No abstract

Internal surveillance systems have long been used by prisons to combat misbehavior. Yet, limited research has focused on cameras’ preventive potential, failing to examine their utility in investigations. Using comparative interrupted time-series analyses and synthetic control methods, this study evaluates the impact of upgrading a surveillance system in a prison’s housing unit on total infractions and infractions resulting in guilty dispositions. Upgrades were two-phased, allowing us to examine the differential effects of replacing outdated cameras versus installing new cameras. One comparison unit came from the same facility as the treatment unit, while the other was synthetically generated from units in other prisons. We found limited evidence that the interventions reduced infractions, though there was a stronger link between the interventions and an increase in guilty dispositions, particularly from the installation of new cameras to reduce blind spots. We discuss the implications of these findings for policy and research.

This paper explores how two advocacy think tanks—the Heritage Foundation (Heritage) and Center for American Progress (CAP)—engage in research on K-12 education and attempt to influence education policymaking. Through our research, we discovered both expected and surprising differences and similarities between the think tanks. Differences included topic choice, particularly around school choice and disadvantaged students, the use of data analyses to underpin positions, and the volume of publication. Similarities included the mix of output type. Our most notable finding was that the model and mission of each think tank drove topic choices and how each conducted research and interacted with the policy world and media.