评估联邦调查局凶杀案补充报告中正当凶杀案的数据完整性、质量和代表性:研究说明。

IF 2.8 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Journal of Quantitative Criminology Pub Date : 2022-03-01 Epub Date: 2021-02-04 DOI:10.1007/s10940-021-09493-x
Brian Karl Finch, Kyla Thomas, Audrey N Beck, D Brian Burghart, David Klinger, Richard R Johnson
{"title":"评估联邦调查局凶杀案补充报告中正当凶杀案的数据完整性、质量和代表性:研究说明。","authors":"Brian Karl Finch,&nbsp;Kyla Thomas,&nbsp;Audrey N Beck,&nbsp;D Brian Burghart,&nbsp;David Klinger,&nbsp;Richard R Johnson","doi":"10.1007/s10940-021-09493-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The most widely used data set for studying police homicides-the Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) kept by the Federal Bureau of Investigation-is collected from a voluntary sample.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using a journalist-curated database of police-related deaths, we find the SHR police homicide data to be substantially incomplete. This is due to both non-reporting and substantial under-reporting by agencies. Further, our inquiry discloses a pattern of error in identifying \"victims\" and \"offenders\" in the data, and finds that investigating agencies are often incorrectly listed as the responsible agency, which seriously jeopardizes police department-level analyses. Finally, there is evidence of sample bias such that the SHR data system is not representative of all police departments, nor is it representative of large police departments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We conclude that the SHR data is of dubious value for assessing correlates of police homicides in the United States, as all analyses using it will reflect these widespread biases and significant undercounts. Analysis of SHR data for these purposes should cease.</p>","PeriodicalId":48080,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Quantitative Criminology","volume":"38 1","pages":"267-293"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10940-021-09493-x","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Data Completeness, Quality, and Representativeness of <i>Justifiable Homicides</i> in the FBI's Supplementary Homicide Reports: A Research Note.\",\"authors\":\"Brian Karl Finch,&nbsp;Kyla Thomas,&nbsp;Audrey N Beck,&nbsp;D Brian Burghart,&nbsp;David Klinger,&nbsp;Richard R Johnson\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10940-021-09493-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The most widely used data set for studying police homicides-the Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) kept by the Federal Bureau of Investigation-is collected from a voluntary sample.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using a journalist-curated database of police-related deaths, we find the SHR police homicide data to be substantially incomplete. This is due to both non-reporting and substantial under-reporting by agencies. Further, our inquiry discloses a pattern of error in identifying \\\"victims\\\" and \\\"offenders\\\" in the data, and finds that investigating agencies are often incorrectly listed as the responsible agency, which seriously jeopardizes police department-level analyses. Finally, there is evidence of sample bias such that the SHR data system is not representative of all police departments, nor is it representative of large police departments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We conclude that the SHR data is of dubious value for assessing correlates of police homicides in the United States, as all analyses using it will reflect these widespread biases and significant undercounts. Analysis of SHR data for these purposes should cease.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48080,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Quantitative Criminology\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"267-293\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10940-021-09493-x\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Quantitative Criminology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-021-09493-x\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/2/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Quantitative Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-021-09493-x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/2/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

引言:联邦调查局保存的用于研究警察凶杀案的最广泛使用的数据集——补充凶杀报告(SHR)是从自愿样本中收集的。材料和方法:使用记者策划的警察相关死亡数据库,我们发现SHR警察凶杀案数据基本不完整。这是由于各机构不报告和报告严重不足造成的。此外,我们的调查揭示了数据中识别“受害者”和“罪犯”的错误模式,并发现调查机构经常被错误地列为责任机构,这严重危及警察部门层面的分析。最后,有证据表明样本存在偏差,因此SHR数据系统不能代表所有警察部门,也不能代表大型警察部门。结论:我们得出的结论是,SHR数据在评估美国警察凶杀案的相关性方面具有可疑的价值,因为所有使用它的分析都会反映出这些普遍存在的偏见和严重的低估。应停止出于这些目的对SHR数据进行分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing Data Completeness, Quality, and Representativeness of Justifiable Homicides in the FBI's Supplementary Homicide Reports: A Research Note.

Introduction: The most widely used data set for studying police homicides-the Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) kept by the Federal Bureau of Investigation-is collected from a voluntary sample.

Materials and methods: Using a journalist-curated database of police-related deaths, we find the SHR police homicide data to be substantially incomplete. This is due to both non-reporting and substantial under-reporting by agencies. Further, our inquiry discloses a pattern of error in identifying "victims" and "offenders" in the data, and finds that investigating agencies are often incorrectly listed as the responsible agency, which seriously jeopardizes police department-level analyses. Finally, there is evidence of sample bias such that the SHR data system is not representative of all police departments, nor is it representative of large police departments.

Conclusions: We conclude that the SHR data is of dubious value for assessing correlates of police homicides in the United States, as all analyses using it will reflect these widespread biases and significant undercounts. Analysis of SHR data for these purposes should cease.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Quantitative Criminology
Journal of Quantitative Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
2.80%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Journal of Quantitative Criminology focuses on research advances from such fields as statistics, sociology, geography, political science, economics, and engineering. This timely journal publishes papers that apply quantitative techniques of all levels of complexity to substantive, methodological, or evaluative concerns of interest to the criminological community. Features include original research, brief methodological critiques, and papers that explore new directions for studying a broad range of criminological topics.
期刊最新文献
Social Change, Cohort Effects, and Dynamics of the Age–Crime Relationship: Age and Crime in South Korea from 1967 to 2011 Now You See It, Now You Don’t: A Simulation and Illustration of the Importance of Treating Incomplete Data in Estimating Race Effects in Sentencing Can We Compare Attitudes Towards Crime Around the World? Assessing Measurement Invariance of the Morally Debatable Behavior Scale Across 44 Countries Racial Bias in Criminal Records Investigating the Dynamics of Outlaw Motorcycle Gang Co-Offending Networks: The Utility of Relational Hyper Event Models
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1