TESTING A BAYESIAN LEARNING THEORY OF DETERRENCE AMONG SERIOUS JUVENILE OFFENDERS

252 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Peer Influence and Delinquency (2019, background): “Research documents that individuals use information about their peers’ deviance to update their own perceptions of sanction risk (Matsueda et al. 2006; see also Anwar & Loughran 2011).”
Criminal Deterrence: A Review of the Literature (2017, background): “…merits discussion can be found in Durlauf and Nagin (2011) who consider that, in addition to exhibiting strong time preferences, individuals may have a great deal of trouble accurately estimating the risk of apprehension even after updating in response to new information (Anwar and Loughran 2011).”
DETERRENCE, CRIMINAL OPPORTUNITIES, AND POLICE (2015, unknown): “Anwar and Loughran (2011) and 1.”
How do people update? The effects of local weather fluctuations on beliefs about global warming (2012, background): “Moreover, although numerous studies have found that people do not always follow Bayes’s rule (e.g., Charness et al. 2007; Charness and Levin 2005), others find that updating is largely consistent with it (e.g., Anwar and Loughran 2011).”
Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century (2013, methodology): “An example of such a survey is the Pathways to Desistance project used in the Anwar and Loughran (2011) analysis, which sampled juveniles adjudicated for felony offenses in Philadelphia and Phoenix.”