--- In [email protected], "markmeredith2002" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > 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.
> > > 
> > > They did, by "predicting" what the crime rate *would* have
> > > been for that period that year on the basis of the previous
> > > five-year trend.  It's true that there might have been
> > > *somewhat* less of a reduction if the crime rate had started
> > > going down in early 1993, but you would have no reason to
> > > see the sharp, sudden drop they measured during the project
> > > on the basis of the decline you're talking about (much less
> > > the return to "normal" a few weeks after the study).
> 
> The 5 yr trend is meaningless - the trend for violent crime was
> significantly up during the 80s and then it unexpectedly and
> dramatically turned down in the 90s, then flattened out near the end
> of that decade.  All sorts of studies came out in the 90s supposedly
> proving that this or that particular program was reducing crime in
> this or that city, but in retrospect we now know that crime was 
going
> down in all large cities, even ones not doing this or that.  
> 
> I'm saying the study design needs to be revisited due to what we now
> know about the unique crime trends in the 90s.  As far as the sharp
> dramatic drops and returns to normal, I want to see the actual data
> before trusting these describtors of it.  
> 
> OF course, akasha is right that even if the statistics hold, you 
still
> need more studies looking at it from different angles.  I dont' see
> that ever happening.  I was on the DC committee that originally came
> up with the DC course idea a couple yrs before 93 at which time MMY
> trashed it saying the M-effect had already been proven enough.  For
> some reason he consented when hagelin revived the idea in 93, but I
> don't see him agreeing again and I can't see the tmo ever getting
> nearly enough people to participate in such an experiment.  
> 
> So what's going to be the practical result of all these half or 3/4
> baked M-effect studies?
>

Millionaires giving MMY lots of money?






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

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/
 



Reply via email to