skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 70058 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Criminology - Acceptance Within Academe (From Radical Criminology, P 233-244, 1980, by James A Inciardi - See NCJ-70047)
Author(s): W V Pelfrey
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 12
Sponsoring Agency: Sage Publications, Inc
Thousand Oaks, CA 91320
US Dept of Justice
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 78-NI-AX-0050
Sale Source: Sage Publications, Inc
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks, CA 91320
United States of America
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: In 1978 a study was undertaken to determine whether criminology is indeed in the throes of a paradigm revolution.
Abstract: The study aimed to discover whether the prevailing consensus that has characterized the prior 30 years of sociological and criminological theory has been shattered. A questionnaire was developed by a panel of experts that, using the term 'new criminology' to encompass conflict-radical-critical-Marxist criminology, addressed the general ideological stance of the respondent concerning traditional criminology versus the new criminology. Statements, followed by a Likert scale of strongly agree to strongly disagree, concerned the power, potential, validity, and ability of the new perspective to replace the old or traditional criminology. The questionnaires were sent to a sample of 761 persons out of 2,284 persons from academic organizations within the crime-related disciplines, with a 50 percent response (384 persons). Of all respondents, 18 percent indicated unfamiliarity with the new criminology, so that the remaining 82 percent of 384 persons formed the bulk of the data for the analysis. Responses confirmed that the 'early stages of continuing crisis' have indeed progressed to a paradigm revolution. Over 57 percent indicated that 'new criminology' is a viable alternative to traditional criminology. The respondents were inclined toward the new criminology as a perspective with definite potential and one which is seen to be capable of transposing traditional criminology. Yet if proponents of new criminology are to convince those who are undecided, the research of the future must be methodologically more closely related to the perspectives and the theoretical propositions must be more tightly formulated so as to provide an arena for testing through research. Results indicate that the largest percentage of the respondents prefer the label 'conflict' terminology, which is the most traditional of the nontraditional perspectives. Finally, while traditional criminology may be quite threatened by the new criminology, both perspectives could probably benefit from a compromise that would allow each to contribute to the other. Twenty-one references are provided. For related documents, see NCJ 70048-57 and 70059-62.
Index Term(s): Criminology; Radical criminology; Ticket fixing
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.