Research Statistics Hate Crime Evidence

Abstract

Research statistics are vital in solving many issues and enables analyzers to answer questions to problems arising in public administration, law enforcement agencies, criminal courts and the criminal justice system. The Bureau of Statistics compiles data on various crimes, such as hate crime, and explains the data and the results. The author here will explain hate crime data and the results, paying attention to the statistical significance as reported and distinguish between methods of establishing a correlation between variables (gender, education, religion) as it aids analysts in research statistics experiments.

Hate Crime

Hate crime is described as a victim’s perception that the offender was driven by bias since the offender used hateful language, used hate graffiti, or detectives established a hate crime occurred (Bureau of Justice, 2017). Each year, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), with the aid of the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) gathers, evaluates and distributes, then issues reports on data and operations of justice systems. Data is utilized by national, state-run, and city policymakers in combatting corruption, and ensuring everyone is represented equally. BJS consists of five data experts with the latest data figures ranging from 1973-2017 (Bureau of Justice, 2017). Hate crime is not new to American culture. As the cultural plane continues to expand, intensified investigations delve into its origins and motivations of the offender. With each atrocity of hate crime, it is crucial to revisit events and societal changes they spurred to better understand rationales behind the behavior of the individual or group. However, a victim’s refusal to report hate crime can be attributed to the victim’s belief that law enforcement are not trustworthy, pleas for help fall on deaf ears, or fear of continued retaliation for reporting hate crime in the first place (Wong & Christmann, 2017).

Statistical Data Significance on Hate Crime

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) contains a wealth of information on the nature of criminal victimization administered to individuals aged 12 and older. Data is obtained from a sample of approximately 240,000 telephone or in-person interviews. These surveys involve 160,000 unique individuals and approximately 95,000 households. In 2017, data included 145,508 interviews related to victimization, whether it be non-violent crimes or property crimes, and those reported and not (Bureau of Justice, 2019). Hate crime, specifically, is a prejudice motivated crime and goes severely underreported and occurs on an unequal basis; victim’s minority status (Wiedlitzka, et al 2018). The Hate Crime Statistics Act states that hate crime is based on race, gender/gender identity, faith, infirmity, sexual orientation, or culture (Bureau of Justice, 2017). Therefore, it is crucial that significant data is available to combat acts of violence on unsuspecting and innocent victims of hate crime.

Methodology to Distinguish Correlation

The incident weight is used most frequently to calculate estimates of the number of crimes committed against a class of victim (Bureau of Justice, 2017). The NCVS data includes information about the individual, household, victimization, and incident weights. BJS analyzers us surveys to categorize and organize comparable victimizations into series; thereby collecting the most recent incident’s detailed information. Weighting counts to a maximum of 10, the actual number of reported victimizations. This process produces more accurate crime levels than only counting victimizations once. The significance of these processes is to provide credible data statistics for police, administrations, and local municipalities. The use of quantitative methods such as the survey, field research, and evaluation enable analysts to gather reliable and valid data in the criminal justice field. The BJS created the NCVS to deliver previously unreported evidence about crime, victims, and offenders (Bureau of Justice, 2017). Criminal justice professionals use collected data to connect, combine, and put together analogies by order of importance in order to utilize the investigative process. This is equivalent to putting together a puzzle in order to see the bigger picture. NCVS derives a sample from the national estimates; therefore, when comparing one estimate with another, caution must be taken. Estimations based on a sample have some degree of sampling error (Wilson, 2015). Response variations of the victim and sample size are factors that affect sample error. One measure of the sampling error regarding estimates is the standard error.

Conclusion

This paper delves into the complex hate crime issue as detailed on the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) website. BJS is the prime source of information on criminal victimization used by local, federal, and state governments. With the aid of NCVS and the U.S. Census Bureau, analysts compare data based on occurrence, characteristics, and significances of crime victimization. This statistical data is relevant in creating laws and policies concerning issues such as the previously mentioned hate crime.

Hate crime is motivated by prejudice-refereed to as the offender’s use of hate language, symbols, or law enforcement deems that a hate crime occurred. The BJS compiles data analyzes and publishes statistics which enable criminal justice professionals as well as federal, state, and local authorities to utilize. The BJS uses several methodologies to test data. With the use of descriptive statistics, quantitative analysis, and sample error, BJS compiles descriptions of a population and compiles numerical data, graphs, and tables. Through these devices, correlations are made about the types of crimes and the gender, race, ethnicity, or religion of the offender.  The Bureau of Justice Statistics website is a useful tool for those researching data collections.

References

Bureau of Justice Statistics (2017). Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=37

Wiedlitzka, S., Mazerolle, L.,Fay-Ramirez, S., & Miles-Johnson, T. (2018, June). Perceptions of police legitimacy and citizen decisions to report hate crime incidents in Austrailia. International Journal of Crime, 7(2), 91-106. Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&sid=2806ffc4-5f5a-479a-a51f-dcf90816fd0f%40sessionmgr4007

Wilson, M. M. (2015, January). Hate crime victimization 2004-2012 statistical tables. Journal of Current Issues in Crime, Law, and Law Enforcement, 8(1), 217-235. Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=8&sid=2806ffc4-5f5a-479a-a51f-dcf90816fd0f%40sessionmgr4007

Wong, K., & Christmann, K. (2017, Winter). Increasing hate crime reporting: marrowing the gap between policy aspiration, victim inclination, and agency capability. British Journal of Community Justice, 14(3), 5-23. Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&sid=2806ffc4-5f5a-479a-a51f-dcf90816fd0f%40sessionmgr4007