The Validity and Reliability of Self-Reporting Method

The report by Krohn et al. (2011) document the method used in the collection of data on crime, arrest, and delinquency. According to the article, the self-reporting method remains the most prevalent technique of examining the causes of such behavior. As a result, the authors aim at explaining the response bias experienced. They similarly stress on the challenges involved while using this technique. In the end, they manage to explain their findings and outlines the future implication for using such a method.

Question Two

The validity and reliability of self-reporting technique are profoundly affected by bias. To scrutinize this claim, the authors undertake a comparison between self-report data from youth with the risk of delinquency behavior and official police record data to investigate the issue of over-reporting and or under-reporting of the made arrest (Krohn et al., 2011). In the report, various factors that affect self-reporting such as gender, age, and race among other are investigated.

Question Three

To verify the validity and reliability of the method, the researchers had to compare different data with the official police records. Data collection was based on a given range. The researchers also had to rely on secondary sources that outlined the same issue. The results noted different discrepancies among gender, age, and races (Krohn et al., 2011). For instance, the finds showed that Hispanics were less likely to under-report or over-report, while the whites were more likely to over-report arrest. The blacks (African-Americans) were likely to under-report.

Question Four

It is evident that bias exists in self-reporting as outlined in the study. Specifically, systematic bias is much present in the over-reporting and under-reporting of arrest by gender and race, and thus bias appears not to be as a result of an intended misrepresentation (Krohn et al., 2011). However, the variations in these seemed to be caused by the level of arrest activity. In the end, the researchers ascribe for more investigation to verify the credibility of their finding.

Reference

Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Phillips, M. D., Thornberry, T. P., & Bell, K. A. (2011). Explaining systematic bias in self-reported measures: Factors that affect the under-and over-reporting of self-reported arrests. Justice Quarterly, 30(3), 501-528.