Understanding the Level of Crime in London - Assignment Example

Part I Number Questionnaire Null Hypothesis Many young Londoners are more fearful of knife crime than gun crime Alternative Hypothesis Young Londoners are not fearful of knife crime than gun crime This is a research study whose main aim is to have a better understanding of the level of crime in London, please fill the following questions to make this possible. Note that; The information here in will be confidential, It will only be used for purpose indicated above, No allowances (benefits) will be given to the participants, and Lastly, to participate in this study is by free consent. 1. Age………………… 2. Where do you live?................................... 3. Are people there aware of gun or knife crime? Yes. No. 4. Do you know of criminals living in your area? Yes. No. 5. Please underline as appropriate if you have had encounter with the following Knife Criminals Gun Criminals Both Knife & Gun Criminals 6. Have your parents or relatives been victims of criminal activities? Yes No. 7. Have your friends seen or been victims of criminal activities? Yes No. 8. How frequent have you been a victim of crime? How many times?.................... 9. How many suspects did you encounter?................... 10. Did they harm you? Yes. No. 11. Was it serious to an extend of going to hospital? Yes. No. 12. If your parents or relatives have been victims of crime, were injured? Yes. No. 13. What do you think is the age bracket of the suspects who attacked you or heard your friends describe? 0-20 Yrs. 21-30 Yrs. 31-40 Yrs. 41 Yrs and Above 14. Of the two below, which one did they (parents/relatives/friends) experience the most? Please underline Knife Crime Gun Crime 15. To you and the experiences from your friends, which one makes one afraid the most? Please underline Knife Crime Gun Crime 16. Why? Please explain briefly....................................................................................... 17. Which month was the crime committed?.............................. 18. The law enforcement agencies are doing a lot to deal with criminals? Yes No 19. A lot has to be done to combat crime, why is it so?....................................................... 20. What are your suggestions on what should be done to counter criminals?...................................................................................................................................................................................................... Thank You. Number 2 i) Research findings are said to be reliable and valid if the sample used is representative of the whole population or it represents all focal elements in the population (Tronchim, W. 2008). A representative sample is assured if the traits of the population elements are studied well for any disparities. Such differences lead to homogeneity or heterogeneity of the population. If a population is homogenous; all the elements have the same traits, then getting a sample form it becomes easy. A heterogeneous population means that different classes of representation exist and which should be harmonized first before drawing the sample. This is impossible. For example, in this research study, the social welfare of the various groups in the population should be fully represented in the sample. Their beliefs, their social class, their affiliations among other issues should be considered in the first place. Both males and females should have equal representation. This is so because, according to research done, gender bias in sampling renders research findings some limitations (Babbie, R. 2005). Further, many are not willing to trust the findings. This is one part which many researchers are keen with. To StatPac (2007), in order to attain a sample which is representative, then random, stratified and systematic sampling techniques should be employed. In random sampling, all the elements of a population have each an equal opportunity like the other of being selected. Here, the sampling is done by taking elements randomly from the population. This technique is applied iff the population is homogeneous. Stratified sampling which is the other technique is employed in cases like this one; when the population has varying trends in behaviour and characteristics (Foreman, F.K. 1991). To carry out sampling using this technique, the population is demarcated according to traits and then random a random sample is selected from each demarcation. Systematic sampling on the other hand is where the kth element of the population is selected to take part in the research study. In this case, the population is not homogenous since it has representation from all over London and thus, random sampling will fail. Stratified sampling is used. ii) In this research study, questionnaire, interview and documentary evidence will be used. A questionnaire is a tool for data collection either through direct administration or face by face interview with the researcher (John, M. 1999). At times; may be due to un-availability of a forum where it can be administered, this tool is mailed to the participant with a return mail so as to ensure that it is send back for analysis and compilation. It happens to be the mostly used tool in research data collection. To Milne, J (1999), questionnaire design needs much attention and the following are observed; Leading questions are omitted, Absence of ambiguity should be maintained, Both open ended and closed questions should be used to ensure more data, It should be as short as possible. For it to attain the required research standards, it should first be test-retested for validity and reliability (Milne, J 1999). Validity is all about whether the questions are valid or not while reliability is one whether the questions asked can be relied to satisfy the objectives of the study. This is tested using the Cron’balch Alpha testing. Once the above is confirmed, a pilot survey is conducted to determine the above results. As a data collection tool, the questionnaire is used since it; Enables the respondent to gives information without interference, Closed questions results to data which is easy to analyze, Open-ended questions leads to more data, No strict deadlines to be met by the participant, Among all the data collection tools, the questionnaire is able to get as much information as possible from all population representations. However, it has some limitations; If halfway filled, analysis with missing values becomes difficult, If mailing is used to administer it, many may fail to reach the research resulting to a small number of respondents thus lacking validity and reliability, More information may result which may render a problem to the research during analysis. The other data collection tool which may be used in this case is the interview. This is conducted where the researcher and the participant meet face to face with each other. Also, the interview may be carried out over the phone or internet. However, according to Steinar, K. (1996), the last two options are not the best and are expensive. In addition, the two cannot give reliable data since the researcher is not able to have much control of the participant. Interviews are used due to the following; The researcher records what is easy to analyze, The respondent may give more information according to the researchers moods and the interview environment, Clarification can be sought incase of confusing information by the respondent, Limitation of interviews; Information depends on the mood of the respondent, Leading questions may have a hallo effect, It is time and resource consuming. Another method which might be employed to collect data in this case again is the documentary evidence. In this case the respondent gives evidence which shows that a certain crime happened or an account of what happened. In this regard, the researcher if observant will be able to tell whether it is true such happened or not. This method like the interview and the questionnaire has advantages in that; First hand information is got, The resultant information is reliable and valid, The researcher has an allowance to make choices, Its limitations are; Some evidence may fail validity and reliability test, Part II a) Univariate Analysis Offence type Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Corrected Model .000(a) 0 . . . Intercept 41604.498 1 41604.498 5279.191 .000 Error 39254.502 4981 7.881 Total 80859.000 4982 Corrected Total 39254.502 4981 From the table above, the offence committed is a significant predictor of the research objective. It has a F-value of 5279.191 which is significant (Sig. = 0.000) at 95% level of significance. Offence Type Frequencies Offence Freq. Percent ABH 1876 37.7 Robbery 1207 24.2 Assault 753 15.1 Harassment 411 8.2 Public Order 205 4.1 GBH 105 2.1 Sex Offence Female O 16 97 1.9 Sex Offence Female U16 23 .5 Sex Offence Male U 16 8 .2 Racial Violence/Threat 112 2.2 Firearms Offence 22 .4 Knife/Other Weapon Offence 12 .2 Murder 6 .1 Other 145 2.9 Total 4982 100.0 ABH has the highest percentage in terms of crimes committed followed by robbery crimes which represent 24.2% of crimes. Number of suspects involved in offence Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Corrected Model .000(a) 0 . . . Intercept 10045.114 1 10045.114 11449.345 .000 Error 4385.886 4999 .877 Total 14431.000 5000 Corrected Total 4385.886 4999 The number of suspects involved in a crime is a significant predictor of the research objective. It has a F-value of 11449.345 which is significant (Sig. = 0.000) at 95% level of significance. Number of Suspects Frequencies Number Freq. Percent 1 suspect 3804 76.1 2 suspects 759 15.2 3 suspects 147 2.9 4 suspects 202 4.0 5 suspects 12 .2 6 or more suspects 76 1.5 Total 5000 100.0 Almost all the crimes had at least one suspect committing it which is 76.1% of the total crimes. Suspect’s age Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Corrected Model .000(a) 0 . . . Intercept 2713285.125 1 2713285.125 14244.576 .000 Error 952201.875 4999 190.478 Total 3665487.000 5000 Corrected Total 952201.875 4999 From the table above, it is evident that the suspect’s age is a significant variable in the research objective. It has F-value of 14244.576 which is significant (Sig. = 0.000) at 95% level of significance. Suspects father social class Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Corrected Model .000(a) 0 . . . Intercept 37974.657 1 37974.657 45193.577 .000 Error 3475.343 4136 .840 Total 41450.000 4137 Corrected Total 3475.343 4136 The suspect’s father’s social class is a valid and reliable predictor while dealing with crime rate. At 95% level of significance, Sig. = .000 and the F-value is 45193.577. Father’s Social Class Frequencies Social Class Freq. Percent Professional/managerial 307 7.4 Skilled/Semi Skilled manual 757 18.3 Unskilled manual 1579 38.2 Unemployed 1494 36.1 Total 4137 100.0 b) Descriptive Statistics Offence type number of suspects involved in offence suspect age Suspects father social class N Valid 4982 5000 5000 4137 Missing 18 0 0 863 Mean 2.89 1.42 23.30 3.03 Median 2.00 1.00 20.00 3.00 Mode 1 1 0 3 Skewness 2.450 2.874 .455 -.637 Std. Error of Skewness .035 .035 .035 .038 Kurtosis 6.157 8.864 .563 -.469 Std. Error of Kurtosis .069 .069 .069 .076 Robbery is the most committed crime in this case. Assault is the most frequent crime as compared to the others. A suspect is involved in almost all the crimes. Unskilled manual labourers have children who are most likely to commit criminal activities than the other cadres. They are followed by children of unemployed and then the unskilled casuals. Number 3 The variable is coded below; 1 = white skinned Europeans, 2 = dark skinned Europeans, 3 = African Caribbean, 4 = Asian-Pakistan, 5 = Chinese-Japanese, 6 = Arabic-Egyptian, 7 = other/unidentified, 8 = anomaly. The codes developed are, 1 = Europeans (white skinned and dark skinned), 2 = Caribbean’s, 3 = Asians, 4 = Africans, 5 = unidentified, 6 = Anomaly. Either white skinned or dark skinned, all of them are Europeans. In this case white skinned and dark skinned take code ‘1’. Africans in of Caribbean origin qualify to be called Caribbean’s and take code ‘2’. Asians are Asians whether they are from China or Pakistan and they take code ‘3’ in this case. Arabs from Egypt qualifies to be an Africans and take code ‘4’. Code ‘5’ is taken by the unidentified while ‘6’ is taken by anomaly. Advantages of Re-coding variable Recoding is done so as; To integrate data into manageable levels to the researcher, Recoded data is easy to analyze-tabulations, Recoded data is easy to understand, Number 4 a) Africans are more likely to commit a crime than the other races Multiple Comparisons-Tables 1. (I) Suspect ethnicity (J) Suspect ethnicity Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound Europeans (White and dark skinned) Caribbean’s .31(*) .082 .000 .14 .47 Asians -.31 .215 .148 -.73 .11 Africans -1.16 .614 .060 -2.36 .05 Anomaly -.30 1.616 .854 -3.47 2.87 Caribbean’s Europeans (White and dark skinned) -.31(*) .082 .000 -.47 -.14 Asians -.62(*) .213 .004 -1.03 -.20 Africans -1.46(*) .613 .017 -2.66 -.26 Anomaly -.60 1.616 .709 -3.77 2.57 Asians Europeans (White and dark skinned) .31 .215 .148 -.11 .73 Caribbean’s .62(*) .213 .004 .20 1.03 Africans -.84 .644 .190 -2.11 .42 Anomaly .01 1.628 .994 -3.18 3.20 Africans Europeans (White and dark skinned) 1.16 .614 .060 -.05 2.36 Caribbean’s 1.46(*) .613 .017 .26 2.66 Asians .84 .644 .190 -.42 2.11 Anomaly .86 1.727 .620 -2.53 4.24 Anomaly Europeans (White and dark skinned) .30 1.616 .854 -2.87 3.47 Caribbean’s .60 1.616 .709 -2.57 3.77 Asians -.01 1.628 .994 -3.20 3.18 Africans -.86 1.727 .620 -4.24 2.53 * The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. From the table above, it is evident that Africans commit crimes at the same rate as the Europeans, and Asians. In fact, Africans from Caribbean commit more crimes than the others. Cross tabulation of Offence type and Suspect ethnicity Suspect ethnicity Total Europeans African Asians Arabs Anomaly Offence type ABH 839 953 75 5 0 1872 Robbery 313 858 32 2 0 1205 Assault 342 378 23 5 2 750 Harassment 239 151 16 4 1 411 Public Order 106 86 12 1 0 205 GBH 48 53 4 0 0 105 Sex Offence Female O 16 34 57 4 1 0 96 Sex Offence Female U16 9 11 2 1 0 23 Sex Offence Male U 16 5 3 0 0 0 8 Racial Violence/Threat 73 34 4 0 0 111 Firearms Offence 6 15 1 0 0 22 Knife/Other Weapon Offence 8 4 0 0 0 12 Murder 0 6 0 0 0 6 Other 57 73 12 2 0 144 Total 2079 2682 185 21 3 4970 There is a week relationship between the offence committee and ethnicity of the suspect. Dependent variable is the offence type while ethnicity is independent. Pearson Correlations Offence type Suspect ethnicity Offence type Pearson Correlation 1 -.020 Sig. (2-tailed) . .161 N 4982 4970 Suspect ethnicity Pearson Correlation -.020 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .161 . N 4970 4988 A correlation coefficient of -.02 confirms weak negative relationship b) Most Caribbean suspects are from unskilled fathers Cross tabulation of Suspect ethnicity and Suspects father social class Suspects father social class Total Professional/managerial Skilled/Semi Skilled manual Unskilled manual Unemployed Suspect ethnicity Europeans (White and dark skinned) 136 311 650 614 1711 Caribbean’s 153 413 857 811 2234 Asians 15 23 64 59 161 Africans 1 7 4 7 19 Anomally 0 1 0 1 2 Total 305 755 1575 1492 4127 Looking through the table above, the two variables have a weak positive relationship with each other. Dependent variable is the father’s social class while ethnicity is independent. Correlations Suspect ethnicity Suspects father social class Suspect ethnicity Pearson Correlation 1 .008 Sig. (2-tailed) . .618 N 4988 4127 Suspects father social class Pearson Correlation .008 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .618 . N 4127 4137 The Pearson correlation coefficient between the two variables is .008 which confirms the weal positive relationship. c) Europeans suspects are mostly from professional fathers Cross tabulation of Suspects father social class and Suspect ethnicity Suspect ethnicity Total Europeans African Asians Arabs Anomally Suspects father social class Professional/managerial 136 153 15 1 0 305 Skilled/Semi Skilled manual 311 413 23 7 1 755 Unskilled manual 650 857 64 4 0 1575 Unemployed 614 811 59 7 1 1492 Total 1711 2234 161 19 2 4127 A week positive relationship exists between the two variables. Dependent variable is the father’s social class while ethnicity is independent. Correlations Suspect ethnicity Suspects father social class Suspect ethnicity Pearson Correlation 1 .008 Sig. (2-tailed) . .618 N 4988 4127 Suspects father social class Pearson Correlation .008 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .618 . N 4127 4137 A weak positive relationship exists between the two. The Pearson coefficient is .008 confirming the above assertion. d) Most of the victims are females Cross tabulation of Suspect ethnicity and Gender of Victim Gender of Victim Total male female Suspect ethnicity Europeans (White and dark skinned) 1014 1059 2073 Caribbean’s 1328 1336 2664 Asians 95 88 183 Africans 11 10 21 Anomally 2 1 3 Total 2450 2494 4944 A week negative relationship exists between the two variables. Dependent variable is the suspect’s ethnicity while victim’s gender is the independent. Correlations Gender of Victim Suspect ethnicity Gender of Victim Pearson Correlation 1 -.014 Sig. (2-tailed) . .313 N 4955 4944 Suspect ethnicity Pearson Correlation -.014 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .313 . N 4944 4988 The coefficient is -.014 and this confirms weak negative relationship. Part III A research is the use of findings to make a point or justify a claim which is not well known or where assumptions have existed over time (Lee, A. 2004). The findings of a research are used to influence decisions in organizations. The trustworthy of the findings depends on the kind of data collected and the method of analysis used. Cron’balch alpha is used to determine whether the findings will be valid and reliable. The process of research has some methodologies which are employed. Some of them are; Exploratory research methodology, Descriptive research methodology, and Casual research methodology. In exploratory research approach, sampling is done according to convenience (Allen, R. and Earl, R. 2004). A sample is selected based on the experiences of the people in the surrounding. In this case, this is a very good approach which can be used by criminologist so as to understand the problem of criminals. This is an approach which they may employ in their quest for information due to its flexibility of use. Further, criminologist can understand the problem under study by adopting the descriptive research methodology. In this case, the criminals and their activities are understood through the victims of their actions. This approach shows the future expectation of criminal activities, and has a clear definition of the questions which they can use in order to come up with tangible results. On the other hand, casual research methodology aims at using an experiment so as to determine the existence of an act (Trochim, W 2006). Like in this case, the criminologists can set up an experiment where the can have certain parameters like gauging the level of contentment of people due to law enforcement activities. Using the above approaches, criminologists can use either qualitative or quantitative approaches to gauge crime rate. In quantitative approach, they will be interested in numbers; for example the number of people who have been victims of crime, be it gun crime or knife crime. Further, the numbers of times the various crimes are committed are of much importance. Also, of importance are the criminals involved. Quantitative approach involves the collecting of data from a sample (Richmond, P 2004). This sample should be collected using stratified sampling if it is to be representative of the whole population. The data is then analyzed with the mean, mode and the variance as the most sought results since the three will show the spread and concentration of crime. An example of this is below; Offence type N Valid 4982 Missing 18 Mean 2.89 Median 2.00 Mode 1 Std. Deviation 2.807 Variance 7.881 Skewness 2.450 Std. Error of Skewness .035 Kurtosis 6.157 Std. Error of Kurtosis .069 Sum 14397 Figure 1 A qualitative research on the other hand deals with attributes (Robey, D. 2003). In this case, attributes are like the social classes and affiliations. For example; Col % Count Suspects level of affiliation to local gangs No Known Affiliation 95.4% 4770 Some affiliation 4.1% 207 Proven affiliation .5% 23 Group Total 100.0% 5000 Combination of the two approaches yields good results and is encouraged. This is so because, he qualitative research approach leads to numbers which can be quantified while the qualitative approach leads to attributes (Kingsley, I. 2006). Thus, the combination of the two caters for both open and closed questions in case of a questionnaire. With the above methodologies and approaches, criminologists can understand crime well. Primary and secondary data is used to produce findings in a research study. Primary data is the data a researcher goes out and collects analyses and writes a report based on them (Hoepfl, M. C. 1997). On the other hand, secondary data is data from another source dealing with the same objective and which is used and referenced in a research. However, primary data is encouraged in many instances because according to Elliott, J. and Stern, E. (1997); It is trusted by many, Relevant mechanisms are used in its collection, The research data collection tools are test-retested for validity and reliability, All important procedures are followed during its collection and the researcher can say with certainty that it is the required information (Mailu, S. 2004), Biasness is minimized since the researcher is in control of the whole process, It is entirely based on the objectives of the study. Due to the above reasons, it is important for the criminologists to collect their data if their findings are to be trusted. According to Callahan, T. (2008), ethical considerations are key to the success of any research work involving human beings even if they are thugs. The following should be employed even in this case; Informed consent should be sought participant; Privacy and confidentiality of data collected should be maintained, All participants should be given full information of the study before its commencement, Risks to the participant should be minimized, References Allen, R. and Earl, R. (2004). Research Methods for Social Work: Thomson Wadsworth Babbie, R. (2005). The Basics of Social Research. Thomson Wadsworth Callahan, T. (2008). Research Ethics. [Online] from: http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/resrch.html [Accessed 19 August 2008] Elliott, J. and Stern, E. (1997). Research Ethics. UPNE Richmond, P (2004). Descriptive Research Approach: The Importance. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Foreman, F.K. (1991). Survey Sampling Principles: Marcel Dekker Hoepfl, M. C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology education researchers. Journal of Technology Education, 9(1). John, M. (1999). Questionnaires: Advantages and Disadvantages. [Online] Available from: http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi/cookbook/info_questionnaires/index.html [Accessed 19 August 2008] Kingsley, I. (2006). Research Process. [Online] Available from: http://www.uaf.edu/library/instruction/ls101/introduction/Research_Process.html [Accessed 19 August 2008] Lee, A. (2004). Research Methods: The Dos and Don’ts: Melbourne: Longhorn Mailu, S. (2004). Primary data collection methods. [Online] Available from: http://brent.tvu.ac.uk/dissguide/hm1u3/hm1u3text3.htm [Accessed 19 August 2008] Milne, J (1999). Questionnaires: Advantages and disadvantages. [Online] from: http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi/cookbook/info_questionnaires/index.html [Accessed 19August 2008] Robey, D. (2003). Qualitative Research Methods: Applications. Ohio: Akron University Press StatPac. (2007). Sampling methods. [Online] Available from: http://www.statpac.com/surveys/sampling.htm [Accessed 19 August 2008] Steinar, K. (1996). An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. SAGE Tronchim, W. (2008). Inferential Statistics. [Online] available from: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/statinf.php [Accessed 19 August 2008] Trochim, W (2006). Qualitative Measures. [Online] Available from: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qual.php [Accessed 19 August 2008] Read More