Running head: ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 1

Introduction

The issue of substance abuse and drug addiction is considered as one of the biggest

contributor to the rising rates of crime across the country. Addiction not only drives individuals

to commit crime in order to gain access drugs but people who regularly abuse drugs are more

likely to engage in criminal activities compared to individuals who are generally sober. As such,

the study of drugs and substance is an important factor in crime reduction and justice programs

by the government and different agencies. On the other hand, it is generally agreed that the

accuracy of the data provided by two of the nation’s official source of crime statistics, the FBI’s

Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), is critical

to the validity of the research aimed at assessment of the quality of programs and activities of the

criminal justice system. While each of the above programs produces valuable information in

regards to different aspects of the nation’s crimes, they are conducted using different methods

and focus on different aspects of crime, which leads to a difference in the accuracy of

information provided by each measure.

This is a significant issue for drug related crimes and programs aimed at managing crime

and assisting inmates with substance use issues. For instance, according to data from the Bureau

of Justice Statistics, the number of drug related violent crimes reported by UCR stood at 17

percent in 2007, while the NCVS reported that drug related crimes was 26 percent during the

same period (Herek, 2017). In particular, NCVS data showed that about 17 percent of adults on

probation used alcohol at the time of the crime, 10 percent used marijuana, 4 percent used

cocaine and 2 percent used stimulants (Duke et al., 2018). The inconsistencies between these
ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 2

programs show that there exist several reliability and accuracy issues with the type of data

reported. According to O’Brien et al. (1980), there is generally close to a 15 percent difference in

figures reported by the two measures which can negatively affect research and programs

interested in prevention and management of crime in the country.

Some of the methodical issues that lead to differences in reported data include non-

reporting and false reporting for certain types of crimes, difficulties associated with asking of

sensitive questions during surveys and problems with sampling such as nonresponse and poor

coverage that tend to lead to inaccuracy depending on the type of crime being investigated.

Because the UCR is largely dependent on reported crimes, its accuracy tends to vary greatly

depending on the likelihood that individuals from a particular area will report criminal activities

to the law enforcement (Skogan, 1974). In this regard, because almost all murders tend to be

reported or document at some point, the UCR is considered as the most accurate measure of

crimes related to murder, since they are always reported or noticed. However, the dependence on

reports also makes UCR less accurate for minor crimes that often go unreported. NCVS on the

other hand, is more susceptible to inaccuracies in the data collected due to higher chances of

cheating or misinformation by the respondents (Lauritsen & Rezey, 2013). The aim of this paper

aims to analyze the causes of inconsistencies and determine the measure that produces the most

accurate and reliable data for rape and murder categories of crime.

Drug Use and Crime Reporting in New York

Alcohol and other drugs are significant factors that contribute to different types of crimes.

For instance, 36 percent of all violent crimes, 27 percent of property crimes ad 19 percent of

non-violent crimes in 2007 were all perpetrated by individuals under the influence of alcohol or
ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 3

other drugs (Duke et al., 2018). The report also found that 11 percent of inmates with substance

abuse and addiction disorders are in constant need for treatment during their incarceration. In

particular, New York became the first state to require all non-violent criminals who have drug

addiction problems to be offered treatment rather than jail time (Duke et al., 2018).

However, despite the significance of such initiatives, the inaccuracies of the data

provided by the two measures of crime could significantly affect the overall achievements of

justice system programs. For instance, according to the data from the UCR, there were about

1,381 cases of larceny theft in 2014 (UCR Statistics, 2018), while data from NCVS reports that

there were about 1548 cases of larceny theft during the same period in New York (TruthFinder,

(2018). These inconsistencies point to an underlying problem of inaccuracy in the official reports

provided by the two measures of crime (O’Brien et al., 1980), which coupled negatively impact

New York, the rehabilitation efforts of drug addicts facing incarceration.

There are a number of programs and services for inmates aimed at run by New York’s

Department of Corrections and Community Supervision which aim to redirect the lives of

inmates in order for them to become productive and law abiding members of society. Some of

these programs include Alcohol And Substance Abuse Treatment Program (ASAT), Community

Reintegration Outpatient Treatment and Comprehensive Alcohol and Substance use Treatment

(CASAT) (DCCS, 2018). With close to half of inmates in local and state prisons suffering from

substance use and associated with psychological disorders, these programs have major

implications for the country’s justice system as well as the health and wellbeing of the general

population (Duke et al., 2018). Yet, the success of these programs is constantly under threat as a

result of the inconsistence of the data reported by the measures of crime. The data provided by

the measures of crime are critical to planning and allocation of resources, and therefore it is
ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 4

critical for New York’s Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to determine the

measure that will provide consistent and accurate data.

Accuracy of UCR compared to NCVS

The previous section has highlighted the importance of accuracy in reporting of crime

data as it is critical for effective planning and implementation of drug and substance abuse

programs aimed at managing crime while assisting regain control. The following section aims to

determine which measure of crime provides the most accurate results in regards to rape and

murder categories of crime, and how this can be used by substance abuse treatment initiatives in

New York.

The overlap between the methods and core objectives of the two measures of crime can

be considered as a validity coefficient, which provides the best estimate of the extent to which a

measure is able to accurately reflect the underlying distribution of events (Highhouse et al.,

2017). In this regard, if the level of crime in a given number of urban settings is found to be the

same based on the validity coefficient of two different measures, then the implication is that each

measure provides a useful representation of the phenomenon being investigated (Highhouse et

al., 2017).

In regards to reporting of alcohol and drug related serious crimes, UCR has been found to

provide reliable results compared to surveys reports of the NCVS. According to a study by

Skogan (1974), which investigated the validity of both NCVS and UCR using data from 10

major cities in the United States, the researchers found that UCR had higher validity coefficient

compared to NCVS. The researchers found that unlike survey measures which tend to provide

higher volumes of crime rates, officially reported measures such as UCR tend to provide data
ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 5

that is worthy of confidence. As such the researcher concluded that as an official statistical

measure of crime, UCR is more accurate because it provides data that does not lead researchers

or interested parties to make radically incorrect judgments (Skogan, 1974). This shows that the

UCR is likely to provide reliable data for drug related crimes that involve murder or other serious

crimes such as robbery or burglary. Because these are the most common crimes, about 36

percent of all violent crimes, 27 percent of property crimes, are perpetrated by offenders under

influence of drugs, these findings has major implications for substance abuse treatment programs

for inmates in New York, especially in regards to accuracy of data for planning and resource

allocation for drug and substance abuse programs for inmates in New York.

The findings of Skogan (1974) also corroborate those of Herek (2017) who argues that

the figures reported by the NCVS are not actual reports but estimates from the data obtained

from interviewing of participants, which are often subject to margin of error. While the official

statistics provided by the UCR moderately correlate with those provided by the NCVS, the two

crime measures generate different types of error variances in their measurements that impact

their accuracy. Herek (2017) notes that one of the factors that affects the accuracy of NCVS as a

measure of crime is the inefficiency of the sample design. The NCVS is a survey that targets

non-institutionalized American citizens with questions regarding the various types of criminal

victimizations, as well as crimes against property and individuals.

Out of the 19 million criminal events identified by the NCVS in 2011, more than 63%

were property crimes, mostly theft, while 30% involved violent criminal acts against people,

while the remaining 7% were considered as serious violent crimes, with rape and sexual assault

accounting for less than 1 percent (Powers, 2015). However, according to Bureau of Justice

Statistics, there were about 151,460 criminal events in 2016, in which arrests were made, while
ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 6

the total number of forced rape cases recorded reached 99,856 in 2017, according to data from

Statista. These findings show that rape constitutes a considerable percentage of crimes being

committed yet, data collected through the NCVS surveys still fail to reflect the true rate of rape

incidents, suggesting that it is less accurate. In regards to drug related crime, the respondents are

also less likely to provide accurate information regarding whether an offender was under

influence or not. For instance, its strongest areas of performance such as property and motor

vehicle related crimes that often occur when the victims are not present; it is difficult to obtain

accurate data regarding the state of the perpetrator during the crime incident. As such, in addition

to be less accurate measure of rates of crime regarding rape, NCVS is also less likely to provide

accurate information regarding drug related crimes.

Another issue that affects the accuracy of the NCVS is the lack of privacy for

respondents which is critical for any survey that deals with sensitive questions such as rape

(Langton et al., 2017). In particular, privacy in household settings is important for participants to

accurately respond to sensitive matters such as rape or sexual assault. Most perpetrators of sexual

violence often live in the same family with the victim and therefore, because the surveys are

normally conducted with the full knowledge of the family members, victims are less likely to

report such crimes due to fear of stigmatization or retaliation. This, in turn, results in

considerable impact on the accuracy of the official data presented by the NCVS report.

While some argue that UCR is also susceptible to underreporting, the fact that most of the

crimes reported is investigated and established before recording also indicates that it has higher

validity compared to NCVS where participants could give false information due to the perceived

anonymity. In fact, NCVS has been found to be susceptible to many of the shortcomings of

surveys as a technique for data collection for research purposes. Langton et al. (2017) note that
ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 7

survey measures of crime are also vulnerable to the social and organizational processes that tend

to blur or influence the notion of victimization among different participants. For instance, in a

survey that targets a household in high-income residential area, the respondents are more likely

to provide conflicting views about what constitutes rape compared to a household in a

marginalized neighborhood. While most people will likely report rape that involves a physical

attack or assault, respondents in high-end residential neighborhood will likely consider rape or

assault to be any gesture or unwanted sexual advances. This means that the level of rape

incidents reported in such neighborhoods will likely be higher, which when coupled with the

high number of people taking the survey, could significantly affects the accuracy of the results.

Therefore, based on these factors, this study agrees with findings of Skogan (1974) who

notes that although UCR also tends to have measurement errors, the official figures tend to be

more valid because they do not lead to false conclusions or inferences which are measure

specific. This is very important for community programs and substance us treatment initiatives

that often require reliable data in order to make the right decisions. Unlike NCVS survey

measures which tend to provide estimates of collected data, officially reported measures such as

UCR tend to provide data that is verified and therefore worthy of confidence. As such this study

concludes that as an official statistical measure of crime, UCR is more accurate because it

provides data that does not lead researchers of interested parties to make radically incorrect

judgments.

Conclusion

This study has drawn upon findings of previous research and shows that although both

UCR and NCVS have various drawbacks, official figures reported by UCR are more valid and
ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 8

accurate compared to NCVS. This is based on the fact that unlike NCVS reports which are

largely based on estimates from the data obtained from interviewing of participants, which are

often subject to margin of error, reports by individuals recorded by police which form the basis

of UCR reports are verified and established by law enforcement. Moreover, NCVS as a measure

of crime rates is also susceptible to numerous issues such as false information, lack of privacy all

of which are likely to impact the accuracy of the final results.

ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 9

References

DCCS., (2018). Substance Abuse Treatment Services. Retrieved from

http://www.doccs.ny.gov/ProgramServices/substanceabuse.html

Duke, A. A., Smith, K. M., Oberleitner, L., Westphal, A., & McKee, S. A. (2018). Alcohol,

drugs, and violence: A meta-meta-analysis. Psychology of violence, 8(2), 238.

Herek, G. M. (2017). Documenting hate crimes in the United States: Some considerations on

data sources. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 4(2), 143.

Highhouse, S., Brooks, M. E., Nesnidol, S., & Sim, S. (2017). Is a. 51 validity coefficient good?

Value sensitivity for interview validity. International Journal of Selection and

Assessment, 25(4), 383-389.

Koss, M. P. (1993). Detecting the scope of rape: A review of prevalence research methods.

Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8(2), 198-222.

Langton, L., Planty, M., & Lynch, J. P. (2017). Second major redesign of the National Crime

Victimization Survey (NCVS). Criminology & Public Policy, 16(4), 1049-1074.

Lauritsen, J. L., & Rezey, M. L. (2013). Measuring the prevalence of crime with the national

crime victimization survey. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,

Bureau of Justice Statistics.

O’Brien, R. M., Shichor, D., & Decker, D. L. (1980). An empirical comparison of the validity of

UCR and NCS crime rates. Sociological Quarterly, 21, 391-401.

ACCURACY OF THE NATION’S TWO CRIME MEASURES 10

Powers, R. A. (2015). National crime victimization survey. The encyclopedia of crime and

punishment, 1-5.

Rennison, C. M., & Rand, M. R. (2007). Introduction to the National Crime Victimization

Survey. In J. P. Lynch & L. A. Addington (Eds.), Understanding crime statistics:

Revisiting the divergence of the NCVS and the UCR (pp. 55-92). New York, NY:

Cambridge University Press.

Skogan, W. G. (1974). The validity of official crime statistics: An empirical investigation. Social

Science Quarterly, 55(2), 25-38

Statista. (2018). Reported forcible rape rate in the United States from 1990 to 2017. Retrieved

from https://www.statista.com/statistics/191226/reported-forcible-rape-rate-in-the-us-

since-1990/

TruthFinder. (2018). Larceny Theft By State https://www.truthfinder.com/criminal-

records/larceny-theft/#crime-table

UCR Statistics. (2018). Estimated crime in New York. Retrieved from

https://www.ucrdatatool.gov/Search/Crime/State/RunCrimeStatebyState.cfm