Outline and Assess Different Measures of Crime and Deviance

When measuring discourtesy and deflexion sociologists subroutine three different means, those argon decreed statistics, self-importance- chronicle studies and dupe surveys. These methods of stack away selective information throw both strong masterminds and weak points, but by feature them a possible general delineation of criminal offence and departure could be cadaverous. The socio dianoetic theories have varying perspectives on the usefulness of generating measurable shame statistics and the validity of each method.Firstly official statistics ar compiled and so published both 6 months by the Home Office, and be drawn from records kept by the police and other official agencies. just now overdue to the concomitant that official statistics are only compiled from crime that has been nameed pencil lead to someone being charged and convicted of that crime those crimes that go unreported are obviously not included. By use of official statistics we screw picture t rends in crime through bulge history, which crime rates are rising slope and which are f onlying and from that starting point we arsehole work out the reasons for this change.In my opinion though official statistics may not be able to cover every crime as not all is recorded it arsehole still gives us a starting point when looking for crime trends and the sociological reasons behind that. For example we can shoot the breeze through looking at the downloadable PDF Social Trends 40 that crimes such as theft, vandalism and household crime have increased from last yr and through further statistics we can recognise that gang activity has in addition increased we can then put two and two unitedly to army us why these crimes are increasing through use of the official statistics.Feminists would argue that crimes that stereotypically affect women (such as domestic abuse or rape) are not covered in these statistics, as the women are in like manner embarrassed or scare to come forwa rd. As a resolving of this, feminists be compriseve the statistics are not a realistic reflection on domestic or spousal abuse rates as the husbands or boyfriends are not being brought to justice. Similarly Marxists would argue that official statistics are incorrect but the Marxists argue that there wrong due to the fact that the bourgeoisie have manipulated them to create scapegoats.By creating scapegoats of the working carve upes the bourgeoisie can divide the proletariat making it easier for the capitalists to continue controlling them. Furthermore the to a lower place(a) class are more strictly policed than the oppressive ruling class and therefore it looks on statistics that the working class are more inclined to crime. This argument, like most of Marxism, is slightly reductionist as not every sociological issue can be so easily simplified to just the bourgeoisie oppressing the proletariat or capitalisms greed.The second method utilize to measure crime and deviance is a self-report engage. A self report study would be a survey which would interview a morsel of people on their relationship with crime, this would be done through every an opportunity sample or through volunteers and the interview would most in all probability be structured or semi-structured. The usefulness of a self-report study is that it could break up what are seen as victimless crimes (such as drug use or under age drinking etc. ) or crimes that go unreported.This would then be able to compensate for the official statistics deficiency of these crimes, and then by combining the two give us a broader picture of crime in the UK. Another advantage of a self report study is that we can not only learn what crimes people use but too we can see what age, ethnicity or social class there in showing us what members of our society are more likely to commit a certain crime. simply by employ a self-report study demand characteristics and socially desirable answers come into play.Becau se in contrast to the official statistics which are gathered from data which can be presumed to be true, self report studies rely on face-to-face interviews which gives people the opportunity to lie or to give an answer which they believe the interviewer will cause pleasing. But this method does yield results, for example Bilton was able to show that 50 to 90% of the people he interviewed had committed a crime that could have come them in court. This use of the self-report study helps us to see how much crime goes unreported or unnoticed and therefore how unrealistic the official crime statistics actually are.Similarly West and Farrington, who as well did a self report study but on deviance rather than crime, name that a high percentage of those interviewed had engaged in, what society perceives as, a deviant. For example they found that 90% of interviewees admitted to having travelled on a train without a ticket, withal 82% had broken a window of an empty house. But also West and Farmingtons study found that like Biltons the official statistics had bewildered out all crime this is obvious as 40% admitted to stolen something from a shop and of that 40% only 8. % had been prosecuted of it. Victim surveys are the opposite to self report studies as instead of being asked about crimes youve committed a person is asked whether they have ever been a victim of crime, samples are interpreted on either a titanic scale (nationally) or on a small scale (locally). Through victim surveys, especially large ones such as the British Crime Survey, we are able to see any pattern or trends in victimisation that we wouldnt have been able to see in the previous two methods.Victim surveys can show us if any race, age, social class or genders are more likely to targeted for a specific crime. Jock Young, a advanced Left Realist, did the first victim survey in Islington, it was able to show that the reason residents feared leaving the house was of the violent gangs committing crime and threatening those who assay to stop it. Victim surveys are able to provide the interviewee without a enceinte deal of confidence as they can remain completely unknown if they choose, in theory this should eliminate people being too scared or too embarrassed to admit to being a victim of crime.But this is not always the case, some people might find it too hard to admit to even themselves that theyve been a victim of a crime, especially crimes such as rape or abuse. This altering of the loyalty is different from that seen sometimes in self-report studies as those lies are usually told to play the interviewee feel better or harder about them self (as nowadays committing crime is seen as cool especially among youths). Similarly to official statistics Feminists would argue that lack of women admitting to being victims of sexual or physical abuse is due to the decrepit society we live in and the male dominance seen throughout it.But victim surveys could be seen as possibl y unreliable as, unlike in official statistics, experts do not do the categorization of crimes it is the interviewers themselves who may be skilled sociologists but are not trained specifically in the act of categorizing crime. This means that similar crimes can not be compared with the statistics as there may have been confusion over the classification hence making it difficult to measure the crime.In my opinion the most logical way in which we should use the measures of crime and deviance is by using all of them together, instead of separately. Through this we will get a broader and clearer picture of crime in the UK as each method covers various holes in the other methods data. For example the official statistics may give us data on the reported crimes there is no way of knowing how umpteen crimes go unreported, but through self-report studies can begin to see a general figure of unreported crimes.