Research Learning Journal
“Authoritarian Capitalism and Policing Studies in China” by Jianhua Xu, Qipu Hu, and Anli Jiang
The paper examines the issue of policing in China as a factor which touches the public police, civilian staff and sworn officers, private policing/security, and police and Para-police Chengguan. The Chinese party-state uses the police as the coercive power. This study recognizes that the evolution of the state affects the study of Chinese policing and the development of the police force (Xu, et al. 1). The study is based on several research questions, including: What is the connection between the authoritative nature of the government and policing? How does the government use the police to legitimize authority? How does the government incorporate the security and stability of the Chinese republic as an overriding principle? How does China’s policing practice perform about problematic policing? How does job satisfaction influence Chinese policing? What are the impacts of capitalism and marketization on policing? What is the general perception regarding China’s authoritarian policing? This study depends on secondary sources of data. The researcher quotes several previous studies and ends the paper by suggesting areas for further research. The study does not describe the method used to collect secondary information.
The research contains several main arguments. First, the researcher argues that the current authoritarian policing are soft compared to Mao’s time (Xu, et al. 2). This paper also asserts that policing has become a service sold in the commodity market due to the forces of capitalism and marketization. Another main argument is that China faces the problem of problematic policing, just like any other country. The research maintains that, just like other authoritarian regimes, the Chinese government relies on performance or ideology. Therefore, police are used to provide social welfare and prevent crime (Xu, et al. 2). The government, in turn, uses these benefits to negotiate its legitimacy. These arguments are crafted under topics labelled as the main themes. This study is based on the theoretical framework, which describes the operation of capitalism, authoritarianism, human resource management, and law enforcement.
“Theory Construction in Qualitative Research: From Grounded Theory to Abductive Analysis” by Stefan Timmermans and Iddo Tavory
The study focuses on the definition of the theory, which it indicates is informed pragmatism. The definition conducted in this study posits theory construction in a bid to make sense of the world via the generalization of the empirical phenomena. The research question is how to construct a theory in qualitative research? The research has no specified method of data collection. Most of the data cited in the study are obtained from secondary sources. The main argument of the paper is that theory is a type of generalization which enables the researcher to move between various incidences of data and to expect various phenomena to happen as well as retrodict the reason for the occurrence of the phenomena (Timmermans and Tavory 168). This paper thereby stresses that theory is elaborated and tweaked to anomalous and novel information. The study emphasizes that there is a difference between tweaking an established theory and creating fresh theoretical accounts. This study is based on grounded theory, which is the main conceptual framework. Furthermore, the primary source of data was not adequately explored to examine both sides of the narrative, as the study only used a secondary method of data collection.
“Public Criminology in China neither Public nor Criminology” by Jianhua Xu and Weidi Liu edited by Kathryn Henne and Rita Shah
The study addresses the common belief in the Chinese population regarding the equivalence of criminology and the study of criminal psychology. The researcher bases the study on the experience of a previous author in the same text who visited China and was bombarded with questions regarding the assumption, as mentioned earlier (Xu and Liu 153). The study’s research question is: How to solve the misconception that criminology is the study of criminal psychology? The study has no specified method of data collection. The research explores the possibility of, and challenges for the development of public criminology in China since the context affects the creation and dissemination of criminology knowledge in the country. The paper is based on several theories, including methodological fetishism, theories regarding contemporary criminology, and modern criminal justice studies and policies.
Works Cited
Timmermans, Stefan, and Iddo Tavory. “Theory Construction in Qualitative Research: From Grounded Theory to Abductive Analysis.” Sociological Theory, vol. 30, no. 3, 2012, pp. 167-186, DOI: 10.1177/0735275112457914. Accessed 9 Mar. 2020.
Xu, Jianhua, and Weidi Liu. “Public Criminology in China Neither Public nor Criminology.” Routledge Handbook of Public Criminologies, edited by Kathryn Henne and Rita Shah, PDF file, pp. 152-159.
Xu, Jianhua, et al. “Authoritarian Capitalism and Policing Studies in China.” PDF file, pp. 1-12.