Researching Crime and Society (SU Sociology Methods) Study Guide

Researching crime and society requires more than knowing crime statistics or memorising sociological theories. It demands a careful grasp of research methods, ethical issues, data sources, and the way social context shapes both criminal behaviour and public responses to crime. This study guide brings together the core methodological tools used in sociology, with a strong South African university focus and practical links to crime, violence, policing, prisons, victimisation, and social inequality.

1. Researching Crime and Society in Sociology: What the Field Studies and Why Method Matters

Crime and society is a central concern in sociology because crime is never just an individual act. It is shaped by poverty, inequality, gender, race, age, urban space, family life, peer networks, institutions, policing practices, and the wider political economy. A sociological approach asks not only who commits crime, but also how crime is defined, who gets labelled as criminal, whose victimisation is counted, and which social forces produce patterns of harm. This makes the methods used to study crime absolutely crucial: the method determines what can be seen, what remains hidden, and what kinds of claims are justified.

In South African sociology programmes, including modules and methods-based courses commonly associated with SU Sociology and related introductory methods teaching, students are often expected to understand crime research as a field where both quantitative and qualitative approaches are necessary. Crime is measurable through police records, victimisation surveys, court data, and prison statistics, but it is also lived through fear, stigma, trauma, survival strategies, informal economies, and community conflict. A complete understanding requires both numbers and narratives.

Crime as a social phenomenon

Sociology treats crime as socially patterned rather than randomly distributed. For example, young men in poorer urban areas are more likely to be arrested for violent offences than older, wealthier adults living in gated suburbs. That pattern does not mean “crime belongs” to one class or group; it means opportunities, surveillance, policing intensity, social exclusion, and access to legal resources differ across social locations. Sociological research tries to uncover those patterns and explain them.

A useful way to think about crime and society is through four linked questions:

What counts as crime?
Definitions of crime change across time and political systems. Acts criminalised under one regime may be legal under another. This matters because research often relies on official definitions that may reflect power rather than harm.
Who is affected by crime?
Victimisation is uneven. Households in high-poverty neighbourhoods may face burglary, assault, gang violence, and extortion more frequently, while affluent groups may experience corporate fraud, cybercrime, or corruption that is less visible but equally damaging.
How is crime controlled?
Police, courts, prisons, private security, community patrols, and informal systems all shape the experience of crime control. Research must study these institutions, not just offenders.
How do people respond to crime?
Fear of crime changes behaviour, trust, voting, migration, and support for punitive policies. Research therefore has to measure both actual crime and perceived crime.

Why method matters in studying crime

Method matters because crime is a difficult object of study. Many offences are hidden, underreported, or selectively recorded. Domestic violence, sexual assault, bribery, corruption, and some forms of cybercrime are often invisible in official records. Meanwhile, police data may overrepresent areas with heavy patrols and underrepresent crimes in communities where residents mistrust the police. This means the “crime rate” is not a simple mirror of reality. It is partly a product of reporting, recording, enforcement, and classification.

A sociologist researching crime must therefore ask:

What is the source of the data?
Who produced it and for what purpose?
What kinds of crime are missing?
How reliable and valid is the measure?
Does the method reproduce the biases it aims to study?

These questions are central to exam answers because they show an understanding that crime research is both empirical and political. A study of burglary in the Western Cape, for instance, may find patterns in police statistics, but those figures could be influenced by reporting rates, property insurance requirements, and local policing strength. A qualitative study might reveal that households in informal settlements underreport theft because they believe nothing will be done, or because they fear retaliation. The two methods do not contradict each other; they illuminate different aspects of the same social reality.

Common sociological questions about crime

Crime research in sociology usually focuses on themes such as:

patterns of violent crime and property crime
social causes of offending
youth gangs and peer influence
the relationship between unemployment and crime
policing, surveillance, and racialised control
prisons and rehabilitation
gendered violence and domestic abuse
corruption and white-collar crime
fear of crime and media representation
community responses to crime and insecurity

Each of these topics can be studied with multiple methods. For example, to study gangsterism, a researcher might use:

interviews with residents and former gang members
observation in schools or communities
police and court records
spatial mapping of shootings
media content analysis
survey data on victimisation and fear

The strongest studies often combine methods because one source alone cannot explain the full picture. A study based only on police statistics may tell us where shootings are recorded. A study based only on interviews may tell us how residents experience violence. Together, they can reveal how crime is produced, hidden, reported, and interpreted.

Key examination idea

A strong sociology answer should always show that crime is socially constructed, unevenly measured, and shaped by power. That means you should avoid simplistic claims like “crime is caused by poverty alone” or “official statistics give the full picture.” Instead, explain how crime patterns emerge from a mixture of structural conditions, cultural meanings, institutional practices, and everyday choices.

2. Core Research Methods Used in Crime and Society Studies

Crime research uses both quantitative and qualitative methods, often in combination. Each method has strengths and limitations, and choosing the right one depends on the research question. In sociology methods courses, the key issue is not simply naming methods but showing why one method is more suitable than another for a particular topic. Research on crime and society is especially demanding because the field involves hidden behaviour, illegal acts, emotional trauma, mistrust, and institutional bias.

Quantitative methods

Quantitative research relies on numerical data and statistical analysis. In crime studies, the most common quantitative sources are:

official crime statistics
victimisation surveys
self-report surveys
prison and court records
census and socio-economic data
spatial and GIS data

Official crime statistics

Official statistics are figures collected by the police or other criminal justice agencies. They are often used to identify trends over time, compare regions, and allocate resources. If burglary in one district rises over three years, researchers may investigate whether the increase reflects actual offending, improved reporting, better policing, or changes in classification.

Strengths:

large-scale coverage
useful for trend analysis
allows comparison across time and place
often publicly available

Limitations:

underreporting is common
recording practices may change
influenced by police priorities and political pressure
does not capture the “dark figure of crime” well

The dark figure of crime refers to offences that occur but are never recorded in official data. This is especially important in sexual violence, domestic abuse, fraud, corruption, and some forms of workplace crime.

Victimisation surveys

Victimisation surveys ask respondents whether they have been victims of crime within a specified period. They are valuable because they capture offences that may never reach the police.

Strengths:

reveals underreported crime
measures fear of crime and reporting behaviour
can identify victim patterns by age, gender, class, and location

Limitations:

memory errors and telescoping
respondents may misunderstand questions
may exclude homeless people, prison populations, or people in institutions
expensive and logistically demanding

In South Africa, victimisation surveys are particularly useful because many communities have low trust in the police or expect no follow-up. A survey may show a much higher level of household theft or assault than the official record suggests.

Self-report surveys

Self-report studies ask individuals, often young people, to disclose their own offending or rule-breaking behaviour. These studies are important for examining delinquency, drug use, vandalism, and school-related offending.

Strengths:

reveals offending that never enters police data
useful for studying youth crime
can be anonymous, increasing honesty

Limitations:

social desirability bias
exaggeration or minimisation
memory problems
samples may not include serious offenders

Spatial and statistical analysis

Crime can also be studied spatially through mapping and statistical modelling. Researchers may use neighbourhood-level income, unemployment, density, housing type, policing levels, and recorded incidents to identify hotspots or correlations.

Strengths:

shows geographic concentration
useful for policy planning
can reveal links between place and crime

Limitations:

correlation does not prove causation
hotspot data may reflect enforcement patterns
may stigmatise poor communities if not interpreted carefully

Qualitative methods

Qualitative research aims to understand meanings, experiences, relationships, and processes. In crime and society studies, qualitative methods are essential for exploring how people interpret violence, how offenders justify behaviour, how communities cope, and how institutions operate in practice.

Interviews

Interviews can be structured, semi-structured, or unstructured. They are widely used to study victims, offenders, police officers, correctional officials, social workers, and residents.

Strengths:

rich detail
captures lived experience
flexible and adaptable
useful for sensitive topics

Limitations:

time-consuming
small samples limit generalisation
interviewer influence may shape responses
requires strong ethics and trust-building

Focus groups

Focus groups bring together several participants to discuss a topic. They are useful for understanding shared meanings, community perceptions of safety, and reactions to policing or crime prevention policies.

Strengths:

reveals group norms and disagreements
efficient for gathering multiple views
useful for policy feedback

Limitations:

dominant voices may overpower others
sensitive topics may be difficult in groups
confidentiality is harder to protect

Observation and ethnography

Observation involves watching behaviour in natural settings. Ethnography is a longer-term immersive form of observation that seeks to understand social life from within.

Strengths:

captures real-world interaction
reveals informal rules and routines
valuable for studying gangs, policing, courts, and neighbourhood life

Limitations:

access is difficult
safety risks may be significant
observer bias is possible
findings are context-specific

Ethnographic work is especially useful for understanding how youth gangs organise territory, how police patrols affect street behaviour, or how residents create informal safety systems.

Case studies

A case study examines one bounded case in depth, such as a specific prison, township, court, or anti-gang initiative. Case studies are common in crime research because they allow detailed analysis of complex social processes.

Strengths:

depth over breadth
context-rich
can combine methods

Limitations:

limited generalisability
findings depend on access and case selection
may be criticised as “too local” if not linked to theory

Mixed methods

Many strong crime studies use mixed methods, combining quantitative and qualitative data. For instance, a researcher might use police data to identify a cluster of house robberies, conduct interviews with residents to learn about fear and security strategies, and observe local community meetings to understand collective responses. Mixed methods are particularly effective when:

crime is underreported
the social meaning of crime matters
institutions and lived experience need to be linked
policy recommendations require both scale and depth

Comparing methods in a single view

Method	Best for	Major strength	Major limitation
Official statistics	Trends, comparisons, policy planning	Large-scale numerical coverage	Dark figure of crime, recording bias
Victimisation surveys	Hidden victimisation	Captures unreported crime	Recall error, survey exclusion
Self-report surveys	Offending behaviour	Reveals hidden delinquency	Honesty and sampling issues
Interviews	Meanings and experiences	Rich, detailed insight	Small samples, time-intensive
Focus groups	Shared perceptions	Group dynamics and debate	Confidentiality and dominance problems
Observation/ethnography	Behaviour in context	Real-time social processes	Access, safety, and subjectivity
Case study	One site or institution in depth	Contextual detail	Limited generalisation
Mixed methods	Complex crime phenomena	Balanced depth and breadth	Requires more time and skill

What examiners often look for

When discussing methods, it is not enough to list advantages and disadvantages. Good answers explain why a method fits a specific crime issue. For example:

A survey is suitable for measuring fear of crime across a province.
Interviews are suitable for understanding why victims do not report domestic violence.
Ethnography is suitable for studying gang territory and everyday survival.
Official statistics are suitable for tracking long-term trends in robbery, but not for measuring total crime levels.

3. Research Design, Sampling, and Measurement in Crime Studies

Research design is the blueprint of a study. It determines what data will be collected, from whom, by which method, and in what sequence. In research on crime and society, poor design can distort findings because the field is highly sensitive to bias, hidden populations, and ethical constraints. A good design starts with a clear research question and then chooses the most appropriate strategy for answering it.

Formulating a research question

A strong research question is specific, researchable, and sociological. It should identify:

the crime or social issue
the population or setting
the relationship or process being studied
the time frame or location if relevant

Examples:

How do residents in low-income Johannesburg neighbourhoods perceive police legitimacy?
What social factors shape young men’s involvement in gang networks in Cape Town?
How do women who have experienced intimate partner violence decide whether to report to the police?
What relationship exists between unemployment and property crime in selected South African districts?

These questions matter because they point toward different methods. The first and third are likely to benefit from interviews or focus groups. The second may require ethnography and life histories. The fourth may combine statistical analysis with local case studies.

Sampling in crime research

Sampling is the process of selecting participants or cases from a larger population. Because crime research often studies hidden or hard-to-reach groups, sampling becomes especially important.

Probability sampling

Probability sampling gives each member of a population a known chance of selection. It is common in surveys.

Types include:

simple random sampling
stratified sampling
cluster sampling
systematic sampling

Advantages:

supports generalisation
reduces selection bias when done properly
useful for larger populations

Disadvantages:

requires a sampling frame
can be expensive
difficult when the population is hidden or mobile

Non-probability sampling

Non-probability sampling is often used in qualitative crime research.

Types include:

purposive sampling
snowball sampling
convenience sampling
quota sampling

Advantages:

practical for hidden populations
flexible
useful for in-depth study

Disadvantages:

limited generalisability
more vulnerable to bias
sample may not represent the wider population

Snowball sampling is especially common in studies of former gang members, sex work, undocumented migrants, drug users, or people involved in illicit economies. One participant refers the researcher to another. This helps access but can create network bias because respondents are connected to similar social circles.

Measuring crime: concepts and indicators

Measurement is central in sociology because concepts like crime, violence, fear, victimisation, and trust must be operationalised. Operationalisation means turning a concept into an observable indicator.

For example:

Crime may be operationalised as reported incidents to police, self-reported offending, or victimisation experience.
Fear of crime may be measured through survey responses about perceived safety in the home, on public transport, or after dark.
Police legitimacy may be measured through trust, fairness, and willingness to cooperate with police.
Neighbourhood disorder may be measured through visible signs of decay, vandalism, abandoned buildings, or social cohesion scores.

The choice of indicator affects the outcome. If fear of crime is measured only by whether respondents say they feel “afraid,” it may miss more nuanced forms of precaution, such as avoiding transport at night or changing shopping routines. If crime is measured only through arrests, it may reflect police activity more than offending.

Validity, reliability, and objectivity

These three concepts are essential in methods exams.

Validity

Validity refers to whether a measure actually measures what it claims to measure.

Example: If a survey asks only about burglary to measure “household crime,” it excludes theft from yards, vehicle break-ins, and arson. The measure is incomplete and potentially invalid for the broader concept.

Types of validity relevant to crime research include:

face validity: does the measure seem appropriate?
content validity: does it cover all relevant aspects?
construct validity: does it reflect the theoretical idea?
ecological validity: does it reflect real-life behaviour?

Reliability

Reliability refers to consistency. A reliable measure produces similar results if repeated under similar conditions.

Example: If two researchers code the same police incident reports and find different results, the coding scheme is unreliable. In crime research, reliability is threatened by vague categories, inconsistent police recording, and subjective interpretation.

Objectivity

Objectivity means reducing personal bias in the research process. Complete neutrality is difficult, especially in crime research where the topic is emotionally and politically charged. Nonetheless, researchers should use clear procedures, transparent coding, and reflexive awareness of their own assumptions.

Research design choices by topic

Topic	Best design option	Why
Fear of crime in communities	Survey + focus groups	Measures prevalence and explains meanings
Gang recruitment	Ethnography + interviews	Captures hidden social processes
Domestic violence reporting	Interviews + case files	Explains silence and institutional response
Police corruption	Case study + document analysis	Uses multiple sources for a sensitive topic
Youth offending	Self-report survey + school interviews	Reveals hidden behaviour and social context
Prison experiences	Interviews + observation	Shows lived reality and institutional power

Practical issues in design

Crime research often faces obstacles that affect design:

access to prisons, police stations, or gated communities
safety concerns in violent areas
distrust from participants
ethical approval requirements
incomplete records
language and translation issues
political sensitivity

For example, a researcher studying extortion in a township may find that residents are unwilling to speak openly because they fear retaliation. The design must then protect anonymity, perhaps by conducting off-site interviews and avoiding identifying details. A poor design that ignores such realities may not only fail methodologically but also place participants at risk.

4. Ethics, Power, and Researcher Safety in Crime and Society Research

Ethics is one of the most important areas in crime research because the topics are often sensitive, illegal, traumatic, or politically charged. Researching crime and society means working with people who may be victims, offenders, police officers, prisoners, or community members living with violence. The researcher has a duty to minimise harm, protect confidentiality, and avoid exploiting vulnerability. In South African university settings, ethical review is taken seriously because crime research can easily expose participants to social, legal, or emotional danger.

Core ethical principles

Informed consent

Participants should know:

who the researcher is
what the study is about
what participation involves
any risks or discomforts
that participation is voluntary
that they can withdraw without penalty

In crime research, informed consent can be complex. If a participant is explaining involvement in illegal activity, they may fear self-incrimination. The researcher must explain limits of confidentiality and avoid making unrealistic promises.

Confidentiality and anonymity

Confidentiality means protecting information shared by participants. Anonymity means that identities are not linked to data.

In studies of crime:

names should usually be removed
identifying locations should be generalised
recordings must be stored securely
field notes should avoid unnecessary personal details

For example, if a researcher interviews women about domestic abuse in a specific informal settlement, even mentioning the exact block or household arrangement may make them identifiable. Ethical writing must balance detail with protection.

Non-maleficence

The principle of non-maleficence means “do no harm.” Harm may be:

emotional distress when discussing trauma
social harm if a participant is exposed as a “criminal”
legal harm if sensitive disclosures are mishandled
physical harm if the research site is unsafe

Researchers should avoid pressing participants to disclose more than they wish to share. They should also be prepared to stop interviews if a person becomes distressed.

Beneficence and justice

Beneficence means the study should have potential value. Justice means burdens and benefits should not be unfairly distributed. In crime research, this means being cautious not to repeatedly study poor communities only to produce knowledge that benefits policymakers, while participants themselves gain nothing. Where possible, research should be shared back with communities in accessible form.

Ethical dilemmas specific to crime research

Crime and society research presents unique dilemmas.

Researching illegal behaviour

If a participant admits to offending, drug dealing, corruption, or gang involvement, the researcher must have a clear protocol. It is unethical to solicit unnecessary detail that creates risk without adding analytical value. Researchers should not act as law enforcement agents unless legally required to do so under strict conditions and institutional rules.

Researching victims of violence

Victim-focused research must be trauma-informed. Questions should be phrased sensitively, participants should be allowed to skip questions, and referrals to support services should be available when appropriate. A victim of sexual assault should never be treated as merely a data source.

Researching prisons and police

Institutional research involves power asymmetry. Prisoners may feel compelled to participate because they think cooperation will help them. Police officers may provide official narratives while hiding misconduct. Researchers must be alert to coercion, performance, and institutional gatekeeping.

Working with children and youth

Young people may be particularly vulnerable in crime studies because they may be involved in offending, victimisation, or gang pressure. Consent may require both guardian consent and child assent, depending on the study and ethics rules. Questions must be age-appropriate and non-threatening.

Researcher safety and emotional labour

Crime research can place the researcher at physical and emotional risk. Entering high-violence areas, interviewing survivors, or observing police or court processes can be stressful. Safety planning should include:

conducting risk assessments
informing supervisors or colleagues of field locations
working in pairs when necessary
avoiding risky times and places
using trusted local contacts
planning exit routes and communication check-ins

Emotional labour is also important. Listening repeatedly to stories of violence, abuse, loss, or betrayal can affect the researcher’s mental health. Reflective practice, debriefing, and supervision are not luxuries; they are part of ethical research conduct.

Power and representation

A major ethical issue in crime research is representation. Researchers do not simply collect facts; they also produce narratives about communities, offenders, and institutions. Poorly written research can reinforce stereotypes about “criminal youth,” “dangerous townships,” or “hopeless communities.” Strong sociology resists these simplifications and explains structural conditions alongside agency and resilience.

For example, a study of gang-affected neighbourhoods should not reduce residents to victims or criminals. It should also show:

how families protect children
how community leaders negotiate peace
how young people navigate limited job opportunities
how local institutions sometimes fail and sometimes help

This balanced approach is ethically better and analytically stronger.

5. Interpreting Findings, Writing Exam Answers, and Applying Sociology to South African Crime Contexts

The final challenge in research on crime and society is interpreting findings properly and writing them up in a way that demonstrates sociological understanding. Exam answers often lose marks not because students lack knowledge, but because they present isolated facts without analysis, or they mention methods without linking them to the nature of crime as a social problem. This section brings together interpretation, argument structure, and South African application.

Interpreting findings critically

A sociological finding is never just a number or quotation. It must be interpreted in relation to theory, method, and context. If a survey finds that many people fear crime even when local burglary rates are stable, the interpretation might include:

media amplification of violent incidents
distrust in policing
repeated community experiences of victimisation
visible disorder such as broken streetlights or abandoned buildings
memories of past violence that persist beyond current statistics

If a qualitative study shows that residents do not report theft, the interpretation should not simply be “they do not care.” More plausible explanations may include:

low confidence in police response
fear of retaliation
belief that stolen goods will not be recovered
bureaucratic difficulty
normalisation of certain harms

The key is to move from description to explanation without making unsupported leaps.

Avoiding common analytical mistakes

Students often make the following mistakes in crime and society essays:

Confusing official data with total crime
Official statistics represent recorded crime, not all crime.
Assuming one method is superior in all contexts
Different methods answer different questions.
Treating correlation as causation
The fact that unemployment and crime rise together does not prove one causes the other in a simple way.
Ignoring measurement bias
Police action, reporting practices, and definitions shape data.
Overgeneralising from small samples
A small case study may be insightful but not statistically representative.
Ignoring power and inequality
Crime is linked to class, race, gender, age, place, and institutional power.

Structuring a strong exam answer

A strong answer on researching crime and society should usually include:

a clear definition of the concept or method
explanation of why it matters for crime research
strengths and limitations
example from a crime context
critical evaluation
conclusion linking back to the sociological problem

A model answer structure might look like this:

Introduction: Define the method and explain its relevance to crime research.
Body paragraph 1: Explain how the method works.
Body paragraph 2: Discuss strengths with a crime-related example.
Body paragraph 3: Discuss limitations and bias.
Body paragraph 4: Compare with another method.
Body paragraph 5: Apply to a South African issue such as domestic violence, gang violence, or police corruption.
Conclusion: Summarise why a mixed, critical approach is usually best.

South African applications

South Africa is a particularly important context for crime research because it combines high inequality, spatial segregation, a legacy of apartheid violence, uneven policing, and intense public concern about safety. This creates a setting where official crime figures, lived experience, and media narratives may diverge sharply.

Urban violence and spatial inequality

In many South African cities, crime clusters reflect historical and contemporary inequality. Township residents may face longer travel distances, weaker infrastructure, limited lighting, and heavier policing presence. A sociological study would examine how space and exclusion shape vulnerability, not just individual behaviour.

Gender-based violence

Gender-based violence is often underreported because of stigma, economic dependence, fear, and distrust in institutions. Qualitative interviews are essential for understanding why survivors may stay silent, while surveys can estimate prevalence. A sound study may also analyse how cultural norms, relationship power, and institutional responses interact.

Gangsterism

Gangsterism is a classic case where ethnography, interviews, and community-based methods are highly valuable. Police data may show shootings, but only fieldwork can explain recruitment, territorial identity, the role of schools, and the survival strategies of residents.

Corruption and white-collar crime

Corruption is often undercounted because it is hidden and sometimes normalised. Document analysis, interviews with investigators, court records, and media analysis can help uncover patterns. Here, quantitative statistics alone are usually insufficient because the most serious harms are often concealed inside institutions.

Youth offending

Youth crime research often uses self-report surveys and school-based studies because many minor offences never enter the criminal justice system. Such research must be careful not to stigmatise young people. It should also connect behaviour to family life, peer networks, school exclusion, unemployment, and neighbourhood disadvantage.

Methods and policy relevance

Research methods matter because they shape policy. If policymakers rely only on recorded crime, they may overinvest in visible policing while ignoring underreported violence at home or in workplaces. If they rely only on anecdotes, they may create moral panic. Good research informs balanced responses such as:

better victim support services
community-based prevention
improved trust in police and reporting systems
youth development and school retention programmes
anti-corruption reforms
targeted interventions in high-risk spaces

Summary comparison of key research approaches

Research approach	Main question answered	Best use in crime research	Caution
Quantitative	How much, how often, where	Measuring trends and patterns	May miss hidden crime
Qualitative	Why, how, what it means	Understanding experiences and processes	Smaller samples, less generalisable
Mixed methods	How much and why	Complex crime problems	More demanding to design
Case study	What happens in this place or institution	Deep local analysis	Limited breadth
Comparative research	How do cases differ?	Comparing regions, groups, or systems	Requires careful matching

Final revision points

Before an exam, focus on these high-value ideas:

Crime is socially constructed and unevenly measured.
The dark figure of crime is central to understanding official statistics.
No single method can fully capture crime and society.
Method choice must fit the research question.
Ethics are especially important because crime research often involves vulnerable people.
South African crime research must account for inequality, spatial history, and institutional trust.
Strong answers combine explanation, evaluation, and application.

Compact exam memory list

Official statistics = useful for trends, limited by underreporting.
Victimisation surveys = show hidden victimisation, limited by recall and sampling.
Self-report surveys = reveal offending, limited by honesty.
Interviews = depth and meaning, limited by small samples.
Ethnography = context and process, limited by access and safety.
Ethics = consent, confidentiality, safety, and non-maleficence.
South Africa = inequality, violence, policing, gendered harm, and trust issues.

A well-prepared sociology student should be able to explain not only what method is used, but also why it is appropriate, what it misses, and how it shapes the knowledge produced about crime and society. That is the core of strong exam performance in research methods and crime-focused sociology.