Personalized crime location prediction

Tayebi, Mohammad A.; Glässer, Uwe; Ester, Martin; Brantingham, Patricia L.

doi:10.1017/s0956792516000140

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The following main reasons suggest that a new credibility crisis might dawn upon psychological science: (1) the limitations and frequent misinterpretations of betweenperson methods that have been described here; (2) the widespread and often predominant use of these betweenperson methods in psychology; (3) the fact that these limitations have been criticized for many years by various authors in combination with the fact that these method critiques are often ignored in current psychological research (e.g., Molenaar, 2004;Simpson, 1951;Reitzle, 2013;Rogosa, 1980;Hamaker et al, 2015); (4) the fact that many people, including practitioners interested in personalized solutions, turn to psychology with questions about individuals that cannot be answered by the between-person methods that are applied to study these questions; (5) the fact that diverse within-person methods have been available for a long time, solve some of the limitations of within-personmethods, but are not yet embraced fully in many psychological research fields; and (6) the fact that within-person methods and personalized descriptions and predictions are not only needed but frequently used in applied fields that take a pragmatic data science approach and are interested in making trustworthy decisions about how to treat individuals, including banking (e.g., Galal et al, 2016;Hernández-Nieves et al, 2020;), advertisement (Zhu & Chang, 2016;Bang & Wojdynski, 2016), medicine (Senn, 2016;2018), law enforcement (e.g., Tayebi et al, 2016), personalized content recommendation tailored to customer's preferences in for example Amazon or Netflix (e.g., Gomez-Uribe & Hunt, 2015;Smith & Linden, 2017), and many more.…”

Section: Do These Limitations Of Common Between-person Methods Imply That We Are At the Dawn Of A New Credibility Crisis In Psychology?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Averting the next credibility crisis in psychological science: Within-person methods for personalized diagnostics and intervention.

Moeller¹

2022

jpor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personalizing assessments, predictions, and treatments of individuals is currently a defining trend in psychological research and applied fields, including personalized learning, personalized medicine, and personalized advertisement. For instance, the recent pandemic has reminded parents and educators of how challenging yet crucial it is to get the right learning task to the right student at the right time. Increasingly, psychologists and social scientists are realizing that the between- person methods that we have long relied upon to describe, predict, and treat individuals may fail to live up to these tasks (e.g., Molenaar, 2004). Consequently, there is a risk of a credibility loss, possibly similar to the one seen during the replicability crisis (Ioannides, 2005), because we have only started to understand how many of the conclusions that we tend to draw based on between-person methods are based on a misunderstanding of what these methods can tell us and what they cannot. An imminent methodological revolution will likely lead to a change of even well-established psychological theories (Barbot et al., 2020). Fortunately, methodological solutions for personalized descriptions and predictions, such as many within-person analyses, are available and undergo rapid development, although they are not yet embraced in all areas of psychology, and some come with their own limitations. This article first discusses the extent of the theory-method gap, consisting of theories about within-person patterns being studied with between-person methods in psychology, and the potential loss of trust that might follow from this theory-method gap. Second, this article addresses advantages and limitations of available within- person methods. Third, this article discusses how within-person methods may help improving the individual descriptions and predictions that are needed in many applied fields that aim for tailored individual solutions, including personalized learning and personalized medicine.

show abstract

Section: Do These Limitations Of Common Between-person Methods Imply That We Are At the Dawn Of A New Credibility Crisis In Psychology?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Averting the next credibility crisis in psychological science: Within-person methods for personalized diagnostics and intervention.

Moeller¹

2022

jpor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreso, different crimes happened in urban populations such as property crime, collective violence, robbery and aggravated assault, where highly urbanized cities and migrant people (from rural to urban) have a strong relationship with crime rate (Lodhi & Tilly, 1973;Qi, 2020). Conversely, not all crimes happen in one specific location but rather crime happens in "crime hotspot" where offenders venture into unknown territory, and frequently select targets in or near places they are most familiar with as part of their activity space (Tayebi et al, 2016).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Economic Cost of Criminality: An Analysis of Its Impact on Development

Sabroso,

Cadusale,

Patayon

2023

EJPSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maintaining peace and harmony is a crucial challenge for developing nations, and the crime rate is a significant factor in achieving this goal. This study is intended to examine the relationship between a developing country's crime rate and the economic factors that influence it. This quantitative study aims to test the objective hypotheses through multiple regression analysis. The study utilized secondary data from the World Bank from 1990 to 2018 to assess the Philippines' crime rate and economic factors. The analysis reveals that economic factors, such as urbanization, GDP per capita, financial development, and labor force, substantially impact the national crime rate. This study provides policymakers with vital insights for implementing evidence-based peace and development initiative strategies. Article visualizations:<img src="/-counters-/soc/0009/a.php" alt="Hit counter" />

show abstract

“…The following main reasons suggest that a new credibility crisis might dawn upon the Psychological science: (1) the here described limitations and frequent misinterpretations of between-person methods, (2) the widespread and often predominant use of these between-person methods in Psychology, (3) the fact that these limitations have been criticized for many years by various authors in combination with the fact that these method critiques are often ignored in the current psychological research (e.g., Molenaar, 2004;Simpson, 1951;Reitzle, 2013;Rogosa, 1980;Hamaker, Kuiper, Grasman, 2015), ( 4) the fact that many people, including practitioners interested in personalized solutions, turn to Psychology with questions about individuals that cannot be answered by the between-person methods that are applied to studying these questions, ( 5) the fact that diverse within-person methods have been available, solve some of the limitations of within-person-methods, but are not yet embraced fully in many psychological research fields, and ( 6) the fact that within-person methods and personalized descriptions and predictions are not only needed but frequently applied in all the applied fields that take a pragmatic data science approach and are interested in making trustworthy decisions about how to treat individuals, including banking (e.g., Galal, Hassan, & Aref, 2016;Hernández-Nieves, Hernández, Gil-González, Rodríguez-González, & Corchado, 2020;), advertisement (Zhu & Chang, 2016;Bang & Wojdynski, 2016), medicine (Senn, 2016;2018), law enforcement (e.g., Tayebi, Glässer, Ester, & Brantingham, 2016), personalized content recommendation tailored to customer's preferences in e.g., Amazon or Netflix (e.g., Gomez-Uribe & Hunt, 2015;Smith & Linden, 2017), and many more.…”

Section: Do These Limitations Of the Common Between-person Methods Imply We Are At The Dawn Of A New Credibility Crisis In Psychology?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Averting the next credibility crisis in Psychological Science: Within-person methods for personalized diagnostic and intervention

Moeller¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personalizing assessments, predictions, and treatments of individuals is currently a defining trend in psychological research and applied fields, including personalized learning, personalized medicine, and personalized advertisement. For instance, the recent pandemic has reminded parents and educators of how challenging yet crucial it is to get the right learning task to the right student at the right time. Increasingly, psychologists and social scientists are realizing that the between-person methods that we have long been using in the hope to describe, predict, and treat individuals may fail to live up to these tasks (e.g., Molenaar, 2004). Consequently, there is a risk of a credibility loss, possibly similar to the one seen during the replicability crisis (Ioannides, 2005), because we have only started to understand how many of the conclusions that we tend to draw based on between-person methods misunderstand what these methods can tell us and what they cannot. An imminent methodological revolution will likely change even very established psychological theories (Barbot et al., 2020). Fortunately, methodological solutions for personalized descriptions and predictions, such as many within-person analyses, are available and rapidly being developed, although they are not yet embraced in all areas of Psychology, and some come with their own limitations. This article first discusses the extent of the theory-method gap between theories about within-person patterns versus methods examining only between-person patterns in Psychology, and the potential loss of trust that might follow from these limitations of the commonly used between-person methods. Second, this article addresses advantages and limitations of available within-person methods. Third, this article discusses how within-person analytical methods may help improving the individual descriptions and predictions that are needed in many applied fields aiming for tailored individual solutions, including personalized learning with educational technology and personalized medicine.

show abstract

Personalized crime location prediction

Cited by 8 publications

References 50 publications

Averting the next credibility crisis in psychological science: Within-person methods for personalized diagnostics and intervention.

Averting the next credibility crisis in psychological science: Within-person methods for personalized diagnostics and intervention.

The Economic Cost of Criminality: An Analysis of Its Impact on Development

Averting the next credibility crisis in Psychological Science: Within-person methods for personalized diagnostic and intervention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About