ABSTRACT

Police crime data guide police operations, direct funding, underpin theory testing and policy evaluation, aide private sector decisions, and inform the public. Those applications would benefit from greater crime specificity. The National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) should improve police crime data specificity. Using robbery incident data (n = 1,341) with NIBRS variables and narrative reports from the Cincinnati Police Department and qualitative analysis, this study identified thirteen robbery subtypes in the data. Tables and data visualizations demonstrate the same thirteen robbery subtypes cannot be identified using just NIBRS variables. Rather the qualitative narrative reports are most informative. While an improvement, NIBRS data are unlikely to increase the crime specificity police crime data users need. Police crime data users are urged to think carefully about what official crime data measures are used when testing theory, conducting crime analysis, evaluating policy, and so on. Recommendations for improving police data recording practices are also offered.

摘要

警察犯罪数据指导警察行动、直接资助、支持理论测试和政策评估、协助私营部门决策并告知公众。这些应用程序将受益于更大的犯罪特异性。国家基于事件的报告系统 (NIBRS) 应提高警察犯罪数据的特异性。使用抢劫事件数据 (n = 1,341) 与 NIBRS 变量和辛辛那提警察局的叙述报告和定性分析，本研究确定了数据中的 13 种抢劫亚型。表格和数据可视化展示了仅使用 NIBRS 变量无法识别相同的 13 种抢劫亚型。相反，定性的叙述性报告提供的信息最多。虽然是一种改进，但 NIBRS 数据不太可能增加用户需要的犯罪特异性警察犯罪数据。敦促警方犯罪数据用户在测试理论、进行犯罪分析、评估政策等时仔细考虑使用了哪些官方犯罪数据措施。还提供了改进警察数据记录做法的建议。