Measuring Cross-National Crime and Criminality: Methodological Considerations and Concerns (From Comparative Criminal Justice: Traditional and Nontraditional Systems of Law and Control, P 15-29, 1996, Charles B Fields and Richter H Moore, Jr, eds. -- See NCJ-161138)

• NCJ Number: 161139
• Author(s): V F Konzhukov; C B Fields
• Date Published: 1996
• Length: 15 pages
• Sale Source: Waveland Press, Inc.
• Publication Type: Issue Overview
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

After profiling the sources and availability of various efforts to compile cross-national crime data, this paper examines some methodological considerations in such data collection and issues that must be addressed.

Abstract

Wikstrom (1991) views cross-national studies of crime and criminality as having three primary purposes: the identification of common and unique features of crime and its correlates, the evaluation of existing theories or the generation of theory to account for commonalities and unique aspects of crime, and the provision of a perspective on our own criminality. Over the past few years, there have been several attempts to obtain reliable measures of cross-national crime and criminality that have focused on one or more of Wikstrom's purposes. The ones reviewed in this paper are the United Nations World Crime Surveys; the Comparative Crime Data File; INTERPOL's International Crime Statistics report; the World Health Organization's report on national and global trends in health and mortality; Crime in Western Societies, 1945-1974 (Gurrs); Correlates of Crime, 1960- 1984; the Dutch Ministry of Justice International Crime Surveys, 1989 and 1992; and the British Crime Survey Series, 1982-1994. Although the British Crime Surveys are not comparative, they should be examined, along with the National Crime Survey of the United States, as excellent examples of national attempts to measure criminal victimization accurately and comprehensively. For each of these data-collection efforts, this paper considers its purpose and data sources. In examining methodological considerations in such efforts, the authors address the comparability of indicators and definitions, the collection practices of the countries involved in a study, and underreporting of crime to the authorities. In the concluding section, the authors list some issues identified by Vetere and Newman (1977:261-63) that must be considered when determining the methods and procedures for the collection of cross-national crime and related data. 7 notes and a 41-item bibliography