Marvin Wolfgang on Kleck’s DGU survey

J. Neil Schulman writes:

So this data has been peer-reviewed by a top criminologist in this
country who was prejudiced in advance against its results, and even
HE found the scientific evidence overwhelmingly convincing.

This is untrue. Wolfgang writes:

“The usual criticisms of survey research, such as that done by Kleck
and Gertz, also apply to their research. The problems of small
numbers and extrapolating from relatively small samples to the
universe are common criticisms of all survey research, including
theirs. I did not mention this specifically in my printed comments
because I thought that this was obvious; within the specific
limitations of their research is what I meant by a lack of criticism
methodologically.”
(J of Criminal Law and Criminology 86:2 p617-8)

One of the limitations of survey research that Wolfgang considered too
obvious to be necessary to point out is there is no guarantee that all
respondents told the truth. Mr Schulman is perhaps unaware of this
fact.