this type of behaviour were significant predictors of self-reported academic dishonesty. The findings suggest that more proactive strategies need to be implemented by universities to prevent student involvement in academic dishonesty.

Developmental and life-course theories of crime collectively can be viewed as theories which take an age-graded approach to explaining the development of offending based on empirical observations from prospective longitudinal studies. This paper provides not only an account of the key developmental and life-course theories of crime but also moves beyond this to include a comparison of the key postulates of these theories. To do this we first provide a brief account of the origins of developmental and life-course criminology and identify the theoretical origins in classic criminological theory. We also provide a brief description of some of the most prominent developmental and life-course theories of crime. This is all to set the stage for an extensive comparison of the key postulates of developmental and life-course theories. We argue that, in order to move forward with these theories, there must be systematic empirical testing of the key postulates to determine which parts of the theories are empirically supported and which parts need updating or revision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Developmental and life-course criminology is concerned mainly with three topics: (1) the development of offending and antisocial behavior from childhood to adulthood; (2) risk and protective factors for offending and antisocial behavior; and (3) the effect of life events on the course of development. The main aim is to study changes within individuals over time in risk factors and life events, and to relate them to later changes in offending. This special issue of the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology brings together a range of papers focused around this aim. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers, as well as decision-makers and practitioners, often wonder what becomes of the results of research in the social sciences. At present in Australia, we know very little on the subject. This article reports results from a survey of academic sociologists and criminologists about the utilization of their research. It tests an empirical model that derives its dependent and independent variables from prior studies on knowledge utilization, and defines research utilization as a six-stage cumulative process. Results indicate that while there are decreasing reported levels of research utilization across the stages by practitioners and professionals, academic sociologists and criminologists report their research is more often used conceptually. Variables that distinguished respondents who report high levels of utilization were investments in linkage and exchange mechanisms. The discussion is placed in a broader context related to measuring the impact of social research and the factors that inhibit and facilitate this process. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Developmental and life-course criminology can be differentiated from other types of criminology by its focus on, and appreciation of, change over time in antisocial behaviour and offending, using longitudinal research. This approach emerged from a long history of longitudinal studies which culminated in the articulation of the 'criminal careers' perspective in the mid 1980s. Since then there have been numerous analyses and developmental and life-course theories which have attempted to explain and classify patterns of offending and antisocial behaviour over time. In this paper we consider various methods used to classify these behaviours, using the examination of persistent antisocial behaviour and offending as a case study. While sophisticated analytic techniques exist, we argue that in the case of identifying persistent offending, a focus on the duration of offending is the key consideration. • Developmental and life-course criminology can be differentiated from other types of criminology by its focus on change over time. • Conceptualisation and operationalisation, as well as analytic techniques, are often driven by commitment to a particular theory. • Persistent offending should only be operationalised using a measure of duration of a criminal career. • Although sophisticated statistical techniques are useful in the classification of longitudinal data, simple methods can be more accurate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose To describe official adult-onset offenders, investigate their antisocial histories and test hypotheses about their origins. Methods We defined adult-onset offenders among 931 Dunedin Study members followed to age 38, using criminal-court conviction records. Results Official adult-onset offenders were 14% of men, and 32% of convicted men, but accounted for only 15% of convictions. As anticipated by developmental theories emphasizing early-life influences on crime, adult-onset offenders' histories of antisocial behavior spanned back to childhood. Relative to juvenile-offenders, during adolescence they had fewer delinquent peers and were more socially inhibited, which may have protected them from conviction. As anticipated by theories emphasizing the importance of situational influences on offending, adult-onset offenders, relative to non-offenders, during adulthood more often had schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and alcohol-dependence, had weaker social bonds, anticipated fewer informal sanctions, and self-reported more offenses. Contrary to some expectations, adult-onset offenders did not have high IQ or high socioeconomic-status families protecting them from juvenile conviction. Conclusions A tailored theory for adult-onset offenders is unwarranted because few people begin crime de novo as adults. Official adult-onset offenders fall on a continuum of crime and its correlates, between official non-offenders and official juvenile-onset offenders. Existing theories can accommodate adult-onset offenders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]