臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：毒品犯罪熱區空間分析--以臺北市中山區為例
作者：林大為
校院名稱：中央警察大學
系所名稱：犯罪防治研究所
指導教授：鄧煌發、鄧志松
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2015
主題關鍵詞：犯罪熱區；地理資訊系統；空間分析；犯罪製圖；偏差地點理論；crime hotspots；geological information system；spatial analysis；crime mapping；deviant places theory
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:70
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機 5
第三節 研究目的 8
第四節 名詞解釋 10
第二章 理論與文獻探討 23
第一節 犯罪熱區及以地點為問題導向之警政執法模式 23
第二節 犯罪學相關理論之運用 29
第三節 臺灣毒品犯罪趨勢與毒品犯罪行為特性分析 42
第四節 地點與犯罪之研究 50
第五節 綜合評述 64
第三章 研究架構、假設與方法 71
第一節 臺北市中山區地理環境與毒品犯罪概況 71
第二節 臺北市中山區毒品犯罪機制 76
第三節 研究架構與假設 90
第四節 研究流程、工具及方法 91
第五節 研究倫理 115
第四章 毒品犯罪資料探索分析 119
第一節 毒品犯罪官方資料統計 119
第二節 毒品犯罪空間探索 134
第三節 綜合分析 151
第五章 毒品犯罪環境特性與分析 159
第一節 實地觀察 159
第二節 毒品犯罪與特定行業及建築物之空間分析 174
第三節 相關分析 188
第四節 迴歸分析 191
第五節 綜合分析 207
第六章 結論與建議 211
第一節 研究主要發現 211
第二節 研究討論 216
第三節 結論與建議 230
第四節 研究限制與未來研究方向 237
參考書目 241
臺北市中山區為全市毒品犯罪查獲件數最多地區，顯然有毒品犯罪熱區聚集情形，本研究認為除了人口結構因素以外，尚有空間上的劣勢因子，導致中山區毒品犯罪熱區聚集。因此，本研究架構假設毒品犯罪在空間上有群聚現象，且有顯著犯罪熱區；而其犯罪熱區之生態環境上有空間上劣勢因子（Spatial disadvantage），包括特定行業及特定建築物類型兩種，分別對毒品犯罪發生產生影響，且共同對毒品犯罪發生影響甚鉅。
檢視本研究結果，首先在研究過程中，運用社會科學及地理資訊之跨領域分析工具，分析臺北市中山區之時空熱點分布情形，確認毒品犯罪熱區聚集區域及趨勢變化情形；其次，透過實地觀察、訪談及犯罪製圖，找出影響毒品犯罪熱區場域之空間劣勢因子，為部分特定行業及特定建築物類型；再利用社會科學多元迴歸與空間迴歸分析，交叉分析建立毒品犯罪案件在數量密度上解釋模型為制服酒店業、資訊休閒業、舞廳舞場業、卡拉OK業及養身會館業與特定建築物（套房出租大樓或列管大樓）所建構出來的場域；以及毒品犯罪地點在距離上解釋模型為酒店視聽歌唱業飯店與資訊休閒、卡拉OK 與舞廳、三溫暖與養身會館、PUB與特定建築物（套房出租大樓或列管大樓）所建構出來的場域，加上彼此的共生效應，將是空間上解釋毒品犯罪的最佳模型。
本研究發現毒品犯罪熱區場域特徵是土地混合使用（住商混合使用），加上老舊複雜的社區大樓（套房出租大樓）與特定行業臨立的共生關係，係形成毒品犯罪聚集的主要因素。無論是進行毒品交易或是其他的毒品犯罪行為，這樣的空間劣勢因子，提供毒品犯罪所需要的熟悉性、安全性、便利性、隱密性及低風險性。
透過毒品犯罪熱區的時空分析，以及毒品犯罪點位與空間上劣勢因子關聯性之確立，本研究希望除了能提供執法機關具體而實用的實證研究，累積國內以地點為問題導向警政的實證基礎以外，更能協助警察機關制定適宜的執法措施，提升警察機關執法效能。
關鍵字：犯罪熱區、地理資訊系統、空間分析、犯罪製圖、偏差地點理論
Zhongshan District, the most drug-related crime cases accounted in Taipei City, leading to apparent drug-related crime hot spots concentration tendency. This research suggested that aside from the demographic structure factor, there are also spatial disadvantage factors forming in the concentration of drug-related crime hot spots in Zhongshan District., this research shall base on the assumption that drug-related crimes have the tendency to build on spatial congregation effect, with apparent crime hot spots. Spatial disadvantage factors in crime hot spot’s ecology include 2 types, namely, distinctive licensed businesses and building types, all have separate impact that lead to occurrence of drug-related crimes, with great influence on drug-related crime rates.
Examining the results of the research, using the cross-field analytical tools of social science and geological information, analyzing the allocation of hot spots in Zhongshan District, Taipei City, while verifying the crime hot spots concentrated areas and changes on trends. Furthermore, through actual field observation, interviews and preparing criminal graphing, by identifying the spatial disadvantage factors within the affected crime hot spots such like distinctive licensed businesses and building types, couple with multiple and spatial regression analysis to cross-examining, to establish the model based on quantitative density of drug-related crime cases, to formulate the premises occupied by the licensed businesses such as Uniform Clubs, Cyber café, Dancing Ballrooms, Karaoke and Sauna /Fitness Clubs as well as distinctive structures like suites-leasing buildings or tabulated buildings, leading to the best model to showcase drug-related crimes from a spatial perspective based on the interrelation effect built from these premises.
This research found specific characteristic in drug-related crime hot spots is in Commercial-Residential Mixed Occupancy Zone, with interrelation between aged residential buildings (mainly suites-leasing buildings) and distinctive businesses, is the key factor in forming the drug-related crime hot spots. These spatial disadvantage factors, facilitating with associated characteristics like convenience, familiarity, low-risk, good privacy and security, provided for drug trading or other drug-related crimes needs.
Through time-space analysis of drug-related crime hot spots and the connection between drug-related crime locations and spatial disadvantage factors, this research is to provide practical and solid research findings to law enforcement agencies, while built on the accumulated spatial issue-based testimonials, to further assist local law enforcement agencies to develop more appropriate law enforcing measures, resulting in higher enforcing performance.
keywords：crime hot spot、geological information system、spatial analysis、crime mapping 、deviant places theory
一、中文部分
1. 王文科（1995）。教育研究法，pp356-357。臺北：五南圖書出版公司。new window
2. 石計生（2007）。社會地理資訊系統與Arcgis研究教學。臺北：儒林出版社。
3. 江慶興(1998)。破窗理論與犯罪偵防-以美國紐約市警察局為例。警學叢刊，29（3），77-92。new window
4. 朱正聲（2007）。全球化下我國緝毒工作之研究。國立政治大學國家安全與大陸研究碩士在職專班碩士論文。
5. 李明道（2000）。以犯罪熱區論警察因應作為－以台北縣為例。中央警察大學行政警察研究所碩士論文。
6. 吳亞如（2005）。桃園市暴力犯罪空間地理分佈之研究。元智大學資訊社會學研究所碩士論文。
7. 周愫嫻（1997）。城市少年犯罪的地緣與空間分析。臺北：國科會專題研究報告（計畫編號：NSC87-2412-H133-001）。
8. 孟維德（2002）。犯罪熱區的實證分析－警察局勤務中心報案紀錄之分析與運用。犯罪學期刊，8，27-64。new window
9. 孟靜(1983)。臺北市犯罪現象之空間組織。地理研究報告，9，135-165。new window
10. 邱富勇（2008）。問題導向警政策略在防制竊盜犯罪效果及提升警察服務滿意度之實證研究－以基隆市某社區為例。中央警察大學犯罪防治研究所碩士論文。
11. 林山田、林東茂、林燦璋（2012）。犯罪學，pp.472。臺北：三民書局。
12. 林建陽、柯雨瑞（2003）。毒品犯罪與防治。桃園：中央警察大學。new window
13. 林傑斌、劉明德（2002）。地理資訊系統GIS理論與實務。臺北：文魁資訊股份有限公司。
14. 林燦璋（1997）。社區與問題導向警政在犯罪預防策略之實證研究。臺北：國科會專題研究報告（計畫編號：NSC 87-2414-H-015-004）。
15. 林進發(2004)。臺中市搶奪犯罪熱區之空間分析。國立彰化師範大學地理學系碩士論文。
16. 林志誠（2006）。警察巡邏勤務實施成效之研究-從問題導向警政策略探討。銘傳大學社會科學院國家發展與兩岸關係碩士在職專班碩士論文。
17. 陳金龍（2008）。毒品犯罪查緝策略之研究。逢甲大學公共政策研究所論文。
18. 陳向明（2002）。社會科學質的研究。臺北：五南圖書出版公司。new window
19. 陳佩君（2011）。問題導向警政運用於金門地區刑案防處之研究。中央警察大學行政管理研究所碩士論文。
20. 莊明貞、陳明如譯（2005）。質性研究導論（C.Glesne著）。臺北：高等教育。
21. 許春金（2007）。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報第8期，1-20。
22. 許春金（2007）。犯罪學。pp.762，臺北：三民書局。
23. 許春金（2008）。犯罪預防與犯罪分析。臺北：三民書局。
24. 許春金（2009）。人本犯罪學。臺北：三民書局。
25. 游靜文(2004)。臺中市犯罪類型與空間特性之研究。國立彰化師範大學地理學系碩士論文。
26. 溫在弘（2009）。犯罪熱區分析的理論與應用。2009 警政治安策略研討會論文集。
27. 溫在弘、劉擇昌、林民浩（2010）。犯罪地圖繪製與熱區分析方法及其應用：以1998-2007年台北市住宅竊盜犯罪為例。地理研究，52，43-63。new window
28. 黃富源譯（1985）。以環境設計防制犯罪。新知譯粹，1（2）。清永賢二及高野公男（1982），都市之犯罪防止，防犯基本七技法。
29. 黃富源、張平吾、蔡田木、黃贊松（2007）。社區犯罪基圖在汽車竊盜犯罪區位特性與預防之研究-以台北市北投區為例。台北：內政部警政署刑事警察局研究案（GRB編號：PG9608-0194）。
30. 黃富源、范國勇、張平吾（2012）。犯罪學。臺北：三民書局。
31. 湯巧君(2006)。利用犯罪地圖分析臺中市2005年搶奪案之時空差異。高雄師範大學地理學系碩士論文。
32. 張淑貞(2007)。街頭搶奪犯罪之空間與時間群聚性研究—以臺中市西屯區為例。逢甲大學土木及水利工程所博士論文。
33. 楊國樞等（2000）。社會及行為科學研究法。臺北：東華書局。new window
34. 葉秀炳(2005)。臺北市士林區少年竊盜犯罪空間分析。臺北市立教育大學社會科教育研究所碩士論文。
35. 葉奇秀（2006）。影響毒品犯罪率因素之實證研究。國立成功大學高階管理碩士在職專班碩士論文。
36. 潘鈺楨(2011)。在理想與現實之間狂亂飛舞-四位臺灣舞者之生命敘說。臺北市立教育學院舞蹈研究所碩士論文
37. 劉擇昌（2007）。犯罪地理學發展與地理資訊系統於犯罪防治工作應用之探究，警學叢刊，37（6），1-20。new window
38. 劉擇昌（2011）。住宅竊盜犯罪熱區空間分析與環境特性之研究--以台北市大安區為例。中央警察大學犯罪防治研究所博士論文。new window
39. 劉擇昌、吳柏蒝（2008）。犯罪製圖（Crime Mapping）與空間分析（Spatial Analysis）軟體運用於犯罪預防工作之探究－以GeoDa0.9.5-i (beta)為例。警學 叢刊，39（1），161-196。
40. 蔡德輝、楊士隆（2012）。犯罪學。臺北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。new window
41. 蔡鴻文（2002）。臺灣地區毒品犯罪實證分析研究。中央警察大學刑事警察研究所碩士論文。
42. 鄧志松 (2011) 。空間分析方法介紹。 空間分析工作室，https://ceiba.ntu.edu.tw/course/a49714/index.htm[2013.5.2]。
43. 鄧煌發（1999）。預防犯罪。桃園：中央警察大學。
44. 鄧煌發（2007）。犯罪分析與犯罪學理論─環境犯罪學理論之應用與評析，警學叢刊，38（1），1-20。new window
45. 賴致瑜（2006）。臺北市住宅竊盜犯罪地圖製作與犯罪區位分析。臺灣大學地理環境資源研究所碩士論文。
46. 賴致瑜、張平吾、張康聰（2005）。臺北市住宅普通竊盜犯罪熱區及其社經人文環境分析之研究。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報，6，29-54。new window
47. 謝文彥、廖有祿、董正談（2007）。社區犯罪基圖在機車竊盜犯罪區位特性之研究。臺北：內政部警政署刑事警察局研究案（編號：200886165757）。
48. 施富山（2010）。青少年毒品轟趴派對特性與聚合過程之研究。國立臺北大學犯罪學研究所碩士論文。new window
49. 施源欽（2011）。警政治理成效評估-臺南經驗「咱ㄟ派出所」。中央警察大學警察政策研究所博士論文。
50. 蔣碩翔（2010）。少年施用毒品特性及其影響因素之實證研究。中央警察大學犯罪防治研究所碩士論文。
51. 鄭幼民（2004）。我國毒品犯罪問題與防治機制-以緝毒工作為核心之分析。中國文化大學中山學術研究所博士論文。new window
52. 曾信棟（2008）。少年施用三、四級毒品成因之實證研究。中央警察大學犯罪防治研究所碩士論文。
53. W.Lawrence Neuman王佳煌、潘中道、郭俊賢、黃瑋瑩譯（2002）。當代社會研究法：質化與量化途徑，p589-590。臺北：學富文化。
二、外文部分
1. Agnew, R. & Cullen, F. T.（2006）.Criminological Theory Past To Present Essential Resdings Third Edition .New York：Oxford University Press, Inc. 109-114 and 421-426.
2. Anselin,L., (1988). Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models, Boston: Kluwer Academic.
3. Anselin, L. (1999). Spatial Econometrics：Bruton Center School of Social Sciences University of Texas at Dallas Richardsons.
4. Anselin, L. (2005). Exploring spatial data with GeoDa : A workbook. Spatial Analysis Laboratory. Department of Geography University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Urbana, IL 61801. Retrieved December 7, 2006 from https://www.geoda.uiuc.edu/default.php.
5. Arlington police department.（2006）. Stopping Open-Air Drug Sales on West Cedar Street, in Arlington, Texas. Available online at http://www.popcenter.org/library/awards/goldstein/2006.
6. Baker, T. E. & Wolfer, L. (2003). The crime triangle: Alcohol, drug use, and vandalism . Police Practice and Research 4(1): 47-61.
7. Becker, G. B.（1968）. Crime and Puunishment：An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76（2）：169-217.
8. Berg, K. N.（2012）. Drugs, Guns, Police and Spatial-Temporal Analysis. University of South Florida, Florida.
9. Bottoms, A. E., & Wiles, P. (2002). Environmental criminology, pp 620-656 in
Maguire, M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.) The Oxford handbook of criminology:Third edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Bowers, K. J., Johnson, S., Pease, K. ( 2004 ). Prospective Hotspotting: The Future of Crime Mapping? British Journal of Criminology, 4（2）, 461 – 568 .
11. Braga , A. A., Weisburd,D., Waring, E., Green Mazerolle,L.,Gajewski, F. (1999). "Problem-Oriented Policing in Violent Crime Places: A Randomized Controlled Experiment." Criminology 37(3):541-580.
12. Braga, A. A. (2001). The effects of hot spots policing on crime. The Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 104–125.
13. Braga, A. A., Pierce, G. L., McDevitt J., Bond, B. J., Cronin S. (2008). The strategic prevention of gun violence among gang-involved offenders. Justice Quarterly, 25, 132-162.
14. Braga, A. A. & Weisburd, D. ( 2010 ). Editors’ Introduction: Empirical Evidence on the Relevance of Place in Criminology. Journal Of Quantitative Criminology , 26（1）,pp.1-6.
15. Brantingham, P., & Brantingham, P. (1999). Theoretical model of crime hotspot generation. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 8, 7–26.
16. Brantingham, Patricia , Paul (1995). "Criminality of Place: Crime Generators and Crime Attractors". European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 3(3), 1-26.
17. Caeti, T. (1999). Houston's Targeted Beat Program: A Quasi-Experimental Test of Police Patrol Strategies Ann Arbor ,Mich. : University Microfilms International.
18. Chainey, S. P. & Ratcliffe, J. H. ( 2005 ). GIS and Crime Mapping, London: Wiley.
19. Chen, D., & Getis, A. (1998). Point Pattern Analysis (PPA). Geography Department of San Diego State University. Available online at http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/~dongmei/ppa/ppa.html.
20. Clarke, R. V. (1980). Situational crime prevention: Theory and practice. British Journal of Criminology, 20, 136-147.
21. Clarke, R. V. (1997). Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies (Second Edition).Albany, NY: Harrow and Heston.
22. Clarke, R. V., & Eck, J. E. (2003).Becoming a Problem Solving Crime Analyst, Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science. University College London.
23. Clarke, R. V. & Eck, J. E.（2006）. Crime Analysis for Problem Solvers: In 60 Small Steps, U.S.：Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
24. Cornish, D. B., & Clarke, R.V. (1986). The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
25. Eck, J. E., & Spelman, W.（1987）.Problem-solving: Problem-oriented policing in Newport News. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum.
26. Eck, J. E. (1994). Crime Control Institute, the University of Maryland, College Park. A General Model of the Geography of Illicit Retail Marketplaces. Available online at http://www.popcenter.org/problems/stolen_goods.
27. Eck, J. E.,1994. Drug markets and drug places: A case-control study of the spatial structure of illicit dealing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland,College Park.
28. Eck, J. E., & Weisburd, D. (1995). Crime places in crime theory. In J. Eck and D. Weisburd (eds.): Crime and place. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
29. Eck, J. E. , Chainey S., Cameron, J. G., Leitner, M., Wilson, R.E. (2005). Chapter 1. Crime hot spots: what they are, why we have them, and how to map them. In Gonzales, A. R., Schofield, R. B., and Hart, S. V., Mapping Crime:Understanding hot spots, 1-14. U.S: Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs.
30. Eck, J. E., Chainey, S. P., Cameron, J. G., Leitner, M. , Wilson, R. E. ( 2005 ). Mapping Crime: Understanding HotSpots. USA: National Institute of Justice. Available online at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij.
31. Felson, M. (2002). Crime and everyday life. （3rd ed.）. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
32. Felson, M. , & Boba, R. L. ( 2010 ). Crime and Everyday Life.Fourth Edition.Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.
33. Gilliam, J. T.（2006）.Determinants Of Individual Drug Market Patterns:Ecological Predictors Of Where Individual Drug Users Buy Their Drugs. University Of Oklahoma Graduate College, Oklahoma.
34. Harries, K. ( 1999 ). Mapping Crime: Principle and Practice . United States National Institute of Justice. Available online at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/maps/pubs.html.
35. Home Office. ( 2001 ). Crime Reduction Toolkits Focus Area and Hotspots . Crime Reduction Unit . Available online at www.crimereduction.gov.uk/toolkits/fa00.htm.
36. Home Office. ( 2005 ). Crime Mapping: Improving Performance, A Good Practice Guide for Front Line Officers, .London: Home Office . Available online at: http://www.jdi.ucl.ac.uk/downloads/publications/other_publications/crime_mapping_guide.pdf.
37. Hope, T. J.（1994）. Problem-Oriented Policing And Drug-Market Locations: Three Case Studies. Available online at http://www.popcenter.org/library/CrimePrevention/Volume_02.
38. Jefferis, E. ( 1999 ). A Multi-Method Exploration of Crime Hot-spots: A Summary of Findings. Crime Mapping Research Centre Intramural project. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
39. Jeffrey, C. R. (1971). Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
40. Kelling, G., Pate, A. M., Dieckman, D., Brown, C. E. (1974). The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment: Summary repor, Washington, DC: The Police Foundation.
41. Kennedy, D. (1993). Closing the Drug Market. Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Justice
42. Kessler, D., & Duncan, S. (1996). "Impact of Community Policing in Four Houston Neighborhoods."Evaluation Review 20(6):627-669.
43 .LaVigne, N. & Wartell, J. ( 1999 ). Crime Mapping Case Studies: Successes in the Field . Vol. 2. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.
44. Levine, N. ( 2004 ). CrimeStat III: A Spatial Statistics Program for the Analysis of Crime Incident Locations, Houston, TX: Ned Levine and Associates.Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice . Available online at http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/nacjd/crimestat.html.
45. Levine, N. (2004). CrimeStat III: A Spatial Statistics Program for the Analysis of Crime Incident Locations (version 3.0). Houston, TX: Ned Levine and Associates; and Washington DC: National Institute of Justice.
46. Mazerolle, L., James, F., Price, J. R. (2000). Civil remedies and drugcontrol: A randomized field trial in Oakland, California. Evaluation Review 24(2): 212-241.
47. Mazerolle, L.（2006）. Street-level drug law enforcement: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Experimental Criminology 2 .409-435.
48. Mayhew, P., Clarke, R.V., Sturman, A., Hough, J.M. (1976). Crime As Opportunity. Home Office Research Study No. 34. London, UK: Her Majesty's Stationary Office.
49. McCord, E. S. & Ratcliffe, J. H.（2007）. A Micro-Spatial Analysis Of The Demographic And Criminogenic Environment Of Drug Markets In Philadelphia. The Australian and New Zealand Journal Of Criminology 43 volume 40 number 1 2007. 43–63.
50. Miethe, Terence D. & Robert F. Meier. 1990. Opportunity, Choice, and Criminal Victimization: A Test of a Theoretical Model. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 27:243-66.
51. Mitchell, A. （2005）.The ESRI Guide to GIS Analysis（Volume 2.）.California: ESRI.
52. Newman, O. (1972). Defensible Space. New York, NY: Macmillan.
53. Paulson, D. J., & Robinson, M. B. (2004). Spatial aspects of crime: Theory and Practice. MA: Pearson A and B.
54. Raymond, P., & Bachman, R.（2001）.Explaining Criminals and Crime. California: Roxbury Publishing Company. p23-42.
55. Ratcliffe, J. H. (2004), Crime mapping and the training needs of law enforcement. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research. 10（1）, 65-83.
56. Ratcliffe, J. H. ( 2002 ). Hot Spot Detective 2.0 for MapInfo Professional 7.0 . Available online at http://jratcliffe.net/hsd/.
57. Rengert, G. , Chakravorty, S., Bole, T., Henderson, K.（2000）. A Geographic Analysis Of Illegal Drug Markets. Crime Prevention Studies, volume 11, 219-239.Criminal Justice Press Monsey, NY.
58. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S.W., Earls, F.（1997）. Neighborhoods and Violence Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy. Science, New Series, 277(5328): 918-924.
59. Scott, M. S.（2003）. The Benefits and Consequences of Police crackdowns. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community OrientedPolicing Services. 23-53.
60. Shaw, C., & McKay, H. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
61. Sherman, L., Buerger, M., Gartin, P. (1989). Repeat call address policing: The Minneapolis RECAP experiment. Washington, DC: Crime Control Institute.
62. Sherman, L., & Weisburd, D. (1995). General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime hotspots: A randomized controlled trial. Justice Quarterly 12: 625-648.
63. Sherman, L., & Rogan, D. (1995). Effects of gun seizures on gun violence: Hot spots patrol in Kansas City. Justice Quarterly 12, 673-694.
64. Sherman, L., & Rogan, D. (1995). Deterrent effects of police raids on crack houses: A randomized controlled experiment. Justice Quarterly 12, 755-82.
65. Sherman, L. W., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P., Bushway, S. (1998).Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising. National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC.
66. Sherman, L., Gartin, P., Buerger, M. (1998). Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology, 27, 27–55.
67. Smith, M. (2001). Police-led crackdowns and cleanups: An evaluation of a crime
control initiatives in Richmond, Virginia. Crime and Delinquency, 47(1), 60-83.
68. Spelman, W., & Brown, D. K. (1984). Calling the police: Citizen reporting of serious crime. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
69. Stark, R. (1987). Deviant Places: A Theory Of The Ecology Of Crime. Criminology. 25: 893–910.
70. Stokes, Robert, Neil Donahue, Dawn Caron, Jack R, Greene. (1996). Safe travel to and from school : A problem-oriented policing approach. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, Officer of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
71. Stone, Sandra S. (1993). Problem-oriented policing approach to drug enforcement: Atlanta as a case study. Dissertation submitted to Emory University.
72. Thomas, C. (2001). Bristol anti-robbery strategy. Avon and Somerset Constabulary. Tilley Award Submission.
73. Tobler, W. （1979）. Cellular Geography, Philosophy in Geography. Dordrecht, Reidel: Gale and Olsson, Eds.
74. Tulsa police department.（1989）.The scope and effect of Tulsa Oklahoma’s drug problem inventory. Available online at http://www.popcenter.org/library/unpublished/CaseStudies.
75. Tuffin, R., Morris, J., Poole, A. (2006). An evaluation of the impact of the National Reassurance Policing Programme. Home Office Research Study 296. London: Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.
76. Weisburd, D., Maher, L., Sherman, L. (1992). Contrasting crime general and crime specific theory: The case of hot-spots of crime. Advances in Criminological Theory, 4, 45–70.
77. Weisburd, D., & Green, L. (1995). Policing drug hot Spots: The Jersey City DMA experiment.Justice Quarterly 12, 711-36.
78. Weisburd, D., & Eck, J. E (2004). What can police do to reduce crime, disorder and fear? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593, 42–65.
79. Weisburd, D., Bushway, S., Lum, C., Yang, Sue-Ming. (2004). Trajectories of Crime at Place: A Longitudinal Study of Street Segments in the City of Seattle. Criminology, 42(2): 283-321.
80. Weisburd, D., & Lum, C.（2005）. The Diffusion of Computerized Crime Mapping in Policing: Linking Research and Practice. Police Practice and Research, 6, 419-434.
81. Weisburd,D., Groff, E., Yang, Sue-Ming.（2012）. The Criminology of Place: Developmental Patterns and Risk and Preventive Factors. . Oxford University Press.
82. Yang, Sue-Ming. (2010). Assessing the Spatial-temporal Relationship between Disorder and Violence.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(1): 139-163.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：430（臺灣：428，外國：2） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1586744 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67380864
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上