Crime rates are influenced by the way various agencies screen out cases at different stages of the recording procedures. This leads to lack of comparability of statistics from one jurisdiction to another. However, the degree to which the police screen cases can be estimated, if one accepts certain assumptions. This can yield a “recording index” which could be used as a means of “correcting” the statistics from various police departments. Such a procedure might make crime statistics more comparable.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BurrowsJ (1986) Investigatory Burglary: The Measurement of Police Performance, Home Office Research Study No 88, HMSO, London.
2.
HacklerJames CDonKim (1990) “Estimating System Biases: Crime Indices that Permit Comparison Across Provinces” Canadian Journal of Criminology, vol 32, pp 243–64.
3.
HacklerJames CCossinsDianeDonKim (1989) “Comparing Crime Rates: When Are They Meaningful?”, Discussion Paper 24, Centre for Criminological Research, Edmonton, Alberta.
4.
National Uniform Crime Statistics Committee Australia (1989) Measuring Crime, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.
5.
O'BrienRobert M (1985) Crime and Victimization Data, Sage, Beverly Hills.
WalkerJohn (1989) “Prison Sentences in Australia” Trends and Issues, No 20, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra.
8.
WalkerJCollierPTarlingR (1990) “Why Are Prison Rates in England and Wales Higher than Australia's” British Journal of Criminology, vol 30, pp 24–35.
9.
WheelerStanton (1967) “Criminal Statistics: A Reformulation of the Problem” Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, vol 58, pp 317–24.
