"Methodological Issues in the Measurement of Crime," in Hans-Joachim Schneider
(ed.) The Victim in International Perspective. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 1982
(English and German editions).
Attempts to assess the nature or frequency of crime using the survey method quickly encounter several
conceptual, methodological, and procedural barriers. The problems and puzzles which make up these
barriers have confounded efforts to generalize reliable and valid measures of crime which are of utility to
scholars or government officials. Here I review these barriers; most of my attention will be devoted to the
National Crime Survey currently being conducted by the United States Bureau of the Census, if only because
extensive methodological investigations have laid bare most of the shortcomings of that effort. These are five
major difficulties facing those compiling "moral statistics" concerning criminal victimization.
(ed.) The Victim in International Perspective. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 1982
(English and German editions).
Attempts to assess the nature or frequency of crime using the survey method quickly encounter several
conceptual, methodological, and procedural barriers. The problems and puzzles which make up these
barriers have confounded efforts to generalize reliable and valid measures of crime which are of utility to
scholars or government officials. Here I review these barriers; most of my attention will be devoted to the
National Crime Survey currently being conducted by the United States Bureau of the Census, if only because
extensive methodological investigations have laid bare most of the shortcomings of that effort. These are five
major difficulties facing those compiling "moral statistics" concerning criminal victimization.
“Innovations in the Analysis of Crime Surveys,” a paper presented at the
Conference on Measurement and Research Design in Criminal Justice, Griffith
University, Queensland, August 1990.
Written for a conference on crime surveys in Australia, this paper presents several excellent
recommendations for the conduct of victimization surveys. It does not simply focus on their "analysis," for it
would be mistake to hope that more sophisticated analytic methods can somehow overcome neglecting to
gather key data elements in the first place. The paper discusses four ways in which the utility of large-scale
household victimization surveys could be enhanced: by bringing geography back into the picture, improving
the treatment of multiple victimization, more consciously constructing the surveys around a conceptual
framework which enhances their explanatory power and substantive appeal, and not doing them at all. Alas,
no one has ever taken any of these recommendation to heart.
Conference on Measurement and Research Design in Criminal Justice, Griffith
University, Queensland, August 1990.
Written for a conference on crime surveys in Australia, this paper presents several excellent
recommendations for the conduct of victimization surveys. It does not simply focus on their "analysis," for it
would be mistake to hope that more sophisticated analytic methods can somehow overcome neglecting to
gather key data elements in the first place. The paper discusses four ways in which the utility of large-scale
household victimization surveys could be enhanced: by bringing geography back into the picture, improving
the treatment of multiple victimization, more consciously constructing the surveys around a conceptual
framework which enhances their explanatory power and substantive appeal, and not doing them at all. Alas,
no one has ever taken any of these recommendation to heart.
Measurement Abstracts
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |