An Introduction to Alternative
Data-Gathering and the
Special Case of Uniform Crime
Reports

Alternative Data-Gathering Strategies
 The experiment as a method of data gathering is by no means the best strategy, despite its obvious strengths.
 No all topics lend themselves to experiments.
 Experiments have weaknesses that other data gathering strategies do not have.

Alternative Data-Gathering Strategies
 There are other types of data gathering strategies which have better external validity and are NOT characterized by their artificiality .
 Examples of alternative data-gathering strategies: social surveys, participant observation, case studies, unobtrusive measures .

 A means of data gathering in which a segment of the population reports their attitudes and/or behavior.
 IE: ( questionnaires , interviews , telephone contact )
 Can be powerful tools for obtaining quantitative data for statistical analysis; Statistics can control for RCF’s

Participant Observation
 Occurs when a researcher observes a group by participating, to varying degrees, in the activities of the group.
 Favorite tool of anthropologists.
 For some subjects participant observation may be the only visible data-gathering strategy.

Case Studies
 Case studies In-depth analysis of one or a few cases.
 Represent a commitment to a qualitative or sensitizing strategy.


Provide a micro-criminological or in-depth close-up of only a few subjects
IE: Edwin Sutherland’s The Professional Thief
(1937), Clifford Shaw’s “Brothers in Crime”

Life Histories
 Generally involve the analysis of diaries , letters , biographies , and autobiographies .

IE: Clifford Shaw’s “The Jack-roller” (1930)
 Oral histories are “recounts of events by participants.”

Unobtrusive Measures
 Non-reactive methods of data gathering.
 Any methods of gathering data in which the subjects are NOT aware of being analyzed.
 IE: Analysis of existing data, UCR data, trace analysis
 Usually an inexpensive alternative to data gathering.

The Special Case of Uniform Crime Reports
 Traditionally the most widely used measure of crime in the United States.
 Began in 1930 by U.S. Department of Justice.
 Compilation of national crime statistics. Law enforcement agencies send statistics to DOJ.

The Special Case of Uniform Crime Reports
 The UCR comprises crimes known to , and recorded by , local police departments.


These statistics do not take into account the
“dark figure of crime.”
In the 1980’s about 98% of metropolitan police agencies reported its crimes to the FBI.

The Crime Index
 The UCR is divided into Part 1 and Part 2 crimes.
 Part 1 consists of index crimes which are
MAJOR felonies reported to the police:
 Murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, arson

The Crime Index
 Part 2 crimes are non-index crimes:
 Includes minor offenses, such as, simple assault, vandalism, gambling, and drunkenness
 The FBI can not vouch for the validity of reports, but it examines them for accuracy, eliminates and makes special inquiries for crass errors

Crime Rate
 The crime rate is expressed as the number of crimes per unit of population size.
 Permits a fair comparison of different size units.
 Crime rate = # of index crimes X 100.000
Population

Calculating the Crime Rate
 This is very important. Newspapers are sold and jobs are won and lost depending on what the crime rate is.
 Question: If the City of Houston has a population of
4,900,000 with 506 homicides a year. How would you calculate the homicide rate?

Limitations of UCR Data
 Recorded statistics represent only a portion of the true crime rate .
(Probably 2x as much).

Citizens’ tendency to report crime may change because of a general change in public morality
(barroom brawls)

Limitations of UCR Data
 Most victimless crimes and white collar crimes are not contained in the UCR

Changes in a police department’s statistical tabulating process may affect how the crime rate is recorded.
 Political pressure to lie.

Limitations of UCR Data
 Hierarchy rule - Only the most serious crime is reported in any single incident.
 The crime index is an un-weighted index - all crimes count the same; IE: A murder counts the same as a bicycle theft.

Limitations of UCR Data
 Crime index may cause police agencies to concentrate on these crimes at the expense of other crimes.
 Larceny and arson should not be included as an index crime.
 In cases of arson it can be hard to tell whether or not intentional.

Crime dip
 Stabilization or decline in crime.
 Demographic shifts may provide some explanation for rapidly rising or falling crime rates.
 Criminologists using UCR data were able to forecast the crime dip in the 1980’s.

UCR Redesign
 Beginning in 1977, the International Association of
Chiefs of Police and the National Sheriffs
Association called for a major redesign of the
UCR system
 Today the National Incident-Based Reporting
System (NIBRS) is replacing the UCR.

National Incident-Based Reporting System
 NIBRS uses fifty-two data elements to describe: victims, offenders, offenders, and circumstances of crimes.
 1st overhaul of UCR in 50 yrs
 NIBRS includes many different types of crimes, such as, bribery, pornography, fraud, and non-forcible sex offenses.

National Incident-Based Reporting System
 NIBRS will eventually replace the UCR as the official source of crimes reported to law enforcement agencies.
 Represents a new way of thinking about crime.
 Illustrates close partnership among BJS, FBI, and over 17,000 law enforcement agencies

NIBRS versus UCR
 1.) Incident-Based v. Summary Reporting:
NIBRS reports include fifty-two data elements describing victims, offenders, and circumstances of the crime.
 2.) NIBRS includes more possible types of crimes: UCR has 8 Part I Crimes, NIBRS has 46
Group A

NIBRS versus UCR
 3.) NIBRS, unlike UCR, makes a distinction between attempted and completed crimes.


4.) Elimination of the “hierarchy rule” (under
UCR). Cites all offenses within the same incident.
5.) Designation of “Computer Crimes”

NIBRS versus UCR
 6.) Better statistical analysis: Greater opportunities for examining interrelationships between many variables such as offenses, property, victims, offenders, and arrestees.
 7.) NIBRS includes “Crimes Against Society”
ie: prostitution, drug offenses, gambling, pornography.

NIBRS versus UCR
 8.) Greater specificity of data:
Because NIBRS collects more specific information, which can lead to better criminal profiling. IE: NIBRS tells a researcher whether or not drugs/alcohol were involved; injuries sustained; types of weapons ; relationship between victim and offender; location .
A plethora of information.

Interpol, United Nations, World Health
Organizations
 The above organizations represent an international effort with respect to crime statistics.
 IE: Interpol puts out its crime statistics.
 This type of data may give insight into crimes in other countries and provide a basis for comparison.

Interpol, United Nations, World Health
Organizations
 CAUTION: Some of the same problems in analyzing international data are the same as those affecting the UCR.
 Problems: Varying definitions of crime across countries, differences in law, differences in recording practices, different urban/rural, economic structures, political factors