Another area would be revisiting Donohue–Levitt hypothesis using a gender based analysis. Donohue–Levitt hypothesis suggested the availability of abortion resulted in fewer births of children at the highest risk of committing crime. A research question could be Did abortion policy lead to a reduction in intimate partner violence? Could it be shown that women with access to abortion could at the margin leave partners committing violence and by having an abortion also reduce the number of births of males who would go own to commit intimate partner violence themselves or births of females who were more likely to be victims of intimate partner violence. Critics of Donohue-Levitt hypothesis have a problem with the twenty year time lag but the same time lag criticism seems to have been overcome in the lead research.
You may be wrong because the effects of lead could be overblown. There is publication bias in the field and a first meta-analysis of the literature suggested that lead exposure may not explain the majority of the large fall in crime observed in some countries. https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/Media_774797_smxx.pdf.
There is a publication bias. But even the study you cite agrees that lower lead pollution may have contributed to a decline in crime. It just thinks it's not 100%. Ofc there are other factors, as the two studies above mention.
I agree but I think the authors suggest it shouldn't be the major reason. I think they say this because there analysis suggests between 0 and 36% explanatory power.
Another area would be revisiting Donohue–Levitt hypothesis using a gender based analysis. Donohue–Levitt hypothesis suggested the availability of abortion resulted in fewer births of children at the highest risk of committing crime. A research question could be Did abortion policy lead to a reduction in intimate partner violence? Could it be shown that women with access to abortion could at the margin leave partners committing violence and by having an abortion also reduce the number of births of males who would go own to commit intimate partner violence themselves or births of females who were more likely to be victims of intimate partner violence. Critics of Donohue-Levitt hypothesis have a problem with the twenty year time lag but the same time lag criticism seems to have been overcome in the lead research.
You may be wrong because the effects of lead could be overblown. There is publication bias in the field and a first meta-analysis of the literature suggested that lead exposure may not explain the majority of the large fall in crime observed in some countries. https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/Media_774797_smxx.pdf.
There is a publication bias. But even the study you cite agrees that lower lead pollution may have contributed to a decline in crime. It just thinks it's not 100%. Ofc there are other factors, as the two studies above mention.
I agree but I think the authors suggest it shouldn't be the major reason. I think they say this because there analysis suggests between 0 and 36% explanatory power.