Both content and citation analysis have a variety of problems; however, these techniques also offer scholars many advantages that are not as readily available with other methods. They provide an objective method for studying both texts and the scholars who produce them. Both use existing documents, or other forms of communication, as sources of data for analysis, rather than involving human participants in research. Both have the potential to be cumulative; that is, as further documents become available for study, they may be incorporated into the research, allowing researchers the opportunity to study trends over time. Both methods are widely used in criminology, and both are somewhat controversial. However, although there is some controversy within the field as to their use, both approaches appear to be both reliable and valid, and both clearly have widespread uses within the field of criminology and criminal justice.
- Busch, C., De Maret, P. S., Flynn, T., Kellum, R., Le, S., Meyers, B., et al. (2005). Overview: Content analysis. Retrieved March 22, 2008, from http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/guide.cfm?guideid=61
- Chapman, A. J. (1989). Assessing research: Citation-count shortcomings. The Psychologist, 8, 336–344.
- Chermak, S. M. (1994). Body count news: How crime is presented in the news media. Justice Quarterly, 11, 561–582.
- Cohn, E. G., & Farrington, D. P. (1990). Differences between British and American criminology: An analysis of citations. British Journal of Criminology, 30, 467–482.
- Cohn, E. G., & Farrington, D. P. (1996). “Crime and justice” and the criminology and criminal justice literature. In N.Morris & M. Tonry (Eds.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 20, pp. 265–300). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Cohn, E. G., & Farrington, D. P. (1998a). Assessing the quality of American doctoral program faculty in criminology and criminal justice, 1991–1995. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 9, 187–210.
- Cohn, E. G., & Farrington, D. P. (1998b). Changes in the mostcited scholars in major American criminology and criminal justice journals between 1986–1990 and 1991–1995. Journal of Criminal Justice, 26, 99–116.
- Cohn, E. G., & Farrington, D. P. (2007a). Changes in scholarly influence in major American criminology and criminal justice journals between 1986 and 2000. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 8, 6–34.
- Cohn, E. G., & Farrington, D. P. (2007b). Changes in scholarly influence in major international criminology journals between 1986 and 2000. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 40, 335–360.
- Cohn, E. G., & Farrington, D. P. (2008). Scholarly influence in criminology and criminal justice journals in 1990–2000. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 11–21.
- Cohn, E. G., Farrington, D. P., & Wright, R. A. (1998). Evaluating criminology and criminal justice. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
- Gordon, R. A., & Vicari, P. J. (1992). Eminence in social psychology: A comparison of textbook citation, Social Sciences Citation Index, and research productivity rankings. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 26–38.
- Huckin, T. (2003). Content analysis: What texts talk about. In C. Bazemore & P. A. Prior (Eds.), What writing does and how it does it (pp. 13–33). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Mastrofski, S. D., & Ritti, R. R. (1999). Patterns of community policing: A view from newspapers in the United States (COPS Working Paper No. 2). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
- Regoli, R. M., Poole, E. D., & Miracle, A. W., Jr. (1982). Assessing the prestige of journals in criminal justice: A research note. Journal of Criminal Justice, 10, 57–67.
- Rushton, J. P. (1984). Evaluating research eminence in psychology: The construct validity of citation counts. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 37, 33–36.
- Shichor, D. (1982). An analysis of citations in introductory criminology textbooks: A research note. Journal of Criminal Justice, 10, 231–237.
- Steiner, B., & Schwartz, J. (2006). The scholarly productivity of institutions and their faculty in leading criminology and criminal justice journals. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 393–400.
- Thomas, C. W. (1987). The utility of citation-based quality assessments. Journal of Criminal Justice, 15, 165–171.
- Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
- Wolfgang, M. A., Figlio, R. M., & Thornberry, T. P. (1978). Evaluating criminology. New York: Elsevier.
- Wright, R. A. (1995). The most-cited scholars in criminology: A comparison of textbooks and journals. Journal of Criminal Justice, 23, 303–311.
- Wright, R. A. (1996). Do introductory criminology textbooks cite the most influential criminologists? American Journal of Criminal Justice, 20, 225–236.
- Wright, R., & Cohn, E. G. (1996). The most-cited scholars in criminal justice textbooks. Journal of Criminal Justice, 24, 459–467.