The Rise of Visual Criminology: Categories, Approaches, and Testable Propositions

1. The Rise of VisualCriminology: Categories, Approaches, and Testable Propositions • J. Wheeldon • Norwich University • D. Harris • San Jose State University

2. Today • Why visualize? Who’s visualizing? • Categories and Approaches • Problems • Testable Propositions

3. Why Visualize? • Assumption: use of and interest in visual means and methods growing in many disciplines (Umoquit, Tso, Burchett, & Dobrow, 2012); • Recognition that people are spending an increasing amount of time staring at screens, and engaging visually with their phones, computers, and social media;

4. ahem.

6. Who’s Visualizing? • Criminologists including Burruss (2011), Heidt (2008), Lippens (2004), and Maltz (2009)? • New Directions in Visual Criminology panel at ASC; • This work is based on previous work (Harris, 2013; Wheeldon, 2011) and desire to better define and operationalize what we mean...

7. One take: • Visualcriminology: • Techniques for the collection, presentation, and interrogation of data on crime and social control (Wheeldon & Harris, 2013).

8. Existing categories: • 1) exploring research methods through expanded uses of concept maps, mind maps, and other diagrammatic approaches in criminology (Wheeldon & Ahlberg, 2012); • 2) describing data, telling stories, and presenting information using visual analytic approaches (Harris, 2013; Maltz, 2009); and • 3) demystifying theory, challenging research assumptions, and interrogating depictions of crime and social control (Lippens, 2012).

9. Learning Research Methods(Wheeldon & Ahlberg, 2012) How do the differences between concept maps and mind maps underscore epistemological, assumptive, and practical differences between quantitative and qualitative research?

10. Existing categories: • 1) exploring research methods through expanded uses of concept maps, mind maps, and other diagrammatic approaches in criminology (Wheeldon & Ahlberg, 2012); • 2) describing data, telling stories, and presenting information using visual analytic approaches (Harris, 2013; Maltz, 2009); and • 3) demystifying theory, challenging research assumptions, and interrogating depictions of crime and social control (Lippens, 2012).

11. Describing Data: In SF Crime doesn’t Climb (Wintrob &Reinhardt, 2013)

12. Crime and Neighborhoods in DC

13. Describing Data: Most Violent Police Beats in Oakland CA 2011/2012 (Natesh Daniel, 2012)

14. Existing categories: • 1) exploring research methods through expanded uses of concept maps, mind maps, and other diagrammatic approaches in criminology (Wheeldon & Ahlberg, 2012); • 2) describing data, telling stories, and presenting information using visual analytic approaches (Harris, 2013; Maltz, 2009); and • 3) demystifying theory, challenging research assumptions, and interrogating depictions of crime and social control (Lippens, 2012).

15. Depictions of Crime and Criminals

16. Images of Crime/Criminals: Last Suppers (Green, 2012)

17. So What? • New VisualApproaches... • (1) can provide new ways to teach theory, methods, and critical debates in criminology; • (2) offer novel approaches to data collection and analysis; and • (3) create potential for the increased use of visual tools for practitioners within the criminal justice system.

18. Teaching Criminology Theory(Heidt & Wheeldon, Contract) 7 steps of criminological thinking

19. Visual Data Collection

20. Life History Plot (Harris, 2013) • Data Visualization technique • Official criminal history • Life history details (including marriage, divorce, employment, military, births/deaths, trauma/ accidents, hospital stays, and psychiatric observations) were collected

21. Life History Plot - Step 1

22. Life History Plot - Step 2

23. Life History Plot - Step 3

24. An Example from Incarcerated Individual

25. A Picture is Worth a Thousand P- values

26. Problems / Limitations • Images can confuse and fail to clarify; • Visual learning not for everyone; • No clear definition / conceptualization / testable propositions

27. Confusing not clarifying

28. NYTimes, April 29, 2007

29. Mapping not for everyone • Potential for maps contains inherent limitation; • Maps and Visual approaches are weird / different / uncommon way for many to communicate - people may reject without proper training / explanation (Wheeldon, 2012) • While maps can assist to break out of the “canned responses” that can occur in interviews in Wheeldon’s work some senior CJ officials were skeptical / resistant to their use;

30. Thinking about testable propositions

31. Some Questions • 1. WHAT are the best uses of visual techniques for teaching and learning criminological concepts? • 2. WHERE are visual approaches most useful to supplement existing data collection methods and research designs; • 3. WHEN do images oversimplify issues instead of expanding criminological thinking? • 4. WHY do images of crime and social control overwhelm more reasoned approaches to criminal justice? • 5. HOW can visual approaches expand partnerships and broaden collaborations?

32. Other Questions? • Johannes Wheeldon (jwheeldo@norwich.edu) • Danielle Harris (danielle.harris@sjsu.edu)