Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Strengths and weaknesses of official crime statistics
Weaknesses in official crime stats
Actual crime rates compared to official rates
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The differences between using official crime data and those using self-reported data varies. While both report crimes, “the self-report and official statistics do not measure the same things” (Mosher et al. 2011 p.139) and the methods used are different, in some cases crimes are not reported to either one, and they both have their own margins of error associated with them. Official crime data is reported by law enforcement organization and only certain types of crimes are accounted for while self-reported is done via surveys, phone calls or even face to face interviews and covers any type of crime. While official crime data is limited to some extent, it has the capability of being able to be an “indicator of criminal activity” (Menard & Covey, 1988, p. 372) in various locations and can share that with other agencies for comparison. One of the main weaknesses with this type of data is that since only serious crimes are reported, it misses a lot of other crimes that could be happening in different areas. Proverbs 19:5 “Desire without knowledge is not good, and whoever makes haste with his feet misses his way” (Holy Bible ESV). …show more content…
Self-reporting allows for all crimes to be accounted for, not just a certain level of criminal activity. These types of data gathering has a longer reach that the data reported in the UCR as it can reach out to victims of all ages and victims of many different crimes. Just because the police are not called to the scene does not mean that crimes are not happening and “substantial distance remains between citizen “reported” and police recorded crime” (Skogan, 1975, p.28). The two types of data gathering would benefit each other more if they were to work together and incorporate each other’s strategies and
Crime data is a resource being used to help understand who the victims are, their age, race, what type of crime they have committed. The more information someone has about crime the more prepared they can be to deal with the victim, evaluate programs that help prevent crime. There are several official sources used UCR, NCVS, NIBRS that are used. There are pros and cons to each source and the following information will include some of the positive and some of the negatives points of each report. This is not inclusive by any means, there are many different various pros and cons of each report.
The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is information that is gathered by the U.S Census Bureau. Unlike UCR this information is not given by law enforcement officials, but by a household survey that is conducted about twice a year. When the survey is being commenced they place the crimes into two different categories; person crimes and property crimes. NCVS has four objectives when obtaining information; “(1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected typed of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas.” (NACJD)
In Canada, crime is measured using a combination of both police and victim-reported information. Statistics Canada presents surveys to criminologists to analyze the data of criminalization and victimization to determine understand criminal behaviour, how the public perceives it, and how to prevent it. Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR) intended to standardize the collection of police-reported crime statistics from across Canada. Figures generated by UCR are less than perfect, due to variations in the grey lines of recording and interpreting crime between different police. (Cartwright, 2015) The General Social Survey (GSS) was implemented later as a broad social survey to poll for crimes not reported to police. This was because Statistics
Loftin and McDowall also mention that in order to understand what the Uniform Crime Report is saying and to do so accurately, one must make sure they understand the data that is being presented to them. With this said, in what ways can the Uniform Crime Report be superior and inferior to victimization surveys and self-report data?
The sample size and exclusion of individuals, such as under 16’s or those in group residence, creates bias and an untrue reflection on population as crimes they experience are not taken into consideration (HO, 2013).
As Nils Christie argued, crime is a property of the state (2004). As such, it can be defined by the same systems of ideals which influence the state. Crime statistics, which refer to a category of human acts that society view as deviant, can consequently be argued to be without objectivity (Dorling and Simpson, 1999). The statistics they provide are thus arguably not exact. To a certain extent one could infer they are reflections of society, of those who present the data and most importantly of those who accumulate it. The facts themselves become a socially constructed foundation for social knowledge, which inevitably become subjective. This essay aims to discuss how ideological biases within the Police and to a certain extent the media are reflected in the crime statistics.
Weatherburn, D. (2011) ‘Uses and abuses of crime statistics’, Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, 153: 1-16
The Extent to Which Sociologists Agree that Official Criminal Statistics Do Not Give an Accurate Picture of the Extent in Terms of Crime
For decades, researchers have tried to determine why crime rates are stronger and why different crimes occur more often in different locations. Certain crimes are more prevalent in urban areas for several reasons (Steven D. Levitt, 1998, 61). Population, ethnicity, and inequality all contribute to the more popular urban. Determining why certain crimes occur more often than others is important in Criminal Justice so researchers can find a trend and the police can find a solution (Rodrigo R. Soares, 2004, 851). The Uniform Crime Reports are a method in which the government collects data, and monitors criminal activity in the United States (Rodrigo R. Soares, 2004, 851). They have both positive and negative attributes that have influenced
In general, official statistics of crime recorded by the police and surveys of the public such as victim surveys and self-report studies are the three main measures of the extent of crime in Britain. The oldest method is to rely on official data collected by criminal justice agencies, such as data on arrests or convictions. The other two rely on social surveys. In one case, individuals are asked if they have been victims of crime; in the other, they are asked to self-report their own criminal activity. (Terence P. Thornberry and Marvin D. Krohn) Although these are a main secondary source of quantitative data, each of them may contain some drawbacks. Thus, this essay will introduce these three methods and demonstrates their disadvantages, such as the police crime statistics exclude the unreported and unrecorded crime;
The Uniform Crime Report, which was developed in the 1930s, is commonly used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a record of crimes committed all across the United States. These crimes, which fall under two categories, Part I and Part II offenses, are reported by local police to the Federal Bureau of Investigation each year. Part I offenses are considered to be the more serious of crimes recognized by society. Such examples of this are homicide, forcible rape, robbery, arson, motor vehicle theft, etc. Part II offenses are those that are considered less serious, such as fraud, simple assault, drug abuse, gambling, stolen property, embezzlement, etc. Part I crimes can also be subdivided into what are known as violent crimes and property crimes. (Barkan, 2012). However, there are both some positive and negative aspects of this type of crime measurement. The following paper will explore the small amount of pros and numerous cons associated with the Uniform Crime Report.
Arguably computer crime mapping has helped mitigate the negative perception held about the effectiveness of police in fighting crime. According to Goldstein & McEwen (2009), perceived confidence in police abilities largely decline in the 1970s and 1980s. Studies conducted at the time, established that the existing policing strategies needed an overhaul. For instance preventive patrol and rapid response to police call (which were the predominant strategies) did very little in crime prevention. Also in line with the findings, available statistical figure clearly pointed out, crime rates-even in areas patrol by highly qualified police forces-were rising at an alarming rate. Police scholars were affected by the negative perception as much as the police; therefore they intensified their search for a solution, by carrying out various studies (Goldstein & McEwen, 2009).
For decades now, including the years 1994 and 1995, the time of the O.J. Simpson murder trial, American law enforcement has used two major data sources to measure crime. First, there is the Uniform Crime Report or UCR. The UCR is compiled data from reported crimes, it is a very accurate system used for murder and those crimes that cannot go unnoticed. Next, we have The National Crime Victim Survey or NCVS which is a unanimous survey, better at accounting for the crimes that may not get reported, crimes such as rape or assault.
Secondly, crime analysis is not just about immediate patterns and series: analysts also look at the long-term problems Annual Crime Report that every police department faces. Also, crime analysts know how to extract data from records systems, ask questions of it, and turn it into useful information. Another primary way is through intelligence, which, describes special information about criminals and criminal organizations: their goals, their activities, their chains of command, how money and goods flow through them, what they’re planning, and so on. Finally, crime analysts make you and your agency look good to the public and to local government officials ("What Crime Analysts Do."). Quote from Chief Tom Casady, of the Lincoln Police