Abstract
Over the past two decades, criminologists have attempted to better understand the process through which research is used by practitioners and policymakers to identify the conditions that facilitate its policy and practice use. As part of this effort, the current study examines the translational research process and the use of researcher-practitioner partnerships (RPPs) in two state correctional agencies. The methods include interviews with leading national researchers, Florida legislative personnel, and state-level decision makers in adult and juvenile corrections. The findings document barriers, facilitators, and mechanisms involved in the translation process and reveal the effectiveness of RPPs to translate research into policy and practice.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.



References
Alpert, G.P., Rojek, J., & Hansen, J.A. (2013). Building bridges between police researchers and practitioners: Agents of change in a complex world, Report prepared for the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC: i-274.
Bales, W. D., Scaggs, S. J., Clark, C. L., Ensley, D., & Coltharp, P. (2014). Researcher-practitioner partnerships: A case study of the development of a long-term collaborative project between a university and a criminal justice agency. Criminal Justice Studies, 27, 294–307.
Baumer, E. P. (2015). Member perspectives. The Criminologist, 40, 8–10.
Blomberg, T. G., Mestre, J. M., & Mann, K. (2013). Seeking causality in a world of contingency: Criminology, research, and public policy. Criminology & Public Policy, 12, 571–584.
Blomberg, T. G., Brancale, J. M., Beaver, K. M., & Bales, W. D. (2016). Volume introduction. In T. G. Blomberg, J. M. Brancale, K. M. Beaver, & W. D. Bales (Eds.), Advancing Criminology & Criminal Justice Policy (pp. 1–3). New York: Routledge.
Blumstein, A. (1997). Interaction of criminological research and public policy. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 12, 349–361.
Braga, A. (2013). Embedded criminologists in police departments. Police Foundation, 17, 1–20.
Braga, A., & Apel, R. (2016). And we wonder why criminology is sometimes considered irrelevant in real-world policy conversations. Criminology & Public Policy, 15, 813–829.
Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods and Research, 42, 294–320.
Chancer, L., & McLaughlin, E. (2007). Public criminologies: Diverse perspectives on academia and policy. Theoretical Criminology, 11, 155–173.
Clear, T. R. (2010). Policy and evidence: The challenge to the American Society of Criminology: 2009 presidential address to the American Society of Criminology. Criminology, 48, 1–25.
CrimeSolutions.gov. (2017). All programs & practices. Retrieved from https://www.crimesolutions.gov/Programs.aspx#programs.
Cullen, F. T. (2005). The twelve people who saved rehabilitation: How the science of criminology made a difference. Criminology, 43, 1–42.
Cullen, F.T. (2013). Rehabilitation: Beyond nothing works, in Tonry, T. (Ed.), Crime and Justice in America, 1975 to 2025, Vol. 42 Of crime and justice: A review of research, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 299–376.
Currie, E. (2007). Against marginality: Arguments for a public criminology. Theoretical Criminology, 11, 175–190.
Garrison, A. H. (2009). The influence of research on criminal justice policy making. Professional Issues in Criminal Justice, 4, 9–21.
Gingrich, N. (2016). Camerota Debate Crime Statistics, retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/12/01/gingrich-camerota-crime-stats-newday.cnn.
Hsieh, H., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277–1288.
Innes, C. A., & Everett, R. S. (2008). Factors and conditions influencing the use of research by the criminal justice system. Western Criminology Review, 9, 49–58.
Kurasaki, K. S. (2000). Intercoder reliability for validating conclusions drawn from open-ended interview data. Field Methods, 12, 179–194.
Latessa, E. J. (2004). The challenge of change: Correctional programs and evidence-based practices. Criminology and Public Policy, 3, 547–560.
Laub, J. H. (2012). Translational criminology. Translational Criminology: Promoting Knowledge Exchange to Shape Criminal Justice Research, Practice, and Policy, 3, 4–5.
Laub, J. H., & Frisch, N. (2016). Translational criminology: A new path forward. In T. G. Blomberg, J. M. Brancale, K. M. Beaver, & W. D. Bales (Eds.), Advancing Criminology & Criminal Justice Policy (pp. 52–62). New York: Routledge.
Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. (1995). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Belmont: Wadsworth.
Lum, C., & Koper, C. S. (2015). Evidence-based policing. In R. Dunham & G. Alpert (Eds.), Critical issues in policing (pp. 1–15). Long Grove: Waveland Press.
Lum, C., Telep, C. W., Koper, C. S., & Grieco, J. (2012). Receptivity to research in policing. Justice Research and Policy, 14, 61–95.
Mears, D. P. (2013). Super max prisons: The policy and the evidence. Criminology & Public Policy, 12, 681–719.
Nagin, D. S., & Weisburd, D. (2013). Evidence and public policy: The example of evaluation research in policing. Criminology & Public Policy, 12, 651–679.
National Institute of Justice. (2012). Projects funded by NIJ awards. Retrieved 20 August 2018 from https://www.nij.gov/funding/awards/Pages/2011.aspx?fiscalyear=2011.
National Institute of Justice. (2014). Projects funded by NIJ awards. Retrieved 20 August 2018 from https://www.nij.gov/funding/awards/Pages/2013.aspx?fiscalyear=2013.
National Institute of Justice. (2018). Projects funded by NIJ awards. Retrieved 20 August 2018 from https://www.nij.gov/funding/awards/Pages/welcome.aspx.
National Research Council. (2012). Using science as evidence in public policy, The National Academies Press, Washingtonp, DC: Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.17226/13460.
Nutley, S. M., & Davies, H. T. O. (1999). The fall and rise of evidence in criminal justice. Public Money and Management, 19, 47–54.
Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2003). From knowing to doing: A framework for understanding the evidence-into-practice agenda. Evaluation, 9, 125–148.
Petersilia, J. (1991). Policy relevance and the future of criminology. Criminology, 29, 1–16.
Petersilia, J. (2008). Influencing public policy: An embedded criminologist reflects on California prison reform. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 4, 335–356.
Petersilia, J., & Cullen, F. T. (2015). Liberal but not stupid: Meeting the promise of downsizing prisons. Stanford Journal of Criminal Law and Policy, 2, 1–43.
Pratt, T. C. (2008). Rational choice theory, crime control policy, and criminological relevance. Criminology & Public Policy, 7, 43–52.
QSR International. (2012). NVivo 10. Doncaster, Victoria, Australia: QSR International Pty Ltd..
Rojek, J., Alpert, G., & Smith, H. (2012a). The utilization of research by the police. Police Practice and Research, 13, 329–341.
Rojek, J., Smith, H., & Alpert, G. (2012b). The prevalence and characteristics of police practitioner–researcher partnerships. Police Quarterly, 15, 241–261.
Rojek J., Martin P., & Alpert G. (2015). The literature and research on police–research partnerships in the USA, in Rojek J., Martin P., & Alpert G., Developing and Maintaining Police-Researcher Partnerships to Facilitate Research Use, New York: Springer, 27–44.
Sampson, R. J., Winship, C., & Knight, C. (2013). Translating causal claims: Principles and strategies for policy-relevant criminology. Criminology & Public Policy, 12, 587–616.
Telep, C. W. (2016). Police officer receptivity to research and evidence-based policing: Examining variability within and across agencies. Crime & Delinquency, 63, 976–999.
Telep, C. W., & Winegar, S. (2015). Police executive receptivity to research: A survey of chiefs and sheriffs in Oregon. Policing, 10, 241–249.
Tittle, C. R. (2004). The arrogance of public sociology. Social Forces, 82, 1639–1643.
Tonry, M. (2010). Public criminology and evidence-based policy. Criminology & Public Policy, 9, 783–797.
Tseng, V. (2012). The uses of research in policy and practice. Sharing Child and Youth Development Knowledge, 26, 1–24.
Uggen, C., & Inderbitzin, M. (2010). Public criminologies. Criminology & Public Policy, 9, 725–747.
Weiss, C. H. (1987). The circuitry of enlightenment: Diffusion of social science research to policymakers. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 8, 274–281.
Weiss, C. H. (1995). The haphazard connection: Social science and public policy. International Journal of Educational Research, 23, 137–150.
Weitzer, R. (2015). American policing under fire: Misconduct and reform. Society, 52, 475–480.
Wellford, C. (2009). Criminologists should stop whining about their impact on policy and practice. In N. A. Frost, J. D. Frelich, & T. R. Clear (Eds.), Contemporary issues in criminal justice policy: Policy proposals from the American Society of Criminology Conference (pp. 17–24). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, the Florida Department of Corrections, the researchers and scholars that agreed to be interviewed, and Dr. Julie Brancale for her assistance.
Funding
This project was supported by Award No. 2014-IJ-CX-0035, awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pesta, G.B., Blomberg, T.G., Ramos, J. et al. Translational Criminology: Toward Best Practice. Am J Crim Just 44, 499–518 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-018-9467-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-018-9467-1
Keywords
- Translational criminology
- Research partnerships
- Research
- Policy
- Practice