|
Abstract
|
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
The aim of this paper by McClintock and Wikstrˆm was to compare the similarities and differences between Edinburgh and Stockholm on the rate, type and community patterns of violent crimes. Police crime reports were used to compare the two cities.
METHODOLOGY:
The authors used police files from the two cities to select their sample. The sample of files was chosen, systematically, according to designated categories of crime. The files were read and coded. Information regarding offender and victim attributes, the crime's social context, and demographic variables (e.g., victim's address, offender's address, and place where the crime was committed) were extracted from the files. Violent crimes studied in detail included approximately 40% of assaults, robberies and rapes reported to the Edinburgh police in 1983, and approximately 30% of those reported in 1982 to the Stockholm police.
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
The authors discussed problems associated with comparing rates of violent crime when different methods of data collection have been used. The two main methods for collecting data have included the frequency of police-reported crimes and victimization or self-reported offending surveys. The authors reported that the advantage of victimization surveys rests in their ability to avoid legal comparability, recording and reporting problems which occur when crime rates have been recorded by the police. The authors stated that the disadvantages with victimization surveys was their low response rates and their tendency to underrepresent peripheral populations (e.g., drug addicts and habitual offenders). Problems associated with comparing police recorded crime rates between the two cities included whether the rates were reported and recorded at approximately the same rate; and whether legal definitions of what constituted the crimes were comparable. The authors reported that police recorded crimes were valuable for their sensitivity to violence experienced by marginalized populations, and victimization surveys were useful for providing information on the victimization of the "conventional population." Overall, the authors reported that police-recorded rates of violent crimes were more representative of crimes committed.
The authors stated that they overcame problems with comparing legal definitions of violent crime by placing homicide, serious assault and petty assault into one category. They argued that problems still existed with borderline definitions of petty assaults and violent acts that weren't considered qualified assault. The authors stated that since there was a difference in recording procedures between Scotland and Sweden (e.g., the Swedish report all violent crimes in the office crime statistics; the Scottish do not), they compared rates based on their own perusal of police files. The authors found higher rates of victims with less serious injuries in Edinburgh than in Stockholm. They stated that this possibly coincided with previous research which found that violent crime is reported more often in Scotland than in Sweden.
The authors found that actual rates of assault, robbery and rape were higher in Stockholm than in Edinburgh. The social context in which violent crimes took place was reported to be very similar between the two cities, however, differences were also evident. The authors found that private assault occurred more frequently in Stockholm (N=29) than in Edinburgh (N=20). No probability figures were provided. The authors reported that rape occurred in the family less often in Edinburgh (N=2) than in Stockholm (N=10). However, rape among non-family acquaintances was higher in Edinburgh (N=18) than in Stockholm (N=11). The authors found that a high frequency of rape took place among casual acquaintances in 'other circumstances' (e.g., in bars, restaurants, etc.) in both cities; Edinburgh (N=53), Stockholm (N=52). The authors reported that when incidences of assault, robbery and rape were combined, the rates were higher in Stockholm. The authors also stated that less serious crimes were reported more often in Edinburgh than in Stockholm.
Comparisons in urban patterns of violence for the two cities were provided. A factor analysis revealed that resident's socio- economic status and family type were major dimensions of residential segregation occurring in Edinburgh and Stockholm. Family type was a stronger indicator of segregation in Stockholm than was socio-economic status. The opposite was found for Edinburgh. The authors reported that a path analysis found that the major type of housing in an area of Stockholm could explain 72% of the family types in that area and account for 43% of the socio-economic status of residents in the area. The figures for Edinburgh were 49% and 74% respectively.
The authors interpreted a further residential segregation factor in the factor analysis as "socially marginalized households" or "social instability." In Stockholm, variables loading on this factor included: home occupants receiving social welfare assistance, single parents, and immigrants. In Edinburgh these variables were immigrants, single parents, unemployed occupants and empty residences. No percentages to account for variability were provided.
The authors reported that high rates of violent offenders and victims of violent crimes were generally confined to small areas. Concentration was greater in Edinburgh than in Stockholm. The authors suggested that this may be related to the fact that Edinburgh appeared to be more strongly segregated than Stockholm. The authors also found that in areas where there were high violent offender rates, there was also a high frequency of violent crime victims. The correlation was greater for Edinburgh (.88) than Stockholm (.60).
The authors found that areas with a high concentration of offenders and victims were mainly located outside the city center and were dominated by council housing. The authors conducted a multiple regression analysis to examine the extent to which urban structure variations could account for offender and victim area rate variations. The predictor variables included: household mean size (family type), percentage of households with working-class occupation (low socio-economic status) and percentage of single-parent households (social instability). The authors found that for both Edinburgh and Stockholm, the three predictor variables accounted for approximately 50% of the variance in violent offender rates. Social instability was the strongest predictor for Stockholm (r=48.0), while socio-economic status was the greatest predictor for Edinburgh (r=52.1). Also social instability was a better predictor in Stockholm (r=31.8), and low socio-economic status a stronger predictor for Edinburgh (r=48.9) when estimating victimization rates.
The authors conducted a further multiple regression analysis to estimate rates of family and non-family violence. The authors found that violent crime in the family was higher in Edinburgh (r=51.5) than in Stockholm (r=23.4), while violent crime in homes involving non-family members was greater in Stockholm (r=32.3) than in Edinburgh (r=22.4). The concentration of public entertainment (e.g., pubs, discos, number of restaurants, etc. per hectare) was added to the above model to explain the relationship between urban structure and violent crimes in public. The authors contended that, although it was not the ideal, this measure provided sufficient information about the relative rate of violence committed in public places in different areas. The authors found that public entertainment accounted for 64% of violent crimes in public in Stockholm, and 96% of violent crimes in Edinburgh. The authors found that crime rates were concentrated towards the city center in both cities. When city center was excluded from the analysis, public entertainment still accounted for 81.1% of violence variance in Edinburgh, however, in Stockholm, social instability of area became the significant predictor (r=27.2). The authors suggested that this probably occurred since there was a greater number of public entertainment places (approximately four times greater) in Edinburgh than in Stockholm at the time of the study.
The authors concluded that overall there were many more similarities, than differences, in the social context distributions and urban patterns of violence in Edinburgh and Stockholm.
(CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado)
KW - Scotland
KW - Sweden
KW - Comparative Analysis
KW - Urban Crime
KW - Urban Violence
KW - Countries Other Than USA
KW - Violence Rates
KW - Violence Incidence and Prevalence
KW - Violence Causes
KW - Physical Assault Causes
KW - Physical Assault Offender
KW - Physical Assault Victim
KW - Physical Assault Incidence and Prevalence
KW - Physical Assault Rates
KW - Sexual Assault Causes
KW - Sexual Assault Offender
KW - Sexual Assault Victim
KW - Sexual Assault Incidence and Prevalence
KW - Sexual Assault Rates
KW - Rape Causes
KW - Rape Offender
KW - Rape Victim
KW - Rape Incidence and Prevalence
KW - Rape Rates
KW - Robbery Causes
KW - Robbery Offender
KW - Robbery Victim
KW - Robbery Incidence and Prevalence
KW - Robbery Rates
KW - Adult Offender
KW - Adult Violence
KW - Juvenile Offender
KW - Juvenile Violence
KW - Community Violence
KW - Cross-National Comparison
KW - Crime Incidence and Prevalence
KW - Crime Causes
KW - Crime Rates
KW - Social Organization
KW - Socioeconomic Factors
KW - Sociocultural Factors
KW - Adult Victim
KW - Juvenile Victim
KW - Victim Characteristics
KW - Offender Characteristics
KW - 1980s
KW - Violence Against Women |