Description & Citation--Study No. 9481
Bibliographic Description |
|
Study No.: |
09481 |
|---|---|
Title: |
Domestic Violence Experience in Omaha, Nebraska, 1986-1987 |
Principal Investigator(s): |
Dunford, Franklyn W., University of Colorado at Boulder. Institute of Behavioral Science Huizinga, David, University of Colorado at Boulder. Institute of Behavioral Science Elliott, Delbert S., University of Colorado at Boulder. Institute of Behavioral Science |
Funding: |
United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice (85-IJ-CX-K435) |
Bibliographic Citation: |
Dunford, Franklyn W., David Huizinga, and Delbert S. Elliott. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE EXPERIENCE IN OMAHA, NEBRASKA, 1986-1987. Compiled by Franklyn W. Dunford, David Huizinga, and Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado at Boulder, Institute of Behavioral Science. ICPSR09481-v2. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor], 2006-07-24. doi:10.3886/ICPSR09481.v2 |
Scope of Study |
|
Summary: |
The purpose of this data collection was to corroborate the findings of SPECIFIC DETERRENT EFFECTS OF ARREST FOR DOMESTIC ASSAULT: MINNEAPOLIS, 1981-1982 (ICPSR 8250) that arrest is an effective deterrent against continued domestic assaults. The data addressed the following questions: (1) To what extent does arrest decrease the likelihood of continued violence, as assessed by the victim? (2) To what extent does arrest decrease the likelihood of continued complaints of crime, as assessed by police records? (3) What are the differences in arrest recidivism between cases that involved arrest versus cases that involved mediation, separation, warrant issued, or no warrant issued? Domestic violence cases in three sectors of Omaha, Nebraska, meeting established eligibility criteria, were assigned to one of five experimental treatments: mediation, separation, arrest, warrant issued, or no warrant issued. Data for victim reports were collected from three interviews with the victims conducted one week, six months, and 12 months after the domestic violence incident. Arrest, charge, and complaint data were collected on the suspects at six- and twelve-month intervals following the original domestic violence incident. The investigators used arrest recidivism, continued complaints of crime, and victim reports of repeated violence (fear of injury, pushing/hitting, and physical injury) as outcome measures to assess the extent to which treatments prevented subsequent conflicts. Other variables include victim's level of fear, self-esteem, locus of control, and welfare dependency, changes in the relationship between suspect and victim, extent of the victim's injury, and extent of drug use by the victim and the suspect. Demographic variables include race, age, sex, income, occupational status, and marital status. |
Subject Terms: |
arrests, crime reporting, deterrence, domestic assault, domestic violence, recidivism, treatment, victims |
Geographic Coverage: |
|
Time Period: |
|
Date of Collection: |
|
Unit of Observation: |
Incidents of misdemeanor domestic assault. |
Universe: |
Domestic violence cases in Omaha, Nebraska during 1986-1987. |
Data Types: |
event/transaction data, and survey data |
Methodology |
|
Study Purpose: |
The purpose of the study was to corroborate the findings of the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment (1984) that arrest is an effective deterrent against continued domestic assaults. The study addressed the following questions: (1) To what extent does arrest decrease the likelihood of continued violence, as assessed by the victim? (2) To what extent does arrest decrease the likelihood of continued complaints of crime, as assessed by police records? (3) What are the differences in arrest recidivism between cases that involved arrest versus cases that involved mediation, separation, warrant issued, or no warrant issued? |
Study Design: |
Cases included in the study were required to meet the following eligibility criteria: (1) Probable cause for an arrest for misdemeanor assault was established. Cases lacking probable cause and felony assault cases were excluded. (2) The case involved at least two people, a victim and a suspect. (3) Both parties to the assault were at least 18 years of age. (4) Both parties lived together sometime during the year preceding the assault. (5) If the suspect was present, a check of police records indicated no arrest warrant was on file. If officers determined that the case met the eligibility criteria, a treatment was randomly assigned by a computer routine operated by the Information Unit of the Omaha Police Department. Cases in which both the victim and the suspect were present when the police arrived were assigned a treatment of either mediation, separation, or arrest. Cases in which no suspects were present at the time police arrived were assigned treatments of warrant issued or no warrant issued. Interviews with victims were conducted one week, six months, and 12 months after the domestic violence incident. Additional data were collected from police officers who completed Domestic Violence Report forms for each case. Police record searches were conducted on suspects six and twelve months after the incident. Continued complaints of crime, arrest recidivism, and victim reports of repeated violence (fear of injury, pushing/hitting, and physical injury) were used as outcome measures to assess the extent to which the various treatments prevented subsequent violence. |
Sample: |
Two-stage random sampling design. |
Data Source: |
personal interviews and police records |
Description of Variables: |
Data were collected regarding the nature of the domestic violence incident, subsequent incidents, the extent of the victim's injury, extent of drug use by the victim and the suspect, and the suspect-victim relationship. During the victim interviews additional data were collected regarding the victim's level of fear, self-esteem, locus of control, and welfare dependency, and changes in the relationship between suspect and victim. Demographic information includes age, sex, income, employment, and marital status. Arrest, charge, and complaint data were collected on the suspects at six- and twelve-month intervals following the original domestic violence incident. |
Response Rates: |
A total of 577 domestic violence cases were selected for inclusion in the study. The number of respondents who completed interviews for Waves I, II, and III are 477 (81 percent), 438 (76 percent), and 416 (72 percent), respectively. |
Extent of Processing: |
All archived data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. The archive also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, the archive performed the following processing steps for this data collection:
|
Access and Availability |
|
Note: |
Detailed file-level information (such as record length, case count, and variable count) is listed in the file manifest. |
Original ICPSR Release: |
1991-03-05 |
Restrictions: |
The data are restricted from general dissemination. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Data Transfer Agreement Form and specify the reasons for the request. A copy of the Data Transfer Agreement Form can be requested by calling 800-999-0960. The Data Transfer Agreement Form is also available as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file from the NACJD Web site. Completed forms should be returned to: Director, National Archive of Criminal Justice Data, Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, Institute for Social Research, P.O. Box 1248, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1248, or by fax: 734-647-8200. |
Version History: |
|
Dataset(s): |
|
