| We report on two recent experiences of policy research in California based on the results from a statewide survey of Californians we conducted in the Spring and summer of 1999. We interviewed 4,250 residents of California and asked questions about their support of 'Three Strikes' sentencing policies and about attitudes towards Police, Police use of Force, and public review of police conduct. Upon the circulation of two press releases of basic results concerning these two areas (2 of several areas the survey focused on), the barrage of reaction followed. Reactions came from both groups who thought our findings justified their opinions and those who decried our results as they disagreed with their opinions. We were asked by some to subvert ethical principles of research, to violate conflict of interest laws, and to endorse political campaigns (something which is against the law in California). We were also accused of fraud, libeled, and attacked as incompetent in public meetings and in the Press. The common theme throughout these contacts with the partisans was that no one expressed any interest in understanding our results, only claiming or defaming that which supported or opposed their already firmly entrenched points of view. How could we have approached these situations differently? Was our attempt to introduce data into highly charged political debates worth the trouble? In what directions should we proceed to increase the debate around such issues and provide citizens in general with more information about such issues? These questions will be addressed along with some recommendations to those wishing to engage in similar policy research. |
Updated 05/20/2006