Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Victimization Survey Method× | Repeat Victimization Analysis× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Criminology | Criminology |
| Menetelmäperhe≠ | Process / pipeline | Regression model |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 1973 | 1993 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement / NCVS and CSEW programs | Ken Pease, Graham Farrell & colleagues |
| Tyyppi≠ | Probability-sample survey measuring crime victimization including unreported offenses | Time-to-event analysis of elevated short-term re-victimization risk |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Lynch, J. P., & Addington, L. A. (Eds.) (2007). Understanding Crime Statistics: Revisiting the Divergence of the NCVS and UCR. Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 9780521862042 | Tseloni, A., & Pease, K. (2003). Repeat personal victimization: 'Boosts' or 'flags'? British Journal of Criminology, 43(1), 196–212. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | Crime Victimization Survey, Victimisation Survey Method, Crime Survey Methodology, Self-Report Victimization Survey | Repeat Victimisation Analysis, Re-Victimization Risk Analysis, Multiple Victimization Analysis, Time-Course of Repeat Victimization |
| Liittyvät≠ | 3 | 4 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | The victimization survey method measures crime by asking a representative sample of households or individuals what they have actually experienced, rather than counting offenses recorded by police. Pioneered in the United States with the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and developed in Britain as the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), it captures the 'dark figure' of crime that never reaches the authorities, using a rotating-panel design with screening questions, detailed incident forms, bounding interviews, and weighted estimation. | Repeat victimization analysis studies the sharply elevated short-term risk that the same target — a household, person, or business — is victimized again soon after an initial offense. Established as a crime-prevention priority by Ken Pease, Graham Farrell, and colleagues in the early 1990s, it models the time-course of re-victimization, quantifies how the hazard of a repeat decays as time passes since the first event, and asks whether repeats arise because an event 'boosts' future risk or because stable target features 'flag' that risk. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|