Skip to main content
Log in

“Pourquoi Pas?” Versus “Absolutely Not!” Cross-National Differences in Access to Schools and Pupils for Survey Research

  • Published:
European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Notes

  1. The representativeness of the sample is considered to be of crucial importance if the purpose is to estimate the prevalence and incidence of behaviour, but less so if the goal of the research is to test the correlates of self-reported behaviour.

  2. For more details on the sampling methods used in the ISRD-2, please see Junger-Tas et al., Delinquency in Europe and Beyond, 2010.

  3. These technical reports will be available electronically soon on the ISRD-2 webite http://webapp5.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/ISRD/JDEB.

  4. A ‘classroom’ is defined as the basic social and academic unit in which most students spend most of their time. In most cases, this did not present a problem, but at times, the ‘classroom’ turned out to be a rather artificial construct.

  5. The ISRD-2 study is primarily a city-based study, where schools and classrooms were drawn from, respectively a large city or metropolitan area, a medium-sized city or town, as well as a cluster of three small towns. A number of countries used a national sample instead, with an oversampling of one large city.

  6. For example, Bosnia needed a total of 13 letters from the different Ministries of education representing the different regions.

  7. It should be emphasised again, that this definitely does not reflect on the efforts and quality of our Russian colleagues. On the contrary, they were able to produce an amazing data set, working under very difficult conditions, on a very limited budget.

  8. But remember that this is not based on a random sampling of all available schools in Moscow

  9. This estimate is based on Kivivuori’s (2007, 36) statement that “If students in access-refusing classes are defined as “non-respondents”, the “response rate” is 48 per cent in Copenhagen and 66 per cent in Oslo.” In view of the fact that the school refusal rates tend to be higher in the larger cities, it seems reasonable to estimate the overall Norway school participation rate to be around 70% (about 20% higher than Denmark, consistent with the difference between Stockholm and Oslo).

  10. Although the Netherlands encountered a high level of non-participation, the characteristics of the final sample are quite comparable to those of the targeted population.

  11. Researchers in the French team decided themselves to eliminate the nine vocational schools initially included because of the age range of the students.

  12. This cluster consists only of three countries, which gives much weight to the extreme ranking of just one country. Perhaps if Australia, New Zealand, or England and Wales also had been included, the overall ranking of the Anglo-Saxon cluster may have been different.

  13. The following discussion draws from Marshall and He 2010

  14. In Surinam, because of problems related to differences in languages (school vs. home), a large number of youth has to repeat grades, so that the average age of pupils in the 7th, 8th and 9th grade is also quite a bit higher than in the other clusters.

  15. Informal e-mail communication with the French research team leader (March 2010).

  16. My university IRB is constituted of faculty representing different fields, as well as community representatives. One of the representatives resigned from the IRB because she failed to see the use of any kind of youth survey.

References

  • Birkbeck, C., Morillo, S., & Crespo, F. (2007). ISRD2 Technical Report Venezuela.

  • Blaya, C. (2007). ISRD-2 Technical Report France.

  • Boekhout van Solinge, T., Wouters, M., Siesling, M., Chong, L., & Corsel, M. (2010). The Netherlands Antilles and Aruba. In J. Junger-Tas, I. Haen Marshall, D. Enzmann, M. Killias, M. Steketee, & B. Gruszcynska (Eds)., Juvenile delinquency in Europe and beyond: Results of the second international self-report delinquency study. New York: Springer.

  • Bovenkerk, F., & Wolf, T. (2010). Surinam. In J. Junger-Tas, I. Haen Marshall, D. Enzmann, M. Killias, M. Steketee, & B. Gruszcynska (Eds.), Juvenile delinquency in Europe and beyond: Results of the second international self-report delinquency study (pp. 399–407). New York: Springer.

  • Brener, N. D., Eaton, D. K., Kann, L., Grunbaum, J. A., Gross, L. A., Kyle, T. M., et al. (2006). The association of survey setting and mode with self-reported health risk behaviors among high school students. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70(3), 354–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enzmann, D., Haen Marshall, I., Killias, M., Junger-Tas, J., Steketee, M., & Gruszczynska, B. (2010). Self-reported youth delinquency in Europe and beyond: First results of the second ISRD (International Self-Report Study) in the context of police and victimization Data. European Journal of Criminology, 7(2).

  • Esbensen, F., Miller, M. H., Taylor, T. J., He, N., & Freng, A. (1999). Differential attrition rates and active parental consent. Evaluation Review, 23(3), 316–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esbensen, F. A., Melde, C., Taylor, T. J., & Peterson, D. (2008). Active parental consent in school-based research: how much is enough and how do we get it? Evaluation Review, 32(4), 335–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatti, U. (2007). ISRD-2 Technical Report Italy.

  • Henry, K. L., et al. (2002). The effect of active parental consent on the ability to generalize the results of an alcohol, tobacco, and other drug prevention trial to rural adolescents. Evaluation Review, 26(6), 645–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, R. (1963). Anti-intellectualism in American Life. Knopf Publishing.

  • Ji, P. Y., et al. (2004). Factors influencing middle and high schools’ active parental consent return rates. Evaluation Review, 28, 578–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Junger-Tas, J.,& Haen Marshall, I. (1999). The Self-Report Methodology in Crime Research: Strengths and Weaknesses. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and Justice, Volume 25 (291–367). University of Chicago Press, January.

  • Junger-Tas, J., Haen Marshall, I., Enzmann, D., Killias, M., Steketee, M., & Gruszcynska, B. (Eds.). (2010). Juvenile delinquency in Europe and beyond: Results of the second international self-report delinquency study. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kivivuori, J. (2007). Delinquent Behaviour in Nordic Capital Cities. Scandinavian Research Council for Criminology. National Research institute of Legal Policy, Helsinki.

  • Konnov, A., Makarov, A., Pozdnyakova, M., Safin, R., & Salagaev, A. (2010). Russia. In J. Junger-Tas, I. Haen Marshall, D. Enzmann, M. Killias, M. Steketee, & B. Gruszcynska (Eds)., Juvenile delinquency in Europe and beyond: Results of the second international self-report delinquency study. New York: Springer.

  • Marshall, I. H. (1996). De method van zelfrapportage. Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, 38, 2–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, I. H., & He, N. (2010). The United States. In J. Junger-Tas, I. Haen Marshall, D. Enzmann, M. Killias, M. Steketee, & B. Gruszcynska (Eds)., Juvenile delinquency in Europe and beyond: Results of the second international self-report delinquency study. New York: Springer.

  • Pokorny, S. B., et al. (2001). Do participation rates change when active consent procedures replace passive consent? Evaluation Review, 25(5), 567–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saint-Arnaud, S., & Bernard, P. (2003). Convergence or resilience? A hierarchical cluster analysis of the welfare regimes in advanced countries. Current Sociology, 51, 499–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steketee, M., Moll, M., & Kapardis, A. (Eds.). (2008). Juvenile delinquency in six New EU Member States. Crime, risky behaviour and victimization in the capital cities of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland and Slovenia. Utrecht: Jonker-Verwey Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sudman, S., Bradburn, N., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking about answers: The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, V., Hill, D. J., & Effendi, Y. (2004). How does active parental consent influence the findings of drug-use surveys in schools? Evaluation Review, 28(3), 246–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank all national partners involved in the International Self-Report Delinquency Study for their invaluable contributions. Without our partnership, the ISRD project could not have succeeded. I take full responsibility for the interpretations of the national research efforts, realising very well that I quite possibly may have misinterpreted the specifics of the research situation in a particular national site. This may be due to incomplete or missing information, or simple cultural bias. I welcome any supplemental information or corrective interpretation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ineke Haen Marshall.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marshall, I.H. “Pourquoi Pas?” Versus “Absolutely Not!” Cross-National Differences in Access to Schools and Pupils for Survey Research. Eur J Crim Policy Res 16, 89–109 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-010-9125-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-010-9125-8

Keywords

Navigation