New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Criminology_midterm exam


Criminology_midterm exam 16SS_CJ7020001


Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

the midterm exam combines 5 classes
Seminar in Criminology
Ben Feldmeyer
Study Guide
50 ?




Popular in Seminar in Criminology

Popular in Criminal Justice

This 13 page Study Guide was uploaded by MEI-TING HSIA on Tuesday March 8, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to 16SS_CJ7020001 at University of Cincinnati taught by Ben Feldmeyer in Winter 2016. Since its upload, it has received 41 views. For similar materials see Seminar in Criminology in Criminal Justice at University of Cincinnati.


Reviews for Criminology_midterm exam


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 03/08/16
Seminar in Criminology Introduction (01/11) “Law Making, Law breaking, Societal Reaction to Low Breaking”— Sutherland classic- contemporary Illegal/ Law Consensus Right/Wrong, Culture, Harm Legalistic- not on books, variables, why, Variation (Child neglect; Conditions/reason; Place/Time; Who’s interest; Intentions) Conflict Perspective - Laws are defined by powerful groups which are used to label & select behaviors as illegal. Deviance- Curra Relativity of Predatory Violence 1. Violence is in the eyes and actions of the beholders - battered wife-> battered husband - VIOLENCE defined culture by culture 2. Arbitrary Definitions- Murder, antisocial personality disorder, too general, 3. Why is violence relative? - Social structure variables: opportunity, symbols, maintain control, know each other - Social Encounters: Motives of the participants, accounts 4. Variables Violence- Infanticide Crime and Victimization Data- O’ brien Sources: 1. Uniform Crime Reports (FBI-UCRs)- Official data 2. Self-reports (Offenders) 3. Victims (NCVS- National Crime Victimization Survey) 4. Others (NIBRS- replace the UCRs, record different time and more information than UCRs; Hospital Records; Vital Statistics) Sellin’s Dictum “The value of a crime for Index purposes decreases as the Distance from the crime itself in terms of procedure Increases” All crime Self Report Offense known (Victimization) Arrested/Cited (Official) Indicted Convicted Jail/Prison Criminal Data- includes Behaviors and Enforcement Policy CRIME DATA (01/27) 1. UCR- (1929,1960good) 97% local police agency, evert week, send to FBI -(1) arrest data (2) Offense known to police -General Pattern, Only Aggregate sum data. - Index Crime/ Type I [street crime]: Violent/Persona (Robbery, Rape, Assault, Homicide); Property (Burglary, Auto-theft, Larceny theft, Arson-1979, add is because insurance company give pressure) Index Crime/ Type II: Pros, Drug Crime, DUI, Alcohol violation, simple assault, Fraud, Embezzle, Kidnap - National level, State level, County level, City/Towns, Villages level - Provide Offenders’ Race (white, black, Asian, Native American), Sex, and Age - Strengths: Time Span, National Coverage, Compare places, Verify by law enforcement, Official - Problems: Unreported Crime (Dark Figure)- serious & vested I; Hierarchy Rule (Incidents, multiple crimes); focus on street crime (Influenced by political pressure); Inconsistent Definitions (Burglary have definition in CA and OHIO); Officer Discretion (filtered through law enforcement); Limited Offender Information; No Victim Information; Categorized problems (all other offenses contains what? in one category may have different crime, like fraud; many are minor crimes, like larceny) 2. NCVS-(1972-current) - Household interview, >12 years old - Household crime: head of household; Personal: An individual - face to face (6 months period), phone follow ups for 3 years - 6 Index Crime: Robbery, Rape/ Sexual Assault, Larceny, Burglary, Auto-theft, Assault, no type II - Strengths: Victim Characteristics; No Hierarchy (Incident, Victims); Dark Figure; Victimization (Frequency, after effect, circumstance, psychological and physical, economic harm); Not filtered through officer/ law enforcement - Problems: Memory problems; Dark Figure; (depends on offender, victim, crime and circumstance); Sampling Error; Attrition/ Dropping out; lost some population (Homeless/ move a lot/ Children excluded); Interviewer Effect; Reactivity (lie); limited offenders information; Redesigns; Place Comparisons (one place may have small sample) 3. Self-Report - focus on Juvenile; go to school and ask not serious - Hindelang: measure very different aspects, this not real crime we should discuss, be cautious. - improve self-report: Elliott No item overlap; maybe interview (debate); better question about serious crime (follow-up); frequency (3+); NYS 47; over time; national 4. NIBRS- official-(official/ FBI) - Victim - Suspect/ Arrests - Time of Report - Incident/ Circumstance - Don’t use hierarchy rule - More information on hate crimes - Look local victimization patterns CRIME PATTERN (02/03) - What crimes are you most likely to be arrested for? - What types of offenses are common? - What types of crime dominates the attention of the criminal justice system? Mostly small stuff (changes in rankings) J: Unequal Crime Decline 1920-1940 Crime increase- Depression; 1940-1960 Crime drop- WWII; 1960-1990 Crime explode increase- Baby boom; war on crime; crack; not good economy (white collar crime increase); Reporting Policy (More police 23% increasing 1973-92; UCR 1960; Professionalization policy; Victimization Service) 1990- Crime Drop from, REASONS? (Homicides drop) - Rise in Imprisonment Rates- “get tough” on drugs, parole - Increase in police presence: hire more - Diminishing Drug Markets- cocaine - The improving economy of the 1990s (long-term pattern) - Baby boom aged; Abortion (Levitt); Immigration - Guns and Gun Control Policies-not necessary,some gun programs don’t decrease gun violence. Gender and Crime - Men> Women - Especially violence Female Crime - Minor Offenses - Profile: (Fraud, Theft, shop thefts, stealing work)- Pink Color; drugs; prostitution - Motivation: (Financial needs, Victimization, abuse, spouse/child) - Rare to strangers - Low commitment: (Peak early, desist, Few career) - Few organized, white collar, and professional crimes Big Questions We Try To Answer!! 1. Gender Gap (M/F): What male and female trends? How big is the gender gap? 2. Profile of Offending (M/F different) 3. Explanations: 
 - Traditional: 
 A. Deterrence
 B. Labeling
 C. Control- Social Bond
 D. Learning
 E. Strain
 - Gender Women Men We see the Change in Female Arrests (Gap is narrowed)- 100 Assault increasing - 75 Stress: Role strain (Work, Children; higher divorce; financial strain) 50 -Liberation/ Modernation -Policy/ Enforcement (Reporting, more minor assault, Charge up, handled formally) 25 -DV -Equal Treatment 0 -Base rate Issue (Women from before didn’t have so many 1970 1985 1995 2010 crime) Age and Crime Hirschi Time, Place, Cultures, Offenses However, taking off such crime (drug, alcohol, theft, property, minor crimes), then the curve would like adults. - Next to gender, age is the best predictor of crime - More than 50% of crime committed by people between 15-29 - Crime onset in mid teens - Desistance typically in mid 20’: social bond (control theory: job, marriage); Social learning; Biological (Testosterone) Race and Crime UCR data: Black: White: 7:1 12:1 5:1 self-report: 1:1 1.2:1 Serious Crime has big gap UCR Arrests- white more all, but serious crime black more (limited to certain offenses: serious violence, street crimes). * Intra-racial: blacks and blacks…etc. Victims are similar to Offenders characteristics (Male, Blacks, Young, Single and Divorced, * Urban, Poor). DETERRENCE (RATIONALCHOICE) (02/10) Goal: (1) Deterrence: scare people/ stop offending (2) Incapacitation- Remove (3) Retribution: eye for eye (4) Rehabilitation History: Supernatural (trial on Ordeals)- Enlightenment (1700s): Free will/ choice; Hedonistic Pleasure (sought pleasure & avoided pain); Rational/ Calculating- “On Crime Punishment- Beccaria” Classical School(1764) THEORY BELIEF PUNISHMENT CLASSICAL SCHOOL Beccaria (1764 Criminals choose the 1. Swift; Severe; Certain crime; M         aximum of pleasure and 2. Judge should decide Minimum of Pain punishment                              3. Protect social contract Deterence Rational Choice Part I; Beccaria An Essay On Modern Criminology-Classical Theory Classical Theory: people are rational, and concerned with minimizing their pain and maximizing their pleasure. Their efforts to do so ofter leads them to engage in crime, unless they are deterred by the threat of punishment. Punishment should be set by the “sovereign” or representative of the state, clearly stated proportionate to the crime, swift, and certainty (then the severity), Immediate punishment Part XI; Cornish and Clarke Reviving Classical Theory: Crime as a Rational Choice (Rational Choice Theory) Crime are broadly the result of rational choices based on analyses of anticipated costs and benefits. Steps: 1. “Initial involvement model” (decision making in criminal involvement): decide if use crime to satisfy the needs (based on experience and learning); 2. decide particular crime (immediate situation); 3. select the target of crime (“crime-specific”: different models of decision making are necessary for specific crime; focus on crime) Contains “Initial involvement model” —>“Event Model”(situation factor)—>“Continue Involvement Model”(increase professionalism; change in life style and values; change in peer group)—>“Desistance Model”(life event…) Part XI; Wright and Decker:Armed Robbers inAction *General deterrence-general population *Specific deterrence- offenders Punishment Works well on…. Not as well - White Collar: Stakes in conformity (formal,informal) - Rape Child Molester - Highest Risk offenders: pulling/ targeted deterrence - Homicide Domestic violence (the con will be only harsh punishment, happens) - Drugs/Alcohol (Addiction ) - Male Prohibit? - Mental Illness - Recency/ Temporary - Gang Offenders - Public - Career Criminals - Instrumental/ property - Violence/ private/ personal However, we can not give certain crime severe punishment on those work well, since there will be no uniform, will have different calculation. Punishment certainty of punishment does seem to carry a bit more weight than the severity of punishment. But as I’ll discuss in a minute, changing certainty of punishment is often much more difficult than simply making fines and prison sentences (severity) greater. Critiques of Deterrence Theory 1. Impulsive/ don’t make rational decision 2. Unaware of punishment (Kleck’s article “Dirty little secret”: perception of punishment don’t match actual reality”) 3. Inconsistent 4. Delay: Penalties learned after arrest; Punishment should give immediately 5. People don’t logically: drugs, mental impairment 6. Individualized differences 7. Certain crimes are hard to deter 8. Distrust in Court/ Law/ Legal system 9. Less choice than we think 10. Counterfactual reasoning: Punishment reflects Norms
 For example: 1990s Increased Police Present,1980s Mass Incarceration have some affect on offense rate (it drops), but only some influences. (It’s hard to determine on deter to what have effects on what) 11. Displacement: change the choice, but not about whether the offenders choice or not. Many critiques on Deterrence Theory, but not on Rational Choice Theory. Since the former focuses on the formal punishment and fear. And Deterrence Theory is based on Rational Choice Theory. (Continued…) DETERRENCE (RATIONALCHOICE) BIOSOCIALCRIMINOLOGY (02/17) Limits of Deterrence Theory 1. Penalties learned after arrested (not known, not equal) 2. Underestimate the risk of getting caught. 3. Crime Displacement 4. Don’t think logically 5. Some people have little to lose 6. Difficult to test 7. Work for some people, situations, offense, contexts: uniform to tailered punishment 8. Temporary effects: how create long-term effect 9. Certainty vs. Severity vs. Swiftness- Empirical evidence “The surest but most difficult way to prevent crime is by perfecting (moral) education” (Beccaria 1764) If Deterrence Theory still has value….then, - Target Hardening: recognize criminals make choices - Focused Deterrence * Saturation point/ effect? (punish can get change, but not 
 further change) - Perceptions“Dirty little secret” * So maybe we can change the perception, using education or media… - Focused/ Targeted: specific offenders or specific group - Rational Choice Theory: Informal Sanction, correction (Deterrence focuses on formal punishment ) - Indirect Impacts: (1) Opportunity effect/ Making business difficult. (2) Educative effect Cornish and Clarke (Rational Choice Theory)
 1. 4 Stages: (1) “Initial involvement model” —> (2)“Event Model”—> (3)“Continue 
 Involvement Model”—> (4)“Desistance Model” (1) “Initial involvement model”: Financial difficulties; Peers/ Learning/ Social Bond (2) “Event Model”(situation factor): Opportunity; Vulnerability target; Guardians; Risk and 
 Reward (3) “Continue Involvement Model”(increase professionalism; change in life style and values; 
 change in peer group) (4) “Desistance Model”(life event…) Formal punishment is hard to change the first stage (1). Therefore, the deterrence can’t change the MOTIVATION of crime, such as poverty. 2. “bounded rationality”: limited information (We only weigh what we know, but choices still be made) 3. Integrated: Cornish & Clarke they combine many theories BIOSOCIALCRIMINOLOGY History - Darwin- early 1800s
 - Focus on Biology
 - Positivism: empiricism, focus on measurement, observation, testing, concrete differences. - Changes about science even until today - Fronz Joseph Gall: Phrenology (Symbolic Head) * Initial of MEDICAL MODEL: Treatment; “Corrections” (Asylums); Probation/Parole; 
 Indeterminate sentences - Cesare Lombroso (Atauism)- 1850s - Born Criminals: atauists - Traits -Autopsies - Shapes (nose, lips, forehead, eye color, throwback): less evolved - Critics of Lombroso: (1) variation within criminals groups (2) small samples (3) no control 
 group (non offender) (4) Environment effect: biology/ physiology is 
 influenced by environment, such as substance abuse. Environment 
 differences - Rise of Sociological Theory of crime- 1900s - Gluecks- 1950s - Comparing 500 delinquents and 500 Non-delinquents - Multi-FacetedApproach: good kids in bad place or bad kids in good place. Environment Genetic biosocial ① Temperament (impulsive, aggressive, risk, hostile) ② Physical- somatotypes ③ IQ - Later Biological Positivism - Sheldon’s constitutional psychology (Replicated by the Gluecks) - Three somatotypes: endomorph, mesomorph, and ectomorph - Delinquents: high in mesomorph; low in ectomorph - School Misbehavior and leisure time because of restless energy. - Critics: biological stuck, not talking much environmental interaction *Age Crime Curve (Robins 1978) Adult antisocial behavior virtually require childhood antisocial behaviour, yet most antisocial youths do not become antisocial adults. (Robins 1978) “Life-Course-Persistent Offenders” and “Adolescent-Limited Offenders” - Why “Life-Course-Persistent Offenders” commit crime?: - “Neuropsychological Deficits” (biology: exposure issues) - Cumulative continuity - Why “Adolescent-Limited Offenders” commit crime?: - Mimicry - Maturity Gap:As youths become older, they have more opportunity to show recognize ability. - NewAreas of Biological Research - genetic: twin studies, adoption studies, molecular genetics - Nervous System: hormones, neurotransmitters, skin conductance, heart rate - Brain imaging: hippocampus, frontal and temporal regions - Neuropsych: IQ, Mental illness - Bio-Environment harms? - Explanatory power? Journals of this week: 1. Wright and Cullen (The Future of Biosocial Criminology: Beyond Scholars’Professional Ideology)
 (1) biosocial criminology can lead to a criminology this is rooted more in science and empirical observation than in ideology 
 (2) biosocial criminology can link criminology to a diverse array of other disciplines and research methodologies 
 - Ideology- political ideology
 - Tribal moral community: bind and blind thinking (biological linkages to human conduct 
 inevitably leads to harsh or brutal government interventions, as critics propose, but because 
 biological thinking and biologically based empirical findings directly confront the 
 professional ideology of criminologists. 
 - Shifting Context and New Possibilities:
 A. Moffitt’s (1993) life- course-persistent and adolescence-limited offenders
 B. criminology does not exist in a vacuum 
 C. As the social context changes, so too do ideas about crime 
 D. Scientific paradigms emerge 
 - What Is Biosocial Criminology? 
 biological variation, ontogeny, and interaction (environmental factors and genes)
 - The Power of the Biological Revolution and the Future of Criminology 
 2. Wasserman (Is There Value in Identifying Individual Genetic Predispositions to Violence)
 SOCIALDISORGANIZATION THEORY (02/24) [Chicago School; Social Ecological Perspective] *Sociological Theory: Type of Places (The dominant perspective of criminology; Environmental factor: poverty, employment, population, mobility, immigration) ex. Social Structure Theory; Social Process Theory; Social Disorganization Theory Early 1900s Radical changes in Chicago: - Population increase: industrialization (jobs); Immigration, in-migration movement; Urbanization population explosion (1880s-500k population, 1900-1 million, 1910-2 million)
 - Park & Burgess start: “CONCENTRIC ZONES MODEL” (Natural Model) (1920s-1950s) -Aprocess of Invasion and Succession (Germany immigrants first at zone II, then move to zone III; after 10 years, other immigrants move here and still have the crime pattern, such as Italians) - Ecological Model: the model is like a natural process, like the plants growth. Shaw and McKay “Social Disorganization Theory”
 “inability of a community structure to realize the common values of its residents and maintain effective social controls” (Bursik, 1984)
 - Juvenile Delinquency and UrbanAreas - They map the distribution of TB, Infant Mortality, Mental Illness, JuvenileArrests (Every social problems have the same pattern) - (1) POVERTY, 2. RESIDENTIAL MOBILITY (no community supervision), (3) ETHNIC HETEROGENEITY, (4) FAMILY DISRUPT cause crime and problems.
 >>Social Disorganization>> Crime>> Subculture (Normal) - Organized community organization v.s disorganized community organization (conflicting systems of values, can’t control delinquency behaviors)
 - Specific areas of youths- groups and adult offenders- acquire experience- skilled - Ineffectiveness of Family: 1. other members illegals 2. the influence of delinquent group 3. new problems that traditional solution can’t be used. - Location, economic, population
 *Shaw and McKay's disorganization mode 
 1. the ability of a community to supervise and control teenage peer group 2. informal local friendship network 3. the rate of local participation informal and voluntary organization Ruth Kornhause (1978s) (Revive Social Disorganization Theory)
 - Mixed Model didn’t work: you can’t be organized for crime and social organization at the same time. - No mixed model, but the Control Theory: Why people don’t commit crime, disorganized community can’t control crime
 - Results in weakening of informal social control 
 Organized Community: Live in area long time; supervision of kids; meeting/watching group; fear/ lock of fear; friendship/ties control
 (Critics: Shaw and McKay never define what the Disorganization community is….) Sampson & Groves (1989s) “Systemic Model” 
 (Strong social ties and Frequent Interaction; friendship; kinship network) - One of the first tests of “disorganization”: friendship, peer groups, organization participation.
 - British crime data (Generalization)
 - Rise of the Systemic Model
 - Employ self-report and victimization data. - They found that the structural factors like poverty and mobility shaped social ties and social networks in communities. Specifically they affected the local friendship networks, the ability of residents to control teen peer groups, and they influenced residents’willingness to participate in local organizations. Bellair (1997) “Weak Ties”
 - Testing Systemic Model: compare social - Infrequent ties, interact one time a year - Strength of “weak ties”: when neighbors have a lot of weak ties, they have much BIGGER and wider social networks, which helps organize communities and prevent crime. Sampson et al. (1997) “Collective Efficacy”
 - PHDCN study - Social Cohesion/ Trust - Informal Social Control: willingness to intervene for common good.
 - Poverty; mobility; heterogeneity>>>Collective Efficacy>>>Crime - Doesn’t must have strong ties, but have Capacity for action; Expectation; Mutual Obligation. Willingness to do something. Others that affect “Collective Efficacy”: Fear of crime; Relation; Immigration flows and homicide trends The limitation of Social Disorganization Theory - Can’t explain individual level
 - Lack of reliability - Focus on changing neighborhood dynamic but not the roots (poverty, mobility…etc.)
 - This is a Urban Crime pattern (match white collar crime), there are other crimes don’t match this map Recommandation Reading: Devil in the white city Back to the yard (Chicago life) STRAIN THEORY (02/24) Three big social theory of criminology: (fundamental differences about the motivation) (1) Strain: Push (pressure to crime; negative experiences) (2) Control: Drift (internal) (3) Learning: Pull (positive interaction)
 Anomie and Strain
 1. Emile Durkheim (1850-1900s)
 - What is “Anomie”?
 - Lack of Ethical standards
 - Normlessness
 - Lack of social regulation (ambiguous rules; hopelessness)
 - Estrangement 
 - Suicide would high when….
 - Irregular Lives
 - Economic Crisis (even the prosperity)
 - War (military service)
 - Divorce (social life shifts)
 - 4 suicides: (low norms)Anomie; Egoistic
 (high norms) Fatalistic;Altruistic
 - happen when norms shift
 - Disjunction between aspirations of ability to achieve goals
 - No limit on human desires (Unlimited goal) 2. Robert Merton (1938) “Social Structure &Anomie”
 - U.S. problems: High emphasis on success goals (money; power/prestige); Means: job, school, 
 follow rules, honest. However, there is a disjunction/gap between Goals and Means, it creates 
 pressure/push toward crime. U.S extremely emphasizes Goals more than Means. The reality is 
 Mean is deficiency.
 - 5 type of adaptation to strain
 (1) Conformity: +(goals) +(means) common
 (2) Innovation (Innovators): +- crime
 (3) Ritualism: - +
 (4) Retreatism:- - least, aliens, drug user, continued failure and inability
 (5) Rebellion:? new social order; revolution, terrorism - Anomie: Why does US have so many crimes?
 - Classic Strain: Individual reactions within a social system. REVISIONS OF CLASSICAL STRAIN THEORY 
 City- “Poverty in the midst of plenty”: Relative Deprivation (inequality)
 *CRITICS of Merton’s theory: 
 (1) Crime among middle class/Elites (pressure on the lower class), ex. white collar crimes, but strain still exist in elites, maybe try to be wealthier or be competitive. 
 (2) Findings poverty on crime were sometimes weak.
 (3) Non-offenders: good boys in bad neighborhood.
 (4) Less focus on women
 (5) Goals of his theory 3. Agnew (1980-1990s) “General Strain Theory” 
 - Negative relationship:
 (1) strain as the actual or anticipated failure to achieve positively valued goals, 
 - Expectations
 (2) strain as the actual or anticipated removal of positively valued stimuli,
 (3) strain as the actual or anticipated presentation of negatively valued stimuli: toxic 
 environment, illness >> cause substance abuse
 - Individually valued goals (not only money)
 - Many people would use “Coping Mechanism”
 (1) minimize importance of goals
 (2) minimize negative outcomes
 (3) accept responsibility
 4. Messner and Rosenfeld (1995) “InstitutionalAnomie” (back toAnomie)
 - “Institutional-anomie theory”- explain high rate of crime in US
 - monetary success+ economy dominates major institutions in the society: basic value and 
 organization of society are responsible for our high crime rate?
 - US: achievement orientation; individualism; universalism
 - 4 social institutions: the economy, polity, family and education- interdependence
 - US dream affect on crime
 (1) direct: the creation of anomic normative order
 (2) indirect: inhibit the development of strong mechanisms of external social control.


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

50 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Bentley McCaw University of Florida

"I was shooting for a perfect 4.0 GPA this semester. Having StudySoup as a study aid was critical to helping me achieve my goal...and I nailed it!"

Amaris Trozzo George Washington University

"I made $350 in just two days after posting my first study guide."

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Parker Thompson 500 Startups

"It's a great way for students to improve their educational experience and it seemed like a product that everybody wants, so all the people participating are winning."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.