There are numerous ways in which criminologists derive data, namely through surveys and detailed records. Sources such as uniform crime reports, national incident-based reporting systems, self report surveys, and national crime victimization surveys are all primary methods of procuring data. Secondary methods include cohort, experimental, and observational data, as well as meta-analysis and systematic review.
Each of these methods has their own fluctuating levels of optimality and negativity. For example, UCRs are sufficiently adequate in publishing reported crimes and arrests, but victims need to initially report the crimes in order for the records to properly serve their purpose. Also, some police departments define crime loosely, and the records are inaccurate due to generalizations or literary misrepresentations.
Due to the technicality of the reports some officers make systematic errors in UCR reporting. Equally the UCR poses potential threats to validity known as methodological issues. The fact that no federal crimes are reported, not all police departments submit reports, estimation is often used in final FBI assessments, and some acts are lumped in together with others, makes the uniform crime report a questionable method of analysis.
National Incident Reporting Systems
National incident based reporting systems are another way criminologists utilize data. This program collects data which is more unique to each situation. It allows for a brief written account of the crime, and it also allows for additional categories of crime. The most apparent problem with NIBRS’ is that it is only fully implemented in 20 states, and its full implementation across the nation should elevate the accuracy and descriptiveness of criminal reporting (Siegel, p.33, 2009).
A self survey is an excellent method by which to acquire an understanding of what social forces impact crime. The sample size of these surveys are subjective and may consist of a few individuals or an entire-school in a cross sectional survey. However, individuals may not be completely forthright or honest when committing criminal acts. Some individuals will obviously refrain from disclosing information which they feel could potentially harm them.
Equally, some individuals will exaggerate their experiences and skew the survey from the opposite direction. Also, the report has potential to overlook chronic and serious abusers because they simply do not comply or care to complete the survey. The survey’s validity also faces vulnerability from underreporting, and this phenomenon persists through different racial, ethnic and gender groups.
National Crime Victimization Surveys
National crime victimization surveys are excellent tools to acquire unreported crimes. The survey accomplishes this by directing the questions through the victim and usually yields a higher number of incidents than UCRs. However, individuals may over-report events due to misinterpretation or error. Individuals may also under-report due to embarrassment or fear of consequence. These surveys also tend to fail to derive any personal criminal activity, and sampling errors and inadequate question formats can skew the results of the study.
Reference
Siegel, Larry J. (2009). Criminology (10th ed.). Cincinnati, Wadsworth, Inc.
Join the Conversation