Critique of the Validity of Crime Statistics - Literature review Example

CRITIQUE OF THE VALIDITY OF CRIME STATISTICS By Name Course Instructor Institution Location Date Official statistics especially those covering the contemporary issues are accessible for students or researchers who are in search of relatively a large amount of resource and at the same time they are known to provide interesting issues collected in a systematic way. Ograjensek, Bavdaz & Perviz (2013) argues that the several advantages associated with official statistics prove why many sociologists prefer them when out for a research. First, they are not expensive, secondly we can say they are at a researcher’s disposal or else readily available bearing in mind how scarce resources can be. The third advantage is their ability to provide well detailed or comprehensive data which by the virtue of being official can be termed as reliable as well as representative. Lastly, they are important due to the fact that they provide a whole country’s data. This easy will lay emphasis on crime statistics notably critiquing their validity. Crime statistics a good example of official statistics have been used in noting the prevalence of crime, highlighting the crime hotspot regions and also in helping the government in coming up with new trends in combating crime while at the same time providing secure and conducive environment to its citizens (McNamara & Bell 2012). However, according to Newburn (2013), official statistics have been vaguely used and the effect s have gone to the extent of affecting the economic growth: In some cases these statistics have been identified providing inaccurate information thereby knowingly or unknowingly scaring away possible investors in some areas that would have been developed or misled people to setting up businesses in regions identified as safe and later suffering huge loses courtesy of crime. Some areas have been identified as secure while in real sense all sorts of crimes are taking place. Still some acts of violence have been reported to be non-existant only to later find out that they are deep rooted in society. Actually crime statistics have contributed to the rise in crime since efforts and resources have been directed to the wrong areas with the demanding areas being left to suffer. The methods of data collection on crime can be blamed for the misleading crime statistics (Westmarland 2011). Crime statistics are reliant on individual crime reports made directly to the police, which is one of the major techniques of collecting data on criminal activities. It has been stated by Maxfieled, Michael and Earl (2004) that most crimes go unreported to the law enforcement agencies. It is worth noting that some people are not able to identify themselves as victims therefore not realizing criminal acts being done to them. A good real life example of this is my neighbor friend (rest in peace) who was regularly domestically abused by her husband. She always said her husband was just being protective and caring meaning that she never realized that this was a crime. Eventually the beatings took a turn for the worse and now she is no more. Fear of embarrassment is another reason why crimes go unreported. Women are the major parties in this trend. Cases of rape in women have gone unreported in most incidences due to fear of being embarrassed coupled with little confidence in the justice system to provide a conviction. In workplace crime is often under-emphasized meaning most crimes go unreported. For many years I have worked in a company where fraud is so clear for any worker to see but no one has ever taken the step of reporting this to the law enforcement authorities. Victims of crime have also been noted to fear implicating themselves if they went ahead to report a criminal act. In work places for example, an employee will have the fear of reporting a crime to avoid the risk of losing his/her job. Another example is crimes that are committed by drug dealers to their customers. You will not expect the victim to report such an incident since he will end up being arrested (Kelly & Welsh 2008). A similar case can be drawn from child abuse crimes which happen within the family structure meaning they are very unlikely to be reported. Crime statistics receive further blow in regards to their validity in the case where law enforcement officers fail to take action on some offences which are of course brought to their attention. Studies on the police force reveal that police officers have a trend of prioritizing their activities hence leaving some crimes unattended to. Boivin & Cordeau (2011) emphasizes that acts of discretion by police whereby they misuse the power accorded to them through turning a blind eye to some offences which they render minor and not worth the effort should be used in police performance assessment. Police officers have developed a certain misguided occupational culture of roughness and aggressiveness which like discretion has devastating effects. In most cases police have been seen to lay a lot of emphasis on particular kind of offences at the expense of other offences. Take for example violent crime overriding shoplifting. Some criminals trade information with police and in return the criminals are allowed to walk scot free. This goes a long way in proving how invalid crime stats can be while at the same time portraying the decreasing trend in police effectiveness (Scoville 2013). Formulating crime statistics ideally involves relying on information on reported to the law enforcement agencies. This means that the measured levels of crime are basically the levels of reported crime forgetting that most crimes go unreported. It is evident that crime statistics follow no scientific research techniques in acquiring as well as analyzing information but only rely on reported cases to generalize the whole situation. Efforts however have been put in place to ensure that different crimes are recorded under stated categories and interpretations made on the basis of a particular crime to avoid cases of generalization. Self-report studies is another method that has been used in formulating crime statistics which uses the questionnaire to group or sample and involves asking them if they have engaged in any forms of crime in a specified time period. Failure to use this method in workplaces shows that they are perceived as safe areas whereas workers still undergo through different kinds of work related crimes which remain unreported. This method is not effective in any sense since you do not expect a serial killer to confess he killed a dozen people. Despite said to offer a higher degree of accuracy, the fact that if one confesses about a crime and the data is equated as unreported crime (Maxfield, Michael & Earl 2004). Thus the validity of crime statistics formulated using this method is poor and therefore a more critical approach is required. The last of the available three methods used in gathering crime information and actually the better of the reviewed two methods is known victim (victimization) survey. According to Hanson & Self-Brown (2010), it involves respondents being asked whether they have faced victimization in terms of crime during the past one year and if yes then they say if it was reported to the relevant authorities. In Britain, victim survey is carried out yearly under the banner British Crime Survey. The weakness with this annual exercise is that the crime hotspot regions record the lowest response meaning that t his data is not particularly valid in helping formulate the official crime statistics record at a local level. Biased or misleading information as a result of relying on people’s memory is common with this method. Still in many workplaces this method has not been put into use leaving crimes in work areas not addressed. This method does not involve data collection from people aged below sixteen years hence crimes against juveniles goes unreported (Newburn 2013). Theories underpinning these approaches include the Marxist and the Feminist theorems. Marxists have a perception that the statistics which are relayed are molded in a manner that protects the elite in the society. In turn, an atmosphere of fear giving room to the legislators to come up and enforce more controlling authority. On the other hand Feminists postulates that statistics should be viewed with caution since they are formulated by men in an attempt to dominate women hence the stats are ends to means. Almost similar sentiments are shared by the Left Realists who view the figures as invalid and as a pathway for the authority to impose extra restrictions on its people (Corbetta 2003). In conclusion, official statistics can be seen to have many loopholes hence lacking validity as well as validity. However , self report studies and victimization tend to faintly justify the reliability they still fail to do enough in guaranteeing validity since they too gave a number of short comings though not as many as crime report method (Klass 2012). Though blemished the three sources of crime information can be incorporated to give some degree of crucial insights on the nature and levels of crime. An approach where many methods are incorporated eliminating overreliance on reports of crimes by victims will greatly help in formulating official crime statistics which is valid and reliable in analyzing crime trends hence helping curb cases of crime. It is further recommend that the law enforcement authorities treat all crimes equally with no priority given to some while others are overlooked. Absolute involvement in field research is crucial where by the police do not wait until crimes are brought to their attention but go out and find out what issues concerning crime that people are faced with not excluding workplaces which currently are crime hotspots (Ellis, Hartley & Walsh 2010). References Newburn, T, 2013, Criminology, Abingdon, Oxon, Routledge. Westmarland, L, 2011, Researching Crime and Justice Tales from the Field, Hoboken, Taylor & Francis. Maxfield, Michael G & Earl, B, 2004, Research methods for criminal justice and criminology, Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth. Klass, G, M, 2012, Just plain data analysis: finding, presenting, and interpreting social science data, Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Ellis, L, Hartley, R. D., & Walsh, A, 2010, Research methods in criminal justice and criminology: an interdisciplinary approach, Lanham, Md, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Corbetta, P, 2003, Social Research Theory, Methods and Techniques, SAGE Publications. Scoville, D, 2013, The elephant in the room: crime stats are used to judge the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies, but hardly anyone is questioning their validity or accuracy, Police (Carlsbad, Calif.) 37. Boivin, R., & Cordeau, G, 2011, Measuring the Impact of Police Discretion on Official Crime Statistics: A Research Note, Police Quarterly, 14, 186-203. Hanson, R, F, & Self-Brown, S 2010, Screening and assessment of crime victimization and its effects, Journal of Traumatic Stress, 23, 207-214. Kelly, C, & Welsh, W, 2008, The Predictive Validity of the Level of Service Inventory & Revised for Drug-Involved Offenders, Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 819-831. Ograjensek, I, Bavdaz, M, & Perviz, L, 2013, On the role of official statistics in business study programmes, Statistics Education for Progress. McNamara, R, H, & Bell, K, J, 2012, Dimensions of crime as a social problem, Durham, N.C., Carolina Academic Press. Read More

Victims of crime have also been noted to fear implicating themselves if they went ahead to report a criminal act. In work places for example, an employee will have the fear of reporting a crime to avoid the risk of losing his/her job. Another example is crimes that are committed by drug dealers to their customers. You will not expect the victim to report such an incident since he will end up being arrested (Kelly & Welsh 2008). A similar case can be drawn from child abuse crimes which happen within the family structure meaning they are very unlikely to be reported.

Crime statistics receive further blow in regards to their validity in the case where law enforcement officers fail to take action on some offences which are of course brought to their attention. Studies on the police force reveal that police officers have a trend of prioritizing their activities hence leaving some crimes unattended to. Boivin & Cordeau (2011) emphasizes that acts of discretion by police whereby they misuse the power accorded to them through turning a blind eye to some offences which they render minor and not worth the effort should be used in police performance assessment.

Police officers have developed a certain misguided occupational culture of roughness and aggressiveness which like discretion has devastating effects. In most cases police have been seen to lay a lot of emphasis on particular kind of offences at the expense of other offences. Take for example violent crime overriding shoplifting. Some criminals trade information with police and in return the criminals are allowed to walk scot free. This goes a long way in proving how invalid crime stats can be while at the same time portraying the decreasing trend in police effectiveness (Scoville 2013).

Formulating crime statistics ideally involves relying on information on reported to the law enforcement agencies. This means that the measured levels of crime are basically the levels of reported crime forgetting that most crimes go unreported. It is evident that crime statistics follow no scientific research techniques in acquiring as well as analyzing information but only rely on reported cases to generalize the whole situation. Efforts however have been put in place to ensure that different crimes are recorded under stated categories and interpretations made on the basis of a particular crime to avoid cases of generalization.

Self-report studies is another method that has been used in formulating crime statistics which uses the questionnaire to group or sample and involves asking them if they have engaged in any forms of crime in a specified time period. Failure to use this method in workplaces shows that they are perceived as safe areas whereas workers still undergo through different kinds of work related crimes which remain unreported. This method is not effective in any sense since you do not expect a serial killer to confess he killed a dozen people.

Despite said to offer a higher degree of accuracy, the fact that if one confesses about a crime and the data is equated as unreported crime (Maxfield, Michael & Earl 2004). Thus the validity of crime statistics formulated using this method is poor and therefore a more critical approach is required. The last of the available three methods used in gathering crime information and actually the better of the reviewed two methods is known victim (victimization) survey. According to Hanson & Self-Brown (2010), it involves respondents being asked whether they have faced victimization in terms of crime during the past one year and if yes then they say if it was reported to the relevant authorities.

In Britain, victim survey is carried out yearly under the banner British Crime Survey. The weakness with this annual exercise is that the crime hotspot regions record the lowest response meaning that t his data is not particularly valid in helping formulate the official crime statistics record at a local level. Biased or misleading information as a result of relying on people’s memory is common with this method.

Read More