Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice

2014 Edition
| Editors: Gerben Bruinsma, David Weisburd

Interrupted Time Series Models

  • David McDowall
  • Richard McCleary
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_184



Interrupted time series models compare the levels of a time series before and after the introduction of a discrete intervention. The time series design is often a good match to the questions posed in criminology and criminal justice studies, and many examples of its use appear in the research literature.

The popularity of interrupted time series designs is largely attributable to the strength of the causal inferences that they allow. Shadish, Cook, and Campbell (2002) evaluate a variety of common research designs in terms of their ability to guard against threats to four types of validity: statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. Within each threat category, they consider a more detailed list of potential problems. Interrupted time series models are vulnerable to comparatively few of the issues that Shadish et al....

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading and References

  1. Allison PD (2009) Fixed effects regression models. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  2. Box GEP, Jenkins GM (1970) Time series analysis: forecasting and control. Holden-Day, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  3. Box GEP, Tiao GC (1975) Intervention analysis with applications to economic and environmental problems. J Am Statistical Assoc 70:70–79Google Scholar
  4. Campbell DT (1963) From description to experimentation: interpreting trends as quasi-experiments. In: Harris CW (ed) Problems in measuring change. University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell DT, Ross HL (1968) The Connecticut crackdown on speeding: time series data in quasi-experimental analysis. Law Soc Rev 3:33–53Google Scholar
  6. Campbell DT, Stanley JC (1963) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Rand-McNally, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  8. Cook TD, Campbell DT (1979) Quasi-experimentation: design and analysis issues for field settings. Houghton-Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  9. Durlauf SN, Nagin DS (2011) Imprisonment and crime: can both be reduced? Criminol Public Policy 10:13–54Google Scholar
  10. Glass GV, Willson VL, Gottman JM (1975) Design and analysis of time series experiments. Colorado Associated University Press, Boulder, COGoogle Scholar
  11. Hahn RA, Bilukha O, Crosby A, Fullilove MT, Liberman A, Moscicki EK, Snyder S, Tuma F, Briss PA (2005) Firearm laws and the reduction of violence: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med 28(2S1):40-65Google Scholar
  12. Harcourt BE, Ludwig J (2006) Broken windows: new evidence from New York City and a five-city social experiment. Univ Chicago Law Rev 73:271–320Google Scholar
  13. Hennigan KM, Del Rosario ML, Heath L, Cook TD, Wharton JD, Calder BJ (1982) Impact of the introduction of television on crime in the United States: empirical findings and theoretical implications. J Personal Social Psychol 42:461–477Google Scholar
  14. Loftin C, Heuman M, McDowall D (1983) Mandatory sentencing and firearms violence: evaluating an alternative to gun control. Law Soc Rev 17:287–318Google Scholar
  15. McCleary R, Hay RA Jr (1980) Applied time series analysis for the social sciences. Sage, Beverly Hills, CAGoogle Scholar
  16. McCleary R, Nienstedt BC, Erven JM (1982) Uniform Crime Reports as organizational outcomes: Three time series quasi-experiments. Social Problems 29:361–72Google Scholar
  17. McCleary R, Riggs JE (1982) The 1975 Australian Family Law Act: a model for assessing legal impacts. New Directions Program Evaluation 16:7–18Google Scholar
  18. McDowall D, McCleary R, Hay RA, Meidinger EE (1980) Interrupted time series analysis. Sage, Beverly Hills, CAGoogle Scholar
  19. McDowall D, Loftin C, Wiersema B (1992) A comparative study of the preventive effects of mandatory sentencing laws for gun crimes. J Criminal Law Criminol 83:378–394Google Scholar
  20. McGaw DB, McCleary R (1985) PAC spending, electioneering, and lobbying: a vector ARIMA time series analysis. Polity 17:574–585Google Scholar
  21. Morgan SL, Winship C (2007) Counterfactuals and causal inference: methods and principles for social research. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Piquero A (2005) Reliable information and rational policy decisions: does gun research fit the bill? Criminol Public Policy 4:779–798Google Scholar
  23. Pridemore WA, Chamlin MB, Trahan A (2008) A test of competing hypotheses about homicide rates following terrorist attacks: an interrupted time series analysis of September 11 and Oklahoma City. J Quant Crimnol 24:381–396Google Scholar
  24. Shadish WR, Cook TD, Campbell DT (2002) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Tonry M (1995) Malign neglect: race, crime, and punishment in America. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (various years). Public use data tape documentation: multiple cause of death for ICD-9 1989 Data. [Data file]. Author, Hyattsville, MDGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Criminal Justice, University at Albany, State University of New YorkAlbanyUSA
  2. 2.School of Social Ecology, University of California, IrvineIrvineUSA