--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The crime rate reduction found by the D.C. study was a > sharp downward turn that correlated very closely with > the start of the eight-week project, not the kind of > gradual reduction over time you're talking about.
> And as I recall, while crime remained lower (it did not > continue to drop) for several weeks following the end of > the project, it then climbed back up to "normal." > It should be fairly easy to look at the stats for a > comparable city to D.C. and see if the crime rate > pattern--a sharp drop at the beginning of the period, > followed by a rise to "normal" 12 or so weeks later-- > was also comparable. On the face of it, that seems > unlikely. The way I read the summary of the study is that they don't compare the crime rate during the course to that prior to the course, but to the same time period over the previous 5 yrs. If the DC crime rate was relatively flat during the 90s, maybe that's an ok methodology. But metro cities throughout the nation experienced a dramatic drop in crime rate starting around 1992-1993 and continuing for several yrs and therefore the study can't prove its point w/o controlling for this major factor. I've tried to search the uniform crime statistics but can't figure out how to isolate the variables needed. Also can anyone post the full study? I still dont' trust how they massaged the raw data - the word here in fairfield after the course was that hagelin was disappointed in the data until they came up the adjusting weather variables. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
