Criminology uses many different methods to acquire and consider the evidence. The main research tools in this field are experiments, surveys, and participant observation and interviewing. In most cases, these methods are used together, which ensures, first of all, the objectivity of the information received. However, sometimes each tool is useful for getting different details of the circumstances that comprise the whole picture. Each of the methods has its own strengths and limitations and differs from each other in terms of purposes and results.
Experiments are most widely used in the investigation of the details of crimes, although they are the most complex. The main strength of this approach is the possibility of acquiring objective data about the circumstances of the case (Bachman & Schutt, 2020). At the same time, many organizational subtleties, as well as procedural protocols, must be observed in order to conduct experiments. Thus, the risk of making an error if the necessary processes are not followed in the experiment is high. In comparison with other methods such as surveys, as well as participant observation and interviewing, the experiment allows you to acquire the most objective data. Moreover, the evidence obtained as a result of the experiment is more reliable in the investigation, as it allows you to get more objective information. However, compared to other research methods, experiments require special equipment and the involvement of experts; they are also time-consuming.
Surveys are the most common research method used in the field of criminology. This is explained by the fact that this approach allows one to acquire a relatively wide set of objective evidence in the case, as well as less complex in procedures in comparison with experiments (Bachman & Schutt, 2020). Surveys are used to obtain information directly from the participants in the crime, including the victim, perpetrator, or witnesses, which allows you to obtain the necessary evidence in the case. Compared to experiments, this method is easier to implement but also requires careful preparation. In comparison with observation and interviewing, this method helps to acquire more comprehensive and objective information. In particular, the investigator needs to create a set of questions that could reveal the necessary details of the case. The main strength of this approach is the possibility of obtaining new information on the case, as well as the disclosure of significant details. However, the limitation is that survey participants can be biased, not remember or have the wrong idea about details, and try to hide information.
Participant observation and interviewing are used to carefully examine behavioral patterns and identify suspects and motives for a crime. Participant observation assumes that the investigator is introduced into the group to identify suspects (Bachman & Schutt, 2020). The interview also helps in obtaining data when communicating with group members to identify suspects and details of the case. The main limitation of this approach is that this process often takes months and can also be easily interrupted in the event of disclosure of the investigator. The strength of this method is the ability to obtain many useful details, as well as direct evidence. At the same time, in comparison with experiments and surveys, this tool is longer in time and can also be endangered when suspicions arise in a group. At the same time, in comparison with other methods, this approach allows you to acquire the widest range of evidence that can later be used for investigation using other research tools.
Reference
Bachman, R. D., & Schutt, R. K. (2020). The practice of research and criminology and criminal justice. SAGE.