Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Crimpergirl
Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
|
|
Where do we get data on violence?
Two primary places - 1. FBI. The FBI has been collecting data on violence (and other things) since about 1929 (other groups collected it before). It is very useful data in many ways, but has flaws (like all data). A big flaw is that it can only report that which has been reported to the police, and that which the police records, and that which the police voluntarily submits to the FBI. 2. NCVS. This data collection effort began in the early 1970s as a complement to the FBI data. A primary reason it was gathered was to understand how much violence (and other crimes - like property crime) was not reported to the police. From the NCVS (which is gathered directly from people who have been victimized) we know a lot about the nature and extent of police reporting.
Under-reporting:
The research looks at characteristics of victims, of offenders and of the incident. We know that in general violence against women, the poor, older people, and the wealthy is more like to be reported to the police. I've done a lot of research in the area because I too have been surprised that (for example) violence against blacks is reported at higher percentages than is violence whites. It makes little sense to me given the historic (and current) relationship between the parties. Still, this is what the research shows and it has shown it over time and consistently. As far as characteristics of reporting, certain characteristics of violence is associated with reporting: stranger violence, use of weapon, and injury to the victim. This is the general rule about it - but one of the things that I've found is that it doesn't necessarily hold well for female victims. Take intimate partner violence for example - when a gun is brandished, the violence is less likely to be reported than when no weapon is brandished. Why? I suspect because the woman knows that calling the police will very likely result in her death - and data backs that notion up. So it's a complex and interesting field that I really enjoy (but a bit afield from the question asked).
What underreporting am I talking about?
The NCVS is known to under estimate the number of rapes and sexual assaults. Like I said above, no data are perfect and that includes the NCVS. Why? because it is a crime survey and people many not feel that what happened to them was a crime (e.g., if they knew the perpetrator). The NCVS does encourage people to report incidents even if they don't believe it was a crime, and even if it was committed by someone they know, but I think it's fair to say that some victims still do not share the incident. Another way the NCVS is thought to underestimate rate is due to the type of questions asked. NCVS asks non-graphic questions (long history here with tons of work going on about it right now). Other surveys ask graphic questions (i.e., behavioral questions - e.g., did anyone use their finger, tongue, penis, or object and place it into, *orifices)* without consent...). Behavioral questions tend to lead to higher estimates. Many of these surveys are not perfect though as they also use broader definitions of rape which include certain things that others don't feel constitute rape/sexual assault. Talking about all of this could take up books (and has). Anyway, suffice it to say that the NCVS underestimates the rate of rape/sexual assault (though it still offers alarming numbers). (But I also caution that just because a survey offers higher estimates, it does not mean it offers better estimates).
In my NYT piece, I offered estimates from the NCVS for many groups (e.g., home owner v renters; levels of education). While we can assume all estimates I presented are low (but still alarming), we have no evidence of systematic differences in sharing victimization experiences with field representatives of the NCVS between the groups I compared. For example there is no reason to suggest that home owners systematically held back information of victimization from NCVS reps compared to renters. Or that college graduates systematically held back information from field reps compared to high school graduates.
Fact is, we can't know if any group help back sharing of rape/sexual assault because by definition it is unknown. We call that the 'dark figure'.
But as an exercise, let's use the reporting violence to the police as a guide to this dark figure of RSA. Maybe given what we know about police reporting we can assume that the poor, and blacks, and others are less likely (in a systematic fashion) to share experiences with field reps. If that is the case, it only strengthens my argument because their higher rates would be even higher than I show. I'm not willing to suggest I know that is true though without evidence.
That make sense? It's been difficult to type this with a very "helpful" cat.
Edit: Here's some reporting to the police estimates. It's an older report, but this stuff doesn't change year to year so it's still worth looking at: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rcp00.pdf
|
|
Lollie
Social climber
I'm Lolli.
|
|
Very very nice, Crimpergirl!
|
|
FRUMY
Trad climber
Bishop,CA
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^ TFPU
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
Finally, we have identified the primary problem in female violence research:
Cats!
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Jun 11, 2015 - 01:56pm PT
|
Cool related article by Charlene Senn in the 6/10 New England Journal of Medicine -
12 hour "don't be a victim class" reduces college rape/sexual assault by 50%.
With an interesting quote about one of the reasons the sexual assault rate is high
for freshmen/sophomore women:
Young women arriving at college have widely been socialized to be friendly and likable, which can blind them to the aggressive advances they might encounter at a party Seems like a good understanding of one of the key factors.
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-campus-sexual-assault-prevention-program-20150609-story.html
Of course these crimes are not the victim's fault,
and it would be great if more college guys would clean up their act.
But it's wise to play defense, because there will usually be some bad guys out there.
And the 50% reduction seems like an impressive result.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!