Influence On Crimnological Research And Justice Policy Criminology Essay

Published: Last Edited:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

In my essay I will be discussing the influence on criminological research and justice policy. Criminological research refers to the scientific gathering of information on factors such as causation, correction and prevention of crime. The justice policy refers to the policies written and agreed upon by the government and the constitution of a given area which states how criminal offences should be dealt with to ensure equity and consequences for wrong doings. In this essay I will be looking at various aspects regarding the factors mentioned above, namely:

Multiple victimization, experience and attitudes to police, crime, communities and the fear of crime, attitudes toward justice issues, risk of crime and drug use.

Multiple victimisation refers to the repetition of the same crimes and victimisation, e.g. more than one incident of rape, etc. Multiple victimisation is a distinct crime pattern and some offences may feature multiple crime patterns. Multiple victimisation is a part of research that can be closely linked to the British Crime Survey (BCS). BCS data identifies multiple victimisation as a problem, however serial victimisation isn't given much attention according to US crime surveys. This information has driven researches into searching for the measures of these kinds of repeated crimes. The data collected showed the association between crime hot spots and repeated victimisation. Repeat victimisation can be seen as the best way to show the succession from investigative data through further research, creative solutions and eventually the measurement of the repercussions of the implemented crime reduction policies.

Although many victim surveys were conducted to measure the amount of criminal offences that weren't reported to police, they also proved to be suitable for the measurement of responded experiences with the police-just like in the case of unreported crime, such incidents may not have been included in police reports. Precise police-contact units added to follow-up documents are ways of showing how the survey has been successfully enhanced in measuring up-and-coming matters in crime and justice. First special interest was given to the police contacts in the 1984 survey, further down the next few years special home office research studies on police contacts were published. Due to the polices' centre of attention being on primary sampling units, the BCS is presently able to check police and public contacts regularly in area context.

Crime and communities stems from the many-staged analysis sustained by geographical identifiers in the BCS. Data that is available in the US is extensively recognised for signifying how community-level measures of social-disorganisation are linked to crime and its views.

The fear of crime refers to the fear of being a victim of crime as opposed to the actual probability of being a victim of crime(1). Psychometricians refer to it as an indirect observable. Parts of the

BCS have embarked upon this subject since the first waves for two related reasons; firstly regardless of its attitudinal content, fear is difficult to evaluate in a way that researchers, etc, can agree on. Secondly the growing gap between biased measures like fear an more objective measures of crime risks. Fear can better be described as 'anxiety'. Researchers have been trying for very long been involved to find better ways to calculate fear and figure it out with resulting data.

Attitude toward justice issues is an additional subject that has been seen as an imperative policy problem. The BCS has covered approaches almost as a social indicator, seeking the public opinions of punishment as a basic measure for lawmaking. Due to the fact that most views on punishment and other criminal justice procedures don't pass well internationally, most BCS data on this subject has emerged in the UK.

The main part of the BCS-centred studies on risks of crime includes policy importance and criminological hypothesis. In the late 70's two powerful sources of media set out routine and lifestyle hypothesis's on crime and victimisation. Lifestyle hypothesis's of crime had a major effect on the 'early days' of the survey. The first sweep had a varied number of variables to calculate directly particular angles of actions that had only been contingent from crime surveys in the past. Investigations on this subject have kept up with subsequent sweeps, which was available in greatly recognised journals in Europe and the US. Data on crime risks has helped with crime prevention plans.

Using the 1992 sweep, the BCS integrated comprehensive self-report drug use items that were collected through computer-assisted surveys. Results from that survey and other sweeps have been published in the sustained series of drug misuse declared home office publications. This part of the BCS is imperative for four reasons: it provides regular information for measuring the amount of drug use among the population, occasional booster samples make it possible to asses drug use against particular populations, experiences and behaviour can be measured using the amount of drug usage, the use of computer assisted self interviewing produces more precise guesses than those that were gotten through other avenues.

The BCS provides an important source of information about levels of crime, public attitudes to crime and other related issues(2). The results play an important role in informing Home Office policy. Victims do not report crime for various reasons and without the BCS there would be no official source of information on these unreported crimes. Because members of the public are asked directly about their experiences, the survey also provides a consistent measure of crime that is unaffected by the extent to which crimes are reported to the police, or by changes in the criteria used by the police when recording crime.