Victimisation Surveys, especially the British Crime Survey “present a clearer and more complete picture of some forms of criminality…but they do not give the whole picture” (Sparks 1977). Until the 1982 and 1984, British Crime Survey there was no official estimate of unrecorded crime in the United Kingdom. Since that time, the BCS results have been important in demonstrating the discrepancy between official crime statistics, and people’s actual experience of crime. By asking respondents if they had been the victims of crime during the previous year, the survey revealed that a much higher percentage of the population had been the victims of crime than previously thought. While valuable indicators, the data from victimization surveys should be treated with great caution. In certain circumstances, such as domestic violence, the methodology of the study itself may result in significant underreporting. For example, the BCS is conducted through interviews in people’s homes. It is quite likely that a victim of domestic violence would not report violent incidents in the presence of the abuser. Nevertheless, there is an awareness of this problem; therefore, some areas are using electronic questionnaires, where the researcher is unable to access the respondent’s answers as they are automatically sent to the department.
According to the BCS, they found that people tended to report crimes where there is an obvious advantage to them doing so; 98% of car thefts are reported; presumably because that is necessary in order to make an insurance claim. This indicates that the usefulness of victim surveys to uncover the dark figure of crime to do with theft and burglary will be considerably accurate. A reason for this may be people are highly likely to remember the procedures referring to paperwork with insurance companies. Therefore, the victims are more likely to remember, and report them on victim surveys.
There is argument that such crimes as “rape and sexual assaults are more likely to be reported in victimization studies” (Jones 1995). A reason for this can be the comfort of the individual’s home in comparison to the environment in the police station. In addition, there are the reassurances that information given is only to be used for the survey, and names and addresses do not have to be given, which illustrates the confidentiality factor of the victimization surveys, which victims may respond to.
However, victimization surveys is not always reliable. As Young pointed out three main reasons for this. Firstly, around 20-30% of people asked, refused to co-operate with researchers. Thus, data is based on typical respondents and the absence of those who are likely to be untypical of the population may lead to distorted figures. Secondly, victims may conceal certain crimes because of feelings of guilt or embarrassment. Therefore, crimes such as rape, domestic violence, and sexual crimes are less likely to be underreported. Lastly, definitions of crime cannot help but reflect the views and opinion of the day. Changes in public perception may mean that people are more willing to report some crimes than others are (Young 1988).
There are some methodological issues, which surround victimization surveys; for example, victimization surveys can only measure criminal incidents where there is an identifiable victim. Therefore, there is no value of assessing victimless crime such as drug offences or consensual sexual acts. “Victimisation surveys can only be used to measure incidents which have both been perceived and defined as crimes; they cannot measure the total number of illegal acts which takes place in society” (Sparks et al 1996). This indicates that crime such as drug offences or prostitution are unlikely to be told to victimization researchers, a reason for this may be the act of the crime is not committed by another person but by himself to himself.
The BCS as a victim survey is also not particularly useful in uncovering dark figure crimes concerning individuals less than sixteen years of age. Therefore, incidents such as child abuse and criminal activities, which is usually associated with young offenders, for example, vandalism, will not be recorded by the BCS. This highlights that although the BCS may be useful in uncovering certain aspects of dark figure crimes, it does not however deal with victims of crime who are under sixteen. Therefore, the reliability and usefulness of the BCS cannot possibly be accurate. However, there are many smaller scale victim surveys that do include those under sixteen, they are not as large as the BCS so consequently can not be a representation of the dark figure crimes.
Another factor that may hinder the usefulness of victim surveys is to what extent do respondents fabricate victimization. (Levine 1976) argues that “respondents are responsible and trustworthy, having nothing to gain by making things up” however it is quite plausible that some respondents, not wanting to disappoint the interviewer, may recall incidents, which happened to friends or neighbours rather than to themselves personally. For instance, with the crime problem so high on the media agenda, therefore embedded in the mind of the public, respondents may feel that something should be done, and fabricate events in the hope it will somehow help. This consequently may result in over representation of certain crime figures victim surveys obtain.
Self-report surveys ask how many times people have participated in a crime. “Self-report surveys ask groups of the population how many times they have participated in criminal activity” Croall, H. (1998). Using questionnaires and interviews to collect information self-report studies ask the participant to admit to the number of crimes they have committed. . “The methods used in order to measure this area of crime are ‘self report studies, victims surveys” (Williams, 2004). Such methods are a great indicator of the true representation of crime and disclose a higher level of crime than recorded by the police service. As discovered in the BCS findings, they estimate ‘that 9.5 million criminal offences occurred…’ in 2002/2003 whereas the police services official statistics recorded only ‘2.3 million’ (Williams, 2004).
However, important questions have been asked about the recipients of these surveys, what criminal is going to complete a survey truthfully? They may distrust its ability to be anonymous, or school children may exaggerate crimes committed in front of friends. However, participants may not be truthful about the crimes they have committed, or may not perceive some acts as crimes. Various tests have been carried out to check the accuracy of self reported studies. It has been found that approximately 80% of those questioned tell the truth. Self reported studies are therefore, not totally reliable, although, they do locate many more offenders placed in different sectors of society than those who are convicted and appear in the official statistics or victimisation surveys.
Victimization surveys and self-report questionnaires probably underestimate the true amount of crime committed. They can only record certain types of crime, those with an obvious victim. They do not include drug offences, prostitution, and white-collar crimes, although it may be more likely victims will report these in the confidentiality of such surveys, rather than go to the police. Victimization surveys also rely on victims’ memories and their ability to define an act as a crime. Minor criminal acts may be forgotten, not regarded serious enough to record, or not seen as a crime. There is very little possibility that the dark figure can be uncovered through the official statistics. However, they could be improved to include more crimes, and manage the classification and recording of reports more accurately.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Coleman, C., and Moynihan, J. (1996), Understanding crime data: haunted by the dark figure. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Coleman, C., and Moynihan, J. (1996), Understanding crime data: haunted by the dark figure. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Croall, H. (1998), Crime and Society in Britain. London: Longman.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/hosb1801.pdf
Jones, T., MacLean, B., and Young, J. (1986), The Islington crime survey. Aldershot: Gower.
Maguire, M., Morgan, R., and Reiner, R. (2007), The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (4th Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McLaughlin, E., Muncie, J. (2005), London: Sage.
Sparks, R.F. (1977). Surveying Victims: A Study of the Measurement of Criminal Victimization, Perceptions of Crime and Attitudes to Criminal Justice. J. Wiley and Sons.
Williams, K. (2004). Textbook on Criminology (5th Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.