Variables The dependent variable, reported to police, is coded 1 for incidents that were reported to police by either the victim or a member of their household and 0 for incidents not reported. Social disorganization theory guided the construction of the primary explanatory variable. It is comprised of five separate indicators, all related to what I term: “household disadvantage.” These five indicators are: (1) the number of households with incomes below the poverty line, (2) the number of households that are considered public housing, (3) the number of households headed by a single parent, (4) the number of structures composed of five or more housing units, and (5) the number of households with residents who have not resided in the same home …show more content…
Specifically, the likelihood of reporting has been found to increase with age (Baumer, 2002; Baumer & Lauritsen, 2010; Bosick et al., 2012; Finkelhor & Ormrod, 2001; Finkelhor & Wolak, 2003; Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, & Hamby, 2012; Rennison et al., 2011; Weiss, 2013) and be more common for crimes against female victims than male victims (Bosick et al., 2012; Finkelhor & Ormrod, 2001; Finkelhor & Wolak, 2003; Finkelhor et al., 2012; Watkins 2005). Moreover, evidence suggests that Black victims are slightly more likely than Whites to notify police of their violent victimizations (Bosick et al., 2012; Finkelhor & Ormrod, 2001; Finkelhor & Wolak, 2003; Finkelhor et al., 2012; Rennison et al. 2011; Watkins, 2006). In this study, the race/ethnicity, gender, and age of the victim as well as the age and gender of the offender are included as controls. Race/ethnicity of the victim is measured using four dummy-coded (1=yes, 0=no) categories: 1) White non-Hispanic, 2) Black non-Hispanic, 3) Hispanic of any race, and 4) other race. In the multivariate model, White serves as the excluded reference category. Victim’s age is a dichotomous variable that is included as a measure for the overall sample (i.e., outside of the juvenile and adult subsets). Victims aged 12-17 are coded 1, while victims 18 and over are coded 0. For the juvenile …show more content…
To account for the number of offenders, a dichotomous variable is used to distinguish incidents involving multiple offenders (coded 1) and those involving a lone offender (coded 0). Bystander presence is treated as a dummy variable with victimizations occurring in the presence of another person coded one and those that were not coded zero. Finally, the location of the incident is indicated by whether or not the victimizations transpired in a private location such as the victim’s home (coded 1) or in a public location such as a school or parking lot (coded 0) as well as whether victims were assaulted within one mile of their residence (coded one) or assaulted at a further distance (within-neighborhood incident). Also, it is worth noting that while other studies have accounted for the victim’s marital status and/or education level, such variables are omitted from the present study (Baumer, 2002; Baumer and Lauritsen 2010; Finkelhor & Wolak, 2003; Watkins, 2005). This is largely due to the fact that this sample consists of juveniles, a majority of whom were single or possessed an education level of a high school diploma or less at the time of the interview. Since there was no variation among these characteristics for the juvenile subset, I deemed it unnecessary to control for
In closing, it was hypothesized by the team, that the youth offenders with a history of violent offenses, in the study were the prime selected for youth mental health services over any other cases. However, that was not true, they actually were commonly denied this style of service. They also discussed that with the new data they now have, this could be passed on to other states and youth offenders advocate entities to assist with future legislation and as well as assisting with the change with in the youth offender
After determining the appropriate level-2 variables, we introduced both level-1 and level-2 variables to the HLM equation. Model 1 of Table 10 includes only level-1 variables. Except population and percent female headed households, all level-1 predictors are significantly associated with the outcome variable. More specifically, violent crime arrest more likely occurs in block groups where poverty is apparent. However, race (Blacks) variable is still significantly related to violent arrest outcome when number of violent crime suspects was controlled at the block group level. That is, Blacks are disproportionately arrested for violent crimes even controlling for their corresponding population and violent crime commission rate. Note that we specified the slope of “Black population” as random in order to see how race
Thesis: College athletes should not get paid due to the financial restrictions of the NCAA, the imbalance of competition, and the fact that these young adults are students.
To increase the validity, the alternative measure of Victim surveys (VS), are used to eliminate the dark figures of OCS. This is used to provide a fuller picture of crimes. VS data is collected quantitatively so it is easily recorded, and be easily put into a graph to find trends and patterns. As not all crimes are reported or recorded, it is difficult to get an accurate figure. Some crimes may not be reported as the victim feels the police may not be able to do anything about the crime committed, or possible fear of reprisals. As VS give the opportunity to ask people if they have been the victim of crime within the past 12 months. This gives a gateway for unreported crimes to be recorded and included within the OCS. Problems may arise with the use of
The criminal justice system is a collection of agencies that are focused on the management of crime and those who commit them. Characteristics such as age are important in the relationship individual perpetrators forge with the criminal justice system. Adolescent crime is a dichotomous problem that not only effects the general public but the youth as well. During the 1970’s, a notable shift occurred from the previously used welfare model to a justice model more focused upon the offence than the offender (Muncie, 2009). Since then, the juvenile justice system has experienced reforms and changes.
At the neighborhood level, we used three variables. The first variable is the number of liquor stores in neighborhoods. A growing body of literature suggests that concentration of liquor stores is related to crime and arrest counts (Conrow, Aldstadt, & Mendoza, 2015; Gorman, Speer, Gruenewald, & Labouvie, 2015; Lipton et al., 2013; White, Gainey, & Triplett, 2012; Zhu, Gorman, & Horel, 2004). The second variable is the percent vacant houses in neighborhoods. Studies suggest that high number of vacant houses is a robust indicator of neighborhood deterioration (Hannon & Cuddy, 2006; Spelman, 1993). These areas cause criminals to gather around for certain criminal purposes (i.e., drug use, selling, burglary) that foster deviant behavior (Hannon & Cuddy, 2006; Newman, 1972).
In the National Crime Victimization Survey administered by the Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs, Truman and Rand (2010) report youth aged 12 to 24 are at greatest risk of being a victim of violence when compared to any other age group. Coker et al. (2014) surveyed 14, 190 students and found 33.4% reported that they had been victimized by a partner and 20% reported using similar behaviors to perpetrate. Black males from low-income neighborhoods were more likely to be victims of crime, but females overall were more likely to be victims of rape and sexual assault violence (Truman & Rand, 2010). The CDC (2014) assessed the prevalence of sexual dating violence among youth, across the United States, and found it was the highest
The JSORRAT was designed for male juveniles between ages 12.00 and 17.99, whom have been adjudicated guilty for a sexual offense (Epperson, Ralston, Fowers, & DeWitt, 2009). Epperson et al., (2009) caution that the tool is not designed juveniles younger than age 12, or for those juveniles whom committed their offense when under age 12. Additionally, the JSORRAT has currently not been had any validation studies predict risk of a given beyond that offenders 18th birthday, and therefore, all JSSORAT assessments are no longer valid once the offender turns 18 (Epperson et al., 2009). Furthermore, while the authors of the test encourage evaluators to participate in a didactic training on proper use of the JSSORAT, they do not require said training in order to use the tool (Epperson et al.,
In line with social disorganization theory, the greater perceived levels of physical and social disorder increased the mistrust of neighbors among elderly persons located in urban areas. In effect, this mistrust can compromise informal social control in urban environments, as demonstrated by the reduced local friendship ties among elderly urban persons. However, friendship ties among elderly persons increases the longer they have placed residence in an urban area (Oh, 2003). In a similar vein, areas with lower rates of residential mobility tend not to maintain high numbers of RSOs (Clark & Duwe, 2015; Hipp et al., 2010; Mustaine & Tewksbury, 2011; Yeh, 2015; however, see Mustaine et al., 2006). Other population characteristics not common in neighborhoods with RSOs are persons with bachelor and/or graduate degrees (Mustaine et al., 2006; Yeh, 2015).
Social disorganization theory was established by Shaw and Mckay (1942) in their famous work “Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas”. The main argument of the social disorganization theory is that, the place where people live will influence the individual’s behavior, and this may lead them to crimes. More precisely, certain characteristics of the neighborhood/community will strengthen or weaken the informal social control within the community, and this has mediating effect on crimes.
Within the violent crime classification, according to Puzzanchera (2009), black juvenile arrest rate in 2008, (926) turned out to be 5 times higher than the rate of white juveniles which were (178) per the same period of time, which were also considered 6 times much higher than the rate for American Indian juveniles that was (153) and it also resulted 13 times much higher than the rate of Asian teenagers (71), if we compared these numbers to the statistics from 1980, we will find that our 2008
In youth violence, the distinction between victim and offender is often arbitrary or incident-specific. While three decades of research consistently reveals significant overlaps in victim and offender populations, violence prevention policies and programs continue to frame youth violence in a bifurcated manner that may reduce the effectiveness of these programs (Fagan, Piper, & Cheng, 1987). REWRITE
Dear Mr. Smithstein, This letter is intended to form a written letter following up repeated verbal complaints I have made in person at the property management office. The situation at Cambridge Apartments has become intolerable. I have on at least 5 occasions spoken to my neighbor in Apt. 3D, Mrs. Hubbard, about the excessive noise of her unruly children.
One day while I was in the garden of King Hamlet. The sweat poured down from my forehead but then I viewed Claudius sneaking up on King Hamlet. Then I ran behind a apple tree and while I was behind that apple tree I was searching around and I spotted red, peach, orange, and white roses. And I felt a breeze on my skin, and could smell of rich black soil and the buzzing of bumblebeez flying around.
The main assumption of Social Disorganization Theory is the ability to explain why crime committed by lower class communities is more prominent than neighborhoods from communities in better economic areas. This theory is the relationship of the destabilization of urban communities and neighborhoods through Shaw and McKay’s study (Quoted in Siegal, 2010) that used the analysis of Ernest Burgess’s Concentric Zones Model. This model generates ideas that the closer to “zone 2”, individuals in a community have more stress factors