204 Measuring crime

Police recorded crime (PRC)- based on the victim
1. Indicator of police workload, locally representing the prevalence and incident rate of offending behaviours across 43 territorial police constabularies
  1. Notifiable offence- 'other crimes against socitey'. Range from theft to murder. Non-notifiable offences- antisocial behaviours e.g littering or TV evasion
    1. Old crimes enabled by new routes to commit e.g. technology.
      1. MCGUIRE AND DOWING 2013 new typology. Cyber-enabled crimes = fraud and sexual offences. Cyber-dependant crimes = illicit intrusion i.e. hacking and DDOS (Distribution of Denial of services attacks)
      2. 2014 APRIL police required to record any crimes which have a cyber-element to them
        Issue to record cyber-crimes in relation with the NCRS as this requires each victim to be counted, not applicable as cyber crimes are committed on a broad spectrum
        Child Exploitation Of protection Center (CEOP) 2011/12 - reported 3652 of online child exploitation offences, 10% accounted for online grooming.
  2. Public self report or PC detect/discover= promient feature of managing crime
    1. Police only present at 3% of incidents, therefore rely on technology and public to report. 2014 MAY police required to wear cameras over uniforms.
    2. POVEY report stated PC weigh recording on a balance of probabilities i.e. sufficient hard evidence, subjectively consider it a crime, characteristics of the offender/ victims involved (despite supposedly being impartial).
      1. Discretionary approach- social skills e.g. reflextive listener, keep in touch with the what the public want= persaude public to report crime by developing a element of trust, sometime which has been scruntinize in recent years
  3. Includes residents, tourist and sectors i.e. commerical crimes.
  4. Well reported and well recorded crimes but not those undiscovered.
2. National crime recording standards (NCRS) - Aims to harmonise recording practices across police constabularies regions and eliminate any deviation from the set standards. Introduced in 2002.Employs a victim centered approach.
  1. 'Gradual erosion to comply with the NCRS'- 2014 crisis
    1. How? COLEMAN and PEASE 1986 'cuffing' - deliberately not include reported crimes
    2. Why? Political pressure to attain good clear up rates, each force with have different target to achieve depending on their overall crime statistics
  2. Recommend stricter auditing to ensure richer quality of data recorded.
Data= individual interpretation and systematic recording. MAGUIRE 2002 need to approach with a critical mind in order to understand WHY, HOW, WHAT is needed to measure in order to gain a good incite. 'true totals' are useless to be measure as they can never be achieved.
1. 3 Stages- REPORT, RECORD, DETECTION
  1. COLEMAN AND MOYNIHAN 1996 ONS- compliment of official agency data which is then published by the state.
2. Crime data= useful because it priotises the CJS to review legislative policies, measures the nature and extent of criminal activity, enables monitoring of social deviant behaviours + fears about crime, evaluates treatment programs and preventative measures if they work- test theories.
Crime survey England and Wales (CSEW)
1. Systematic research method (VICTIMISATION SURVEY), individuals self report own victimsed or offending behaviours in the last 12 months via a structured interview method. Record crimes against the houshold.
  1. 'reality check on the ONS'. Records 'crimes against society'- overall crimes FELL BY 9% MARCH 2013
    1. 8.6 Volume crime recorded last year
  2. Sample size 35,000 since MARCH 2013 from 46,000, AGED 16-65 years old. Multi-clustered technique. No longer use 2,000 booster sample for ethnic minorities. NATALINO 1981 stated ethnic/ racial minorities are underrepresented
  3. Excludes the homeless, institutionalised groups and those not on the electroal role
    1. PICKERING ET AL 2008 believed the exclusion of instutionalised establishments would have little effect on the ONS.
    2. 'Gradual exposure of Dark figure', introduction since 2009 child victimised survey aged 10-15yrs.
      1. SOOTHILL, PEELO AND TAYLOR 2002 'dark figure'- partial account of crimes reported recorded.
        BOTTOM AND PEASE- 'grey figure'- variations in those report by the public and those recorded by the police.
  4. limitations
    1. Willingness- issue to disclose personal experience face to face
    2. Define crime- SPARKS1977 social groups difference interpretations e.g. found affluent groups were less tolerant to antisocial offences so more likely to report minor incidents
    3. Recall- the ability of the respondent to recall events during the time required. MORRIS AND SLOUCH 2010 found persistent offenders to have difficulty in recalling the time of events.
  5. Offending crime and justice survey (alongside the CSEW)- 6 module after the initial screener test- suggest 'events' not label them are criminal= implies they are though.
    1. Illicit drug use- not count drug use during the 'interview' period.
2. Design = structured interviews
  1. Self administered interview responses, HARRISON 1997 found most favourable over face to face or telephone interviews.
    1. BABBIE 2010 face to face preferred over telephone
      1. Response rate 75%= consisent
  2. Computerised method= most commonly used by researcher
    1. RICHMOND ET AL greater privacy and confidentailty due to the anonymity aspect.
      1. MIRRLES-BLACK 1999 good estimate fo Domestic Violence
    2. Types- CAPI (Computer assisted personal interviewer)- interviewer ask questions and inputs the response. CASI (Computer assisted self interview) repsonse reads the questions and puts in their own responses- optional if interviewer present. A-CASI (Audio- Computer assisted self interview)- same as CASI but have headphones.
      1. Suitable for children asking sensitive questions and iliterate individuals.
        65% only use this option last year
Criminal Justice System (CJS)- offender/victim based-court statistics
1. Shifted from a Victim focus to counting the number of offences. Combines both summary and indictable offence.
  1. ATTRiTITION= the number of cases which have filtered through the CJS.
2. Courts- based on offenders
  1. JULY-JUNE 2011/12 Magistrates court - 228,900 NOT GULITY, 1,130,000 GUILTY, 88,000 ACQUITTED/ TERMINATED
    1. Crown Court- 81% GUILTY, 55% RECIEVE CUSTODIAL SENTENCE, 19% NOT GUILTY
  2. LORD SHAWCROSS (HOUSE OF COMMONS 1951) 'It has never been in this country, i hope never will be that suspected offences are subjected to prosecution'
  3. Cases referred to mainly by the DVLA or HM revenue.
  4. 2 Test - evidence based (realistic prospect that the evidence can be used, reliable and what the defence case might be) and in the interest of the public.
    1. For prosecution = weapons or violence, discrimination against the victim. Against Prosecution = physical or mental harm inflicted upon the victim/witness or elderly defendant
3. Offences brought to justice (OBTJ) - those cautioned, convicted or considered in court
  1. 'Justice gap' police recorded crimes not included. 80% unpunished 2013
  2. Discontinuation of cases due to.... court dismissals, not convicted in the same year the crime was committed e.g. HAROLD SHIPMAN 2002= Size gap differs for each crime type therefore creating a disproportion in the statistics. Recently historical crimes being brought to light e.g. YEWTREE EFFECT, increase sexual offences nby 9% in 2013, this could be applied to other crimes. Records 'PRINCIPLE OFFENCE'- Most serious.
Sampling
1. Aims to generate a conclusive representation of those sampled.
2. PROBABILITY= representative and non bias
  1. RANDOM- Everyone can be included/ eligilbe
  2. STRATIFIED- separates the sample into exclusive groups called 'strata'
  3. CLUSTER- usage of all population/ target groups e.g. prison can be clusters, more complicated = separate into female/ male or category A,B,C.
  4. CSEW- use a MULTI-CLUSTERED sampling technique= stratifies police force areas (PFA), randomly selects a cluster of postcodes/ streets, randomly select the household then the individual to participate who is eligible based on the criteria.
3. NON PROBABILITY= non representative and bias (repeat, consistent deviation of the sample).
  1. VOLUNTARY RESPONSE SAMPLE (VRS) + conveience- those who can be motivation to participate in the research i.e. respond to news paper campaigns, so attain a non representative sample as it invovles the same group of people = not generalise
  2. PURPOSIVE- subjectively pick groups/ individuals to participate based on the criteria according to the nurture of the research e.g. offending surveys.
  3. SNOWBALL- find individuals who are information rich, lead to other potenital sources of in for. HACKATHORN suggested suitable for 'hard to reach' groups e.g. online hackers or for ethnographic studies i.e. drug dens
  4. Useful were no sampling frames created. Thought to attain an element of representativeness as it produce information which otherwise would not exist.
4. ADVANTAGES/ DISADVANTAGES
  1. GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE- larger the scope= more representative the sample will be. NATIONAL YOUTH SURVEY SAMPLE- sufficient enough to generate reliable prevalence/incident rates but not a breakdown of regional areas of particular youth groups.
  2. RESPONSE RATES- the actual number of participants who responded. REYNES ET AL 2009 undergraduate research of those who were victims of cyber crimes= anticipated low response rate therefore sent email to prompt certain students to respond to the study. CSEW response rate varies year upon year but achieve 75%.
  3. RESPONSE ERROR- issue with the participate giving reliable answers due to INTERVIEWER EFFECT or HAWTHORN EFFECT
  4. PROBABILITY SAMPLING = TOO EXPENSIVE
  5. NON SAMPLING ERROR- faults within the machanics of the study i.e. unclear instructions, interview incorrectly entering the data etc.
SURVEYS
1. HAGAN 1993 systematic research method which requires the respondent to willingly participate in an structured.
  1. JUNGEN-TAS AND MARSHALL 1999 2 principles.... 1. Measure the NATURE and EXTENT of PREVALENCE/INCIDENT rates. 2. Test etiological theories of crime control e.g. HIRSCHI 1969 Social control theory. Therefore enables PREVENTATIVE MEASURE/ TREATMENT PROGRAMS to devlop= VALUABLE TOOL.
    1. SHORT AND NYE 1957 'revolutionised the idea of the feasibility to use self report surveys as a method to research taboo/sensitive topics'.
      1. BOX 1981 only way to measure 'primary deviancy' accurately.
      2. Most suitable method for juvenilles.
    2. HINDELANG ET AL enables use to compare demographic offending behaviours. PARKER AND NEWCOMBE 1987 found burgarly rates correspond with herion use. Therefore we can target specific 'problem' areas/ groups.
2. VALIDITY- what is the focus of measure is accurate. ABSTRACT concept. Vulnerable.
  1. TRUSTWORTHINESS- Can we believe what the respondents say? IS IT A SMALL PROPORTION OF INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE FOR A LARGE PORTION OF CRIME? OR ARE THERE NEW COMERS?
    1. AGE- Adults= problematic group. Consider ramifications in accordance to their actions= deter from diclosing offending past because they want to promote a pro-social image for the prospects of gaining a job in the future.
      1. GIBSON 1970 found 91% aged 14year old lead to conviction. BLACKMORE 1974 81% 14years 76% 16years during the survey. Others found adolescents exaggerated their 'criminal achievements to create a 'deivant identity'
      2. WEISS 1986 high risk offenders more likely to not comply/ uncooperative
    2. ARRESTEE SURVEY 75% admit drug use 1/2 confessed this to contribute to their overall offending behaviour.
3. TYPES
  1. COMPUTERISED- WEB-BASED, CAPI ETC,POSTAL, TELEPHONE.
    1. STRUTTER AND KRAGER 1994 barriers = language barriers, refusal of parents or mental and physical illness stopping them from participating.

Next up

204 Measuring crime

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by millsv almost 10 years ago