The DN of the Debate. Serious quality problems in the examination of the Crime

in the Study, it is Possible to rest assured of the Kind?” from the university of Linköping has been a huge media proliferation, which has resulted in that the Brås's overall credibility has been called into question. One of the effects was that the minister of justice reported to the committee on the constitution. The authors of the report, and the Brås the director-general's memorandum to the committee on justice for a discussion. The authors have also made recent announcements in the Swedish daily newspaper svenska Dagbladet and Expressen.

In the report, conveyed a negative image of the agency at a high level, based on the evidence from a number of ex-employees. It is not our intention to deprive them of their experience or to challenge it. That is, the current employees of the investigator of the Crime, we are opposed, however, by the general description of our business, which is controlled, censored, or influenced by a tystnadskultur.

This means that we don't often choose our own research topics, but work on behalf of the government, on the basis of what it identified as current topics of interest or areas where it is needed in decision-making. Of course, it may not be out of place to discuss the implications of such an arrangement, in the content of research. The discussion should be but are not limited to, research and investigation activities of the state authorities, in general, is something that we take a positive view to it. In addition, there is an in-depth examination Brås activities are welcome. This study, however, is far from being a process which can be considered to be objective, and this is unacceptable. Some of the things that are formulated as a criticism of our business is in point of fact, a representation of the conditions that apply to all of the forskningsmyndigheter.

the objective nature of the principal author may also be questioned, as he, under the title ”recruitment process” using her own case, which did not result in a position of authority.

we are, to a large extent work on the basis of the government does not mean that we are guided in our conclusions. Each and every report of Crime is, in part, on the collective behalf. This means that, when working independently, but reports are discussed in internal seminars, and are reviewed by senior management, with the processes as a result. This process is an integral part of the myndighetsforskning. In addition, it is to be examined in our research reports by outside researchers. All of these steps, in a similar form, where, even in the university research staff, is an important part of a quality assurance system, and is not an indication of bias.

this, too, we are inquiring into. For many of us, though by no means all) have been educated at the university of Stockholm, where, among other things, Sweden's highest point the institution is located. To do this, as well as a lot of other things misstänkliggörs, so issues such it raises a number of questions about the real purpose of the. Anyone can Brås website to read about the Gothenburg, Lund and Malmö, as well as the university of Linköping, themselves, are also represented among the persons who are included in the Brås of the scientific council.

We want to be an independent actor to take on the task of reviewing the scientific character of the report on the Crime, which, in spite of the serious quality problems have received such a wide-ranging and, at first, completely unreflective proliferation. Anyone who takes the time to read the report, the attention-grabbing findings concerning the Brås's credibility is based largely on the testimony of persons who have been employed in the past, and in some cases for a very long time ago, and at the same time that the impression is that this is an up to date situation. The probability of obtaining an objective picture, by interviewing people who, for various reasons, or have chosen to terminate his / her employment at the authority, takes on the always.

The selektionseffekter that could reasonably have occurred among the respondents regarding the nature of the set-up for an interview, and the participation is problematic too. Several of us declined to participate, for the purpose of seemed to be unclear, and the study had not been etikprövats. This is to be interpreted in this report as an indication of the tystnadskultur. Those who participated in the study were given the opportunity to read their statements and submit their comments. They decided to fix something – a procedure in which the participants are presented in the quality assurance system it is supposed to be – interpreted as an expression of the tystnadskultur. A intervjuperson went out he said he had been misquoted, so that the statement is intended to provide assistance to Brås, the research suffers from a lack of quality. The report's methodology, in other words, in many respects, the new research ethics concerns.

There is a consistent skew in the findings of the report when the negative information in a relatively small number of people will be of great importance, while the quotes do not support the image they want to convey, is not to be taken into account in the sluttolkningen. In some cases, to be interpreted also as a sign of Brås the ”blind spot”, that is to say, a sort of lack of understanding. The objectivity of the principal author may also be questioned, as he, under the title ”recruitment process” using her own case, which did not result in a position of authority. All of this takes place within the framework of a study on the forskningsbias is amazing.

It is also one of the most high-profile in the public debate. It is of particular importance to the research in the field, are subjected to critical scrutiny and that there should be objective, ethical and with a solid scientific basis. Another approach is contributing to a social climate marked by increased faktaresistens and skepticism towards the research as well.

in every case, with similar functions-there is also, of course, our authority in situations where there is a disagreement about how the results should be presented, what conclusions can be drawn, or what are the steps that are reasonable to propose. And in every case, it is very important that we take care of our environment, and it is great. The critics will say the report should not be dismissed, but they are not representative of the Brås, research, and investigative activities. The government, of whatever political colour is to our clients. The conclusions of that Kind is, however, not influenced by political agendas.

as Of the last couple of weeks, have become more doubtful about the answer to the question, ”is it possible to be rest assured of the Kind?” as want to, we make sure that our reports are well-researched and quality assured in order to provide the best possible evidence-base for decisions on matters of crime and how to prevent it.