Comparability of the Crime Surveys in the UK: A Comparison of Victimisation and Technical Details

DSpace Repository


Dateien:
Aufrufstatistik

URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10900/81968
http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:21-dspace-819686
http://dx.doi.org/10.15496/publikation-23360
Dokumentart: Report (Bericht)
Date: 2010-05
Source: The Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research Report ; (2010) 1/2010
Language: English
Faculty: Das kriminologische Repository des <a href="http://www.fidkrim.de">Fachinformationsdienstes Kriminologie</a> enthält forschungs- und fachrelevante Literatur mit dem Schwerpunkt auf "graue Literatur" (Berichte von Ministerien, amtliche Statistiken etc.). Alle Dokumente werden auch in der kriminologischen Literaturdatenbank <a href="https://krimdok.uni-tuebingen.de">KrimDok</a> nachgewiesen.
Department: Kriminologie
DDC Classifikation: 360 - Social problems and services; associations
Keywords: Großbritannien , Kriminalität , Umfrage , Vergleich
Other Keywords:
United Kingdom
Crime Survey
Comparison
Show full item record

Abstract:

The ability to compare crime rates using recorded offences is limited because crimes are defined and recorded in different ways across the different jurisdictions within the UK. Crime surveys offer a more standardised approach to comparing crime rates and trends. The population of the UK is covered by three separate crime surveys; the British Crime Survey (BCS) which covers England and Wales; the Scottish Crime Survey (SCS) and the Northern Ireland Crime Survey (NICS). The geographic coverage of these surveys reflects the three jurisdictions within the UK. This paper aims to map differences between the BCS, SCS and NICS which may influence the estimates of victimisation. Although this paper concentrates on victimisation rates the analysis presented could be expanded to other substantive areas, for example fear of crime or perceptions of the criminal justice system. This paper is based primarily on an analysis of information contained in the published technical reports for each survey. To that extent we have been limited by how the ranges of topic covered, and level of detail given, varied between technical reports. While these differences do not directly affect the comparability of the different surveys, they limit researchers’ ability to conduct comparative research because it is not immediately apparent the extent to which the surveys may vary in terms of methodology and content. The issues covered in this paper can be grouped into three broad categories: The sample: who and how many people are asked?; The questions: what are people asked about? Are they asked in the same way?; Coding: how are the answers people provide turned into data?.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)