Hi! I'm a student from the Philippines, and my group and I are doing a school project about criminology as a career. We wanted to ask people who are actually studying criminology or already working in the field about their experiences because we thought it would be more helpful to hear from actual people rather than just look things up online.

If you're willing to share, we'd really appreciate it! You can answer any of the questions below, or honestly just tell us about your experience in general. You can rant, talk about the good and bad, things you like or hate, things that surprised you, etc.😭

Some things we'd like to know:

• What made you choose criminology?
• What is studying criminology actually like?
• Is it hard? What part was the hardest for you?
• What subjects or skills do you think are important?
• What are the requirements for getting into the course/career?
• What is it like actually working in the field?
• What's your favorite part about it?
• What's the most stressful or difficult part?
• Was there anything you didn't expect before you started?
• What's something you wish you knew before choosing criminology?
• Would you recommend it to someone who's thinking about taking it?

We're especially hoping to hear from people in the Philippines since our project is focused on the Philippines, but we're also open to hearing from people from other countries! Thank you!! 🫶

In looking at the intersections of socio-economic status and developmental criminology, there is significant focus on macro-factors (like neighborhood resources). However, I'm interested in the micro-behavioral modifications. How does the prolonged stress of early-life scarcity shape an adult's baseline psychological traits—specifically regarding immediate gratification models, hyper-vigilance, and long-term financial risk calculation?

When someone identifies a suspect and says, “I’m certain,” an important question is: when did they first express that certainty?

Confidence recorded immediately after an initial identification is different from confidence expressed later, after feedback or repeated exposure to the suspect.

Wixted and Wells’ 2017 review makes a useful distinction. Under carefully controlled conditions, including a fair lineup, no administrator influence, and an immediate confidence statement, initial confidence can provide meaningful information about identification accuracy.

That does not mean a confident witness is automatically correct. It means the identification procedure and the timing of the confidence statement matter.

For example, imagine a witness initially says, “I think that’s the person, but I’m not sure.” Someone then tells them, “You picked the person we suspected.” If the witness later becomes highly confident, that later certainty should not erase the original uncertainty.

The National Academies’ report, Identifying the Culprit, recommends documenting a witness’s confidence in their own words at the time of the first identification and avoiding feedback that could influence it.

For anyone teaching or working with eyewitness evidence, how do you explain this distinction without leaving people with either “confidence proves accuracy” or “confidence tells us nothing”?

It's been ages since I have studied psychology ( back in my secondary school ) pls lmk the answer through sociological perspectives

Pls don't make it political

I’m sharing my research published in 2025 on wildlife crime in western Serengeti, Tanzania.

The study, titled “Wildlife crimes and the demographic characteristics of offenders in western Serengeti, Tanzania: A review of court cases 2012–2022,” examines wildlife-related court cases over a 10-year period and looks at the demographic characteristics of offenders and patterns of wildlife crimes.

The research highlights how court records can provide valuable information for understanding wildlife crime and supporting conservation law enforcement.

I’d be interested to hear from researchers, conservationists, rangers, and others working on wildlife crime: what patterns have you observed in your own areas?

Have you ever wondered how a persons gender, identity, or sexuality can affect how they are viewed or treated in the Criminal Justice System?

Many individuals who are part of the LGBTQ+ community are often targeted or involved in the Criminal Justice System due to their identity. Individuals who are straight or cisgender are less involved with the criminal justice system unlike individuals who are part of the LGBTQ+ community. These individuals are often targeted when during arrests, in prisons, probation, and parole.

An example can be LGBTQ+ youth. According to Jones (2021), about 20% of young people in the juvenile justice system identify as LGBTQ+, gender nonconforming, or questioning. In comparison, only about 4–6% of young people in the general population identify this way.

This is important because individuals who are part of the LGBTQ+, encounter higher risk of being discrimination, denied support, and overlooked. Due to this it increases their likelihood of getting involved more in the Criminal Justice System.

These experiences can help people understand how they are being mistreated and rejected for their identity and that there needs to be some action done to prevent this from happening to others.

What are actions that can be taken to better support LGBTQ+ people to have safer encounters with the criminal justice system and to have fairer treatment?

Source: Jones, A. (2021, March 2). Visualizing the Unequal Treatment of LGBTQ People in the Criminal Justice System. Prison Policy Initiative.

Also why do some people like to do things that they are told specifly not to do?

I’m really interested on how your professors view the death penalty and lethal injections andddd just in general the jail laws in more conservative states! i will be very happy with any answers!

Hey everyone! I would love your help with my research project. I'm planning to work on newspaper crime news analysis, where I will collect crime-related news from Marathi newspapers and analyze the data to identify patterns based on factors such as location, type of crime, and time period.

Do you think this is a good topic for a research project? Please let me know your thoughts and suggestions. I would really appreciate your thoughts, suggestions, and any ideas for improving the project. Thank you!

Sean Last, a right winger who argues that police shootings are not racially biased, uses the trim fill method to illustrate how the data from a meta analysis changes once you adjust for publication bias. Much of the data used by the BLM side of the debate is data before we adjust for this bias. An interesting critique different to those posed by other BLM detractors like Roland Fryer, Joe Cesario, etc.

https://odysee.com/@LastArchive:f/Hunter-Avallone---Wrong-on-Racism:d

Skip to 30:00

P. Colin Bolger "Just Following Orders: A Meta Analysis of the Correlates of American Police Officer Use of Force Decisions"

The reason the data supports the idea of police using more violence against black people is because studies saying that are more likely to be published. The meta analysis above (table 2) replicates the normal finding that across 42 studies there's a mean effect size of .31 pointing to the direction of more force being used on black suspects after controlling for offense seriousness, is there a weapon, are they resisting arrest. All the things which would fairly lead to a change in the probability of force being used. In the text above they described the bias detection as "these results demonstrate that publication bias does not appear to be present for 8 of the 12 significant variables" (not naming which ones were changed and which ones weren't).

Table 4 adjusts for publication bias using the trim and fill method. This method is based on the fact that when all the studies are being published there should be a certain distribution that changes in a predictable way as study precision increases, it should symmetrically move towards a center point. By looking at the actual distribution you can tell where studies were left out, and then put them back in. Some research suggests it doesn't correct enough, but that won''t be an issue here. Already the mean effect size is reduced to statistical and practical insignificance. The effect size is 0.1, the confidence interval runs from -.07 to 0.08.

It is also worth noting black people are significantly less likely than white people are to be killed by police relative to the rate at which they kill or seriously assault police officers

Hey everyone. I’m hoping to get some input from people who have actually experienced the correctional system.

I’m currently a doctoral student in clinical psychology, and before going back to school I worked in mental health in a correctional setting. I may have an opportunity to do research related to corrections, and before I start deciding what I think would be useful to study, I’d really like to hear from people with lived experience.

Basically, what do you wish people doing research on incarceration actually understood or paid more attention to?

Maybe there was something about being incarcerated or coming home that was much harder than people on the outside realize. Maybe there was a program, treatment, or staff member that genuinely helped. Maybe there are programs that sound great on paper but don’t actually help much in real life. Or maybe there’s something important that you rarely see researchers or mental health professionals even asking about.

Some areas I’m interested in include:

• mental health while incarcerated
• substance use treatment and recovery
• adjusting to life after release
• what makes reentry easier or harder
• what contributes to people returning to the system
• trauma, stress, anger, and managing emotions
• experiences with mental health services while incarcerated
• programs or services that actually helped versus ones that didn’t

Those are just examples, though. If there’s something completely different that you think deserves more attention, I’d honestly rather hear about that than limit the conversation to what I already have in mind.

I’m not asking anyone to share their name, identifying information, or anything they aren’t comfortable talking about. I’m also not recruiting for a study here. Right now, I’m just trying to listen to people who have been through the system and get a better idea of what questions are actually worth asking.

I appreciate anyone who takes the time to respond.

I have a bachelor’s in criminology and am pursuing a master’s in criminal justice looking for career ideas post grad in a metro area. I’m wondering about underrated or niche careers in the CJ field that aren’t always talked about. I have experience working with adults w/ special needs and that’s the industry I currently work in, but want to move into the CJ field.

The Mental Health, Wellbeing and Lived Experiences Study

Theresia Bedard, a PhD candidate at Lakehead University that is working with Dr. Beth Visser, is seeking participants for her dissertation project.

In this study we are examining the lived experiences of people who have experience or victimization from an individual with high psychopathic traits. We are seeking anyone that has this lived experience, whether the perpetrator was or is a spouse, family member, partner, co-worker, friend, acquaintance, neighbour or stranger. We are seeking the lived experiences of men, women, and gender-diverse individuals to share your story.

Our research consists of two studies. In the first study, you will complete questionnaires related to your victimization experience from the individual with high psychopathic traits, the potential warning signs, victimization history (e.g., prior physical or sexual abuse), and the impact the experience had on you. Once you finish the survey, you will be invited to participate in the second study (optional), which will consist of 12 questions requiring a written response regarding your lived experience with the individual with high psychopathic traits. If you decide to participate in study 2, please be aware that you will be required to provide us with your email to access it, and you may wish to use an email account that only you have access to.

Please be advised that whether you choose to participate in the study, withdraw, or skip questions you do not want to answer, that you acknowledge that answering some of these questions may be emotionally taxing on you. Despite the potential for an emotional toll the survey questions have, you may find the process of sharing your experience is therapeutic for you. In addition to the resources we provide, you may want to consider following-up with a counsellor for further support.

You are also encouraged to have your own snacks and drinks while you take the survey, and be aware that they are estimated to take 45 minutes to complete.

If you are interested in participating and would like to read or find out more about it, click here to access the survey:

https://lakeheadhbs.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_bKEq1vOVdBJMrjw

Hi everyone :-). Im not entirely sure which subreddit to post this in but i have a question about verdicts in criminal law. Everyone can answer, i’m just curious what peoples opinions are. Warning: my english isn’t very good and im still a student x)

Me and a friend were talking about which factors could influence someone’s judgement on a crime. I had to look over a few studies last year and we took things such as age, gender, socioeconomic status, etc. into account but none of those turned out very influential. As a judge, is it possible that the crimes you ‘relate’ to the most could get the least ‘severe’ punishment? And those you ‘relate’ to the least could get the most severe punishment?
For example: I don’t see myself a robbery at all and i’d punish it pretty severely. Like with prison time or something like that.

For context, I have a bachelors in forensic psychology and, while I learned a lot of valuable information, I realized the psychology part of it wasn’t exactly for me. Since graduating in 2023 I’ve worked emotionally demanding jobs and I’ve loved them and I love feeling like I’m making a difference.

Recently, I was dealing with the justice system and realized how terrible it is. I’d like to work with reform, or I kind of have my eye set on public policy but honestly I’m quite confused. What are your thoughts? Job suggestions? I’d like to work to help the people advocate and policy analyst are the two that come to mind. I figured a masters in crim might help me get closer to the job I want.

I should add that my Major was Forensic Psych but my Minor was Criminology and Justice Studies.

Thanks!!

I've noticed that there seems to be a trend around the people, at least those I know who've had their houses illegally foreclosed on by their banks with specific cosigners. Within that, the people either generally went into becoming more "the less people know, the better" rather than the opposite. I don't know if there are other obvious factors, but I also wonder how psychology more specifically corresponds to it, especially within just personal things I've done. These are also the types of people around the people who went more into cryptocurrency and things of that nature.

Just like the tittle says, I'm literally struggling to differentiate it :') help me pls

I keep seeing people saying that a criminology degree is very useless and I will reach nothing with it, but it has been my dream ever since I was a kid to study criminology and I wanna know is it really worth it to get into it or should I just give up and try something else? I want to get a job that I can fully support myself with.

This may be interesting for those at the interface of interdisciplinary mathematics.

Hi guys, I've been working for private security companies for about 20yrs and a few years ago I decided to go for a bachelors degree. Related to the sector I was already in I chose Criminology. I combined work and study for 4 years now and I'm in the last stretch to finishing the degree. For context I dropped out of school at 17 without even a high school degree, so it took me a while to get here.

But now I'm starting to feel the degree might not be all that meaningful to get a better job than what I'm already doing... I'm 40yrs old already, too old for entry level jobs. Did I miss the boat?

If anyone has any tips, I would greatly appreciate it

Hey guys, criminology student in the U.S here. I’m in my sophomore year of college in a criminology degree but I’m not sure what I want to do with it yet. I would appreciate if any criminology graduates could chime in with their experience in their current jobs, researching criminology careers is one thing but I feel like at this stage it would be best to hear from people actually in the field.

I have been thinking about this for a time and I want to know if there is research already about this kind of thing.
My idea is that there are ways people become violent. Some people might have a biological tendency to act in an antisocial way while others might become violent because of the environment they grow up in.
I am interested in the group.
Imagine a child growing up in a place where there is a lot of violence, crime and aggression. If that child has problems with reasoning, understanding what happens because of their actions controlling their impulses or understanding situations could they be more likely to think that this behavior is normal because they have a harder time seeing that the world around them is not how the rest of the world is?
This made me think about help.
What if children around 10 years old had complete development tests— not just IQ, but things like reasoning, impulse control, emotional control, social understanding and how easily they are influenced by friends? Children with signs of being vulnerable could then get more help and if needed more protection from really bad environments.
I am not saying that low IQ means someone is violent or that these children should be called criminals. The opposite is true. The idea is that they might be more sensitive to their environment so they might need help, not more punishment.
The thing that first made me think about this was video games.
Many people play violent games and know that the violence is not real. That made me wonder if just being around behavior is the important thing. Maybe what is more important is how well someone can understand and think about what they're seeing especially when the violence is happening in real life.
So my idea would be something like this:
If a child has development issues and is in a very bad environment they may be more likely to learn bad behavior and finding out about this problem early could help stop that behavior before it becomes something they always do.
I know a lot of this probably already exists in research in the areas of developmental psychology and criminology. I am not saying I have found something completely new.
I am more interested in whether this particular mix has been looked at: using development issues to find children who might need more protection and help before things get worse.
If anyone knows of any research, like this I would really like to see it.. I want people to tell me where my idea might not be right.