Journal of Quantitative Criminology

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 209–223 | Cite as

When random assignment fails: Some lessons from the Minneapolis Spouse Abuse Experiment

  • Richard A. Berk
  • Gordon K. Smyth
  • Lawrence W. Sherman


In this paper, we consider what may be done when researchers anticipate that in the implementation of field experiments, random assignment to experimental and control groups is likely to be flawed. We then reanalyze data from the Minneapolis Spouse Abuse Experiment in a manner that explicitly models violations of random assignment. As anticipated, we find far larger treatment effects than previously reported. The techniques developed should be useful in a wide variety of settings when random assignment is implemented imperfectly.

Key words

field experiments random assignment domestic violence selection bias 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence (1984). U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  2. Amemiya, T. (1985).Advanced Econometrics, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  3. Bard, M. (1970).Training Police as Specialists in Family Crisis Intervention, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  4. Berk, R. A., and Sherman, L. W. (1988). Police responses to family violence incidents: An analysis of an experimental design with incomplete randomization.J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 83: 70–76.Google Scholar
  5. Berk, R. A., Rauma, D., Loseke, D. R., and Berk, S. F. (1982). Throwing the cops back out: The decline of a local program to make the criminal justice system more responsive to incidents of domestic violence.Soc. Sci. Res. 11: 245–279.Google Scholar
  6. Berk, R. A., Boruch, R. F., Chambers, D. L., Rossi, P. H., and Witte, A. D. (1985). Social policy experimentation: A position paper.Eval. Rev. 9: 387–429.Google Scholar
  7. Commission on the Prevention of Drug and Alcohol Abuse (1986). Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, Calif.Google Scholar
  8. Cook T. D., and Campbell, R. T. (1979).Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings, Rand McNally, Chicago.Google Scholar
  9. Fagin, J. A. (1978).The Effects of Police Interpersonal Communications Skills on Conflict Resolution, Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale (University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich.).Google Scholar
  10. Fienberg, S. E. (1980).The Analysis osf Cross-Classified Categorical Data, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  11. Fienberg, S. E., Singer, B., and Tanur, J. M. (1985). Large-scale social experiments in the United States. In Atkinson, A. C., and Feinberg, S. E. (eds.),A Celebration of Statistics: The ISI Centenary Volume, Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Goolkasian, G. A. (1986).Confronting Domestic Violence: The Role of Criminal Court Judges, National Institute of Justice, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  13. Lawless, J. F. (1982).Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data, John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Maddala, G. S. (1983).Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics, Cambridge Press, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Parnas, R. I. (1972). The police response to domestic disturbance. In Radzinowitz, L., and Wolfgang, M. E. (eds.),The Criminal in the Arms of the Law, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Reicken, H. W., and Boruch, R. F. (1974).Social Experimentation: A Method for Planning and Evaluating Social Intervention, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Sherman, L. W., and Berk, R. A. (1984). The specific deterrent effects of arrest for domestic assault.Am. Sociol. Rev. 49: 261–271.Google Scholar
  18. Sherman, L. W., and Hamilton, E. (1984).The Impact of the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment: Wave I Findings, Police Foundation, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  19. Tanur, J. M. (1983). Methods for large-scale surveys and experiments. In Leinhardt, S. (ed.),Sociological Methodology, 1983–1984, Jossey Bass, San Francisco.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard A. Berk
    • 1
  • Gordon K. Smyth
    • 2
  • Lawrence W. Sherman
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Sociology and Program in Social StatisticsHaines Hall, University of CaliforniaLos Angeles
  2. 2.Statistics and Applied Probability ProgramUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraSanta Barbara
  3. 3.Department of Criminal JusticeUniversity of MarylandCollege Park

Personalised recommendations