Justice Reform and Scientific Understanding
The realms of policing, scientific understanding, and justice reform are in a state of continuous evolution. It has become clear that true progress cannot be made by rules and systems in isolation; it is people who drive meaningful change. To construct a justice system that is effective, equitable, and humane, we must deeply grasp how individuals behave, how they interact, and what constitutes rigorous scientific understanding.
Recent research has brought forth three compelling findings. These insights illustrate the intricate connections between our social behaviours, scientific methodologies, and the experiences of those who are incarcerated. Such revelations challenge long-held practices and suggest novel approaches for policy creation and practical application.
We’ll look at how friends influence gun use, why some scientists are questioning p-values, and how prison visits affect deaths. Each finding tells us to focus less on strict rules and more on the detailed lives and experiences of people. These discoveries are more than just theories. They show practical ways to change how we understand and carry out justice.
Friends and Guns – How Violence Spreads Like a Sickness
One recent finding shows how much gun use, especially among young people, is tied to social groups. Many people think violence, like using guns, comes from one person’s problems or choices alone. But new research shows that friends and group behavior strongly shape it.
Young people in groups where having guns is seen as normal or cool are clearly more likely to carry or use guns themselves. This is called “social contagion.” It means ideas, actions, and even feelings about violence spread in groups because people see them often and they are supported. If guns are seen as a sign of power, safety, or importance in a group, young people are more likely to act that way too. This is especially true if there aren’t good examples or different ways of thinking.
This evidence questions today’s ways of stopping violence, which mostly focus on punishing individuals or trying to fix them alone. Instead, it suggests we need to work with groups. These new ways should understand how much community rules and relationships matter. Programs led by communities, mentoring, and peer support can be much better at breaking down bad group ideas and encouraging safer behavior.
Putting money into programs that build good social ties – like after-school clubs, community help, and peer talks – can create strong support systems. These support systems can give young people what they need to avoid bad peer pressure and choose peaceful paths. So, preventing violence is less about fixing one “bad apple” and more about growing a whole healthy “orchard” or community.
Better Science Than p-Values – Being Honest and Careful with Research
Science research, especially in policing and crime labs, is very important for making laws and public rules. So, this research must be honest and correct. For a long time, the p-value was the main way to tell if a scientific finding was statistically important. If the p-value was less than 0.05, it was often seen as the magic number to “prove” that a discovery really meant something. But this “yes or no” way of understanding data is now being questioned a lot.
We know the problems with p-values very well. They can make complicated information too simple, turning rich, unclear data into just “important” or “not important.” This oversimplification has caused big problems. For example, only “important” results get published (publication bias). Also, weak findings are trusted too much, and people who aren’t experts, like politicians or judges, can misunderstand the results.
Because of these problems, many scientists want to use probability-based methods, especially Bayesian analysis. Unlike p-values, Bayesian methods let scientists guess how likely it is that an idea is true, based on the information they have. This way of working accepts that things can be uncertain. It gives a more detailed view of the evidence, which is very helpful in police and crime lab work where mistakes can have huge effects.
Moving to probability-based thinking is more than just a small technical change. It’s a bigger change in how we think about science. It shows a promise to be clear, open, and humble about what we know. Scientists are now asked to admit what their methods can’t do, to share their findings in the right way, and to avoid acting too certain about things. In short, this change demands honest science.
For teachers and workers in criminal justice, using stronger and more honest ways to do research isn’t just good science – it’s a moral duty. Because if science is wrong or exaggerated, it can fool courts, give bad information for policies, and lead to unfair legal outcomes. As science becomes a bigger part of legal and policing choices, making sure it’s accurate and trustworthy is a job for everyone.
Prison Visits and Deaths – Why People Need Connection
New research has established a concerning correlation between social isolation in prison and elevated inmate death rates. The study indicates that prisoners who receive few or no external visits are substantially more likely to die while incarcerated. This highlights the profound importance of human connection and social support, particularly within the harsh confines of a correctional facility.
Being in prison naturally means being isolated. But if there’s no support from outside, this isolation gets much worse. It can cause deep mental pain, like sadness, feeling hopeless, and thinking about suicide. Over time, this emotional harm can lead to physical illness and, finally, more deaths.
What’s surprising is that fixing this problem doesn’t need big, expensive changes. It just needs new rules that make it easier for prisoners to have regular contact with others. Prisons should understand how important it is for prisoners to keep in touch with family and community. This can happen through:
- Flexible visiting rules
- Easy-to-use video calls
- Cheap phone services
- Letter-writing programs
These rules don’t just help prisoners feel better; they also help society as a whole. Studies always show that prisoners who stay close to their loved ones do better after they are released. They are less likely to commit new crimes, have better mental health, and have a better chance of fitting back into society. So, supporting prison visits is not just the right thing to do; it’s also a smart, long-term way to make our communities safer.
Also, this issue is about human rights. Stopping prisoners from keeping up personal relationships takes away their dignity and goes against basic rules for treating people kindly. Seeing that human connection can save lives is a step toward a kinder and better prison system.
Critical Analysis
It’s hard to use good ideas from social science research, especially in criminal justice. There are many real-world challenges.
For example, we know that friends can influence gang violence or gun activity. But proving this link clearly for all kinds of people (from different backgrounds or income levels) is still a big challenge for researchers. To do this, studies must show cause and effect, not just that things happen together. They also need to consider many other factors and different social situations. Doing such studies ethically in the real world, without messing up the results, is very difficult.
Even if we have good proof, how social science research is done often makes it hard to use in real life. For example, researchers often rely too much on “p-values” (a statistical measure). Many experts agree these are often misused and can be misleading. This continues because old habits are strong in universities and government. Also, many people making decisions or working in the field don’t fully understand statistics. This can lead to policies based on findings that look important statistically, but don’t actually help much in the real world. This wastes money that could go to more effective, proven solutions.
Finally, even when we have strong proof that social science ideas work, putting them into practice often fails. This is due to problems with the system itself and a lack of money. Take the example of prisoners: We know that being isolated, especially without family visits, leads to poorer mental health and can shorten their lives. Things like more visits, online communication, or programs to help prisoners re-enter society could lessen these bad effects. However, these need a lot of money and strong political support. For prison systems that are already overloaded and underfunded, getting this money and dealing with complex rules is often too hard. This means good ideas aren’t used, and outdated or harmful practices continue.
Conclusion – Focusing Justice on People
All our learnings, whether about how friends influence crime, how we use scientific information, or how vital human connection is in prison, point to one simple truth: justice must always focus on people. Our systems, laws, and data are only useful if they truly understand human realities. Whether it’s a young person influenced by friends, a policymaker using research, or a prisoner needing connection, the criminal justice system must understand and support the human experience.
Real change happens when we shift our focus from just punishing people to preventing problems. It means being humble about what science can tell us and bringing people together instead of isolating them. These ideas require not just new policies, but a change in how we think about justice, seeing it as a shared responsibility for everyone. By using strong evidence with kindness, and by valuing relationships as much as rules, we can build a justice system that works well, is based on facts, and is truly caring. Ultimately, justice is about care and kindness, not control.
Reference:
- Police Science Snippets Nr. 239 of Dr Susanne Knabe- Nicol;https://www.linkedin.com/video/live/urn:li:ugcPost:7345801916263661569/?isInternal
