Scientists Study Crime In Progress In a VR Simulated Environment 80
HughPickens.com writes: Claire Nee writes in the NYT that for psychologists, it's best to observe actual behavior, in real time, and afterward interview research participants. Yet for obvious ethical and safety reasons, it's almost never possible to observe a crime as it happens. Now psychologists have devised a simulated environment that can be navigated using a mouse or a game controller. and had willing, experienced ex-burglars to commit a mock burglary in it. Ex-burglars approached the task in a dramatically different way from a comparison group of postgraduate students, of a similar age as our experienced ex-burglars. Burglars entered and exited the house at the rear, while students, unaware of the cover that the side and rear of the house afforded, entered at the exposed front. Burglars spent significantly more time in areas of the house with high-value items and navigated it much more systematically than the students did. They also showed greater discernment, by stealing fewer but more valuable items. Most important, all participants burgled the real and the simulated houses almost identically (PDF). We concluded that using simulations can be a robust way to study crime, and in studying it this way, we will not be limited to just burglary. "A better understanding of criminal behavior will help us reduce opportunities for crime in our neighborhoods," concludes Nee. "By knowing what the burglar is looking for — what signals wealth, occupancy, ease of access and security in properties — we can make adjustments in awareness and protection."
Must have been some pretty stupid students (Score:3)
Re:Must have been some pretty stupid students (Score:5, Funny)
These were postgraduate students -- they were special idiots.
Re: (Score:2)
Never underestimate what you can get away with as a white male with a clipboard.
Toss on a vest and a bump cap and walk up like you belong there.
Re: (Score:2)
Go bad to Reddit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I doubt their motivations were the same as someone who had actually had the drive to steal in reality previously. Without having to be in the actual situation they never visualized the necessity of cover or the true value of the items they were stealing. A real burglar had already done these things before, so in the simulation all he had to do was emulate his previous actions from memory. It's a dumb study.
Re: (Score:2)
Any idiot knows to go in the back/side,
If the internets have taught me anything...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Short version (Score:5, Insightful)
Professionals do something better than amateurs.
Re: (Score:2)
Better? What's the metric? Eg, if there is no chance of getting caught in the simulation, why not go in the front door and carry out everything that's not nailed down?
Re: (Score:2)
I remember a Paul Harvey segment where he said the cops knew if a thief was a professional because all the drawers of a dresser would be open and empty...indicating they went from bottom to top to save time (they didn't have to close drawers to get to the open ones) and quickly pulled the clothes to get the heavy smaller stuff at the bottom.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if seasoned "Pay Day" players would rate better?
Online training for newbie thieves (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If by that you mean "prison", yes.
Re: (Score:2)
That depends on which shard you're playing on. If you're playing on the North American shard, you've got very high annual fees to pay, and they go to figures in government. If you're playing on e.g. the South American shard, for the most part yes, they still have somewhat traditional thieves' guilds, and they are highly regional.
Squeezing the balloon (Score:2)
"A better understanding of criminal behavior will help us reduce opportunities for crime in our neighborhoods,"
And as soon as one form of crime is understood and deterrents introduced, won't the (successful) criminals simply move their attentions to another neighbourhood, modus operandi or equally illegal field of endeavour?
This initiative doesn't seem to address the basic issue of the number of criminals or their need to indulge in criminal (as opposed to legal) ways of making money.
Re:Squeezing the balloon (Score:4, Informative)
And as soon as one form of crime is understood and deterrents introduced, won't the (successful) criminals simply move their attentions to another neighbourhood, modus operandi or equally illegal field of endeavour?
No. Most crime is based on opportunity. More opportunities means more crime. Fewer opportunities means less crime.
This initiative doesn't seem to address the basic issue of the number of criminals
There is not a fixed number of criminals, nor a fixed amount of crime. If crime doesn't pay, potential criminals will do something else, and as crime in an area falls, businesses invest and other job opportunities tend to open up.
Re: (Score:2)
If that was true, then does that mean all professional thieves should be permanently taken out circulation? Obviously they can't be rehabilitated.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. You really think someone who steals for a living will decide to flip burgers instead?
Yes. You should read Freakonomics [amazon.com]. It is a superb book, and in one chapter he explains the economics of crime. Teenagers selling crack on street corners were making $3 an hour. Many of them asked the researcher if he could get them a "good job" as a janitor at the university. I think many criminals would be glad to flip burgers if such jobs were available in their neighborhoods.
They'll just find another crime that pays.
If the other crime paid, then another criminal would already be doing it. Expertise in one type of crime doesn't automaticall
Re: (Score:3)
For instance, burglary skills are of little use to a Wall Street investment banker.
Wall Street investment bankers have moved well beyond simple burglary.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. You really think someone who steals for a living will decide to flip burgers instead? They'll just find another crime that pays.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blo... [blogger.com]
Re:Squeezing the balloon (Score:5, Interesting)
Exactly crime is a business. as long as someone is willing to do the work and make a profit at it they will do so.
Prisons are part of what makes crime expensive. Another thing is flooding the market with low value goods that simulate high value goods.
Look at car radios. since manufacturer's started putting high quality audio and navigation systems into cars, car radio theft has dropped off considerably. It isn't worth it to steal the radio.
Tv's aren't big ticket items anymore. neither are dvd players. Computers are a mixed bag but even they are so cheap now a days. jewels always will be. Though if you want to protect your diamonds the best way is to put staged storage areas filled with fakes. the crooks will steal the fakes.
Crime falls when the standard of living comes up, and inequality is lessened. As inequality is increased so does crime.
Re: (Score:2)
So if a mug you, it is because I am being oppressed?
No, it is because mugging pays better than the available alternatives ... except it mostly doesn't, which is why muggings have drastically declined over the last few decades. Today, people carry credit or debit cards instead of cash, and used cellphones aren't worth much.
Re: (Score:2)
Non your bank ATM's have withdrawal limits.
Re: (Score:2)
Can be if you walk the mark to the nearest ATM.
That involves much more risk than a quick snatch-and-grab mugging. You will be with the mark for much longer, meaning more time to get noticed, and ATMs have cameras. You will likely need a weapon to intimidate the mark, meaning a longer prison sentence if caught. For what, maybe $300?
A simple cost-benefit analysis shows why this type of crime is rare.
Re: (Score:1)
Though if you want to protect your diamonds the best way is to put staged storage areas filled with fakes. the crooks will steal the fakes.
No, they will steal them all.
Not a discovery (Score:4, Insightful)
Burglars have been telling us this for decades. Nothing new has been learned simply by using a video game scenario. In this the psychologists are half a century behind law enforcement. But it probably makes for a good grant write up.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, something new was learned. The goal of the experiement was to test whether virtual environments are a valid tool for observation of burglary techniques such that their use should be continued. They weren't looking for new insight into *actual* burglary techniques -- that comes later.
This is all called out explicitly in the paper -- the approx 10 page paper which took about 10 minutes to read.
Yes, it would make for a good grant write up because this paper suggests continued development of the virtu
Re: (Score:2)
Why would new insights come later as they already can and do interview professional burglars now who explain *actual* techniques?
Re: (Score:2)
This paper is something like the fifth time I read a study aimed at analyzing the validity of virtual training or simulations for real wold stand ins. And not wonder there, if the parameters of the simulation where properly designed, training goal was well defined and the game sufficiently realistic, it was a cost effective training and evaluation tool.
I understand that, for scientific accuracy, a method must be evaluated, but except for pilot, cargo ship and emergency response training, I have not seen muc
Re:Not a discovery (Score:5, Interesting)
Burglars have been telling us this for decades. Nothing new has been learned simply by using a video game scenario. In this the psychologists are half a century behind law enforcement. But it probably makes for a good grant write up.
Similarly, there was no point in Galileo and Newton studying the way stuff falls because everyone has been watching stuff fall forever.
You don't seem to get science. Finding a way to systematically study a subject in a controlled environment is the first step to dramatically increasing knowledge in that subject, at a pace that non-systematic, anecdotal experience -- however broad and deep -- cannot touch. In the case of the psychology of crime this has been problematic for the reasons mentioned in the study. The discovery here is that simulation may offer mechanisms that enable previously impossible areas of study, not the lessons about how burglars search homes. It's no surprise that the findings of the initial tests didn't contradict law enforcement experience... in fact if they had contradicted that experience it would have been a bad thing, since odds are that the new methodology would have been at fault, not the old experience.
If they can manage to establish a solid research methodology, though, and outline clearly its strengths and weaknesses, then they can start using it to systematically explore the subject. Odds are that many initial findings will merely corroborate anecdotal evidence. That's fine, and contrary to common non-scientific wisdom, it does not mean that such confirmatory studies are a waste of time and money. It's worth effort to establish that what you believe to be true really is (or, more precisely, to increase your confidence that it really is; absolute "truth" isn't reachable). But it's also a near certainty that, given a good experimental methodology, researchers will quickly be able to learn things that traditional wisdom does not know.
But none of that can happen if the subject can't be effectively studied and, particularly in psychology, it's often the case that the real breakthrough is in devising a way to test and measure. After that, the rest is just grunt work.
Will this method really enable significantly better research into the psychology of crime? I don't know. But it seems promising, and noteworthy.
Re: (Score:2)
The thieves are secretly training their replacements.
The "Study" is a sham and the 'researchers' are hitting Vegas after the study concludes.
Re: (Score:2)
Running someone through a vr simulation is no faster as the recording needs to be analyzed and is *still* anecdotal vs watching them actually perform a crime without their knowing they are being watched. Just because it's machine recorded doesn't alter that. In fact, studying home and business security camera footage would be of greater value.
Psychologists were amongst the law enforcement people interviewing burglars previously, making it just as valid as
Re: (Score:1)
Completely missing the point. You can't tamper with real buildings and see what makes them better or worse for theft. No one would take the risk they'd make things easier on a thief, the liability is too real. They can't test things in a simulation without first proving that the simulation reflects real-world behavior.
This experiment shows that it can distinguish between a professional burglar's actions and an amateur's. The VR modelling at its baseline is a suitable representation of a real actual burglary
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone else think of Virtuosity (1995)? (Score:2)
Pbbbt (Score:1)
Another no duh moment, psychology is a bit of a pseudo science.
What if the house had a sign out front (Score:2)
A sign that reads, "This homeowner donates lots of money to charity."
Would the criminals think "Oh, well, they're nice people so I won't rob them," or would they think, "Hey, where's my shorty, Morty? You gave money to everybody else, why not me too? You obviously have more than you need."
Or would they simply think, "Eff you. I need to fence your crap so I can fuel my drug habits."
Re: (Score:1)
I don't want private organisation having a say where it is used. eg; your church charity suck.
All rather have the state invest in school, hospital, shelter and other social services where it is actually useful. The state is accountable to me, your church is not. Pay more taxes, fuck charity.
Re: (Score:2)
Crime In a VR Simulation (Score:2)
Scientists Study Crime In Progress In a VR Simulated Environment
So reality has finally caught up with CSI Miami?
Re: Why not just lock up burglars for DECADES? (Score:2)
How about deterrence by lead poisoning?
Fuck thieves, jail is too good for them. Bullet to the back of the head and be done with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)