Reconciling questions about dichotomizing variables in criminal justice research

Anne-Marie R. Iselin, Marcello Gallucci and Jamie DeCoster

Journal of Criminal Justice, 2013, vol. 41, issue 6, 386-394

Abstract: Despite accumulating evidence against the practice of artificial dichotomization, its continued use among criminal justice researchers indicates that there are still unresolved questions about its appropriateness. Farrington and Loeber (2000) provided a discussion of how these issues impact research on delinquency, and many researchers have cited their article as a justification for dichotomization within the field of criminal justice. In the current study, we examine the reasons why researchers have cited Farrington and Loeber as a mechanism for answering some unresolved questions about whether and when dichotomization may be justified.

Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235213000688
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jcjust:v:41:y:2013:i:6:p:386-394

DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2013.07.002

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Criminal Justice is currently edited by Matthew DeLisi

More articles in Journal of Criminal Justice from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().