Search results

Showing 1 – 31 of 31 results.
Curated

ABC News Poll of Public Opinion on Crime, December 1982 (ICPSR 8100)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
This special topic poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. In this poll, respondents were questioned regarding their perceptions of crime and the criminal justice system. Questions assessed the respondents' fear of crime, perceptions of the seriousness of crime in the United States, evaluation of the judicial and penal systems, assessment of police performance, and confidence in the ability of the police to prevent crime. The poll also asked for respondents' opinions about President Ronald Reagan's policies, the state of the economy, and government spending. Demographic information was collected, including the respondent's sex, age, education level, race, and income level.
Curated
Restricted

Assessing the Impacts of Broken Windows Policing Strategies on Citizen Attitudes in Three California Cities: Redlands, Ontario and Colton, 2008-2009 (ICPSR 34427)

Released/updated on: 2016-06-20
Geographic coverage: Colton, Ontario (California), California, Redlands
Time period: 2008-03-01--2008-06-01, 2009-01-01--2009-04-01, 2008-03-01--2009-04-01

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This study examined the impact that a six-month broken windows style policing crackdown on disorder had on residents of three California cities: Colton, Ontario and Redlands. The study investigated four questions:

  1. What is the impact of broken windows policing on fear of crime among residents of the targeted hot spots?
  2. What is the impact of broken windows policing on police legitimacy in the targeted hot spots?
  3. What is the impact of broken windows policing on reports of collective efficacy in the targeted hot spots?
  4. Is broken windows policing at hot spots effective in reducing both actual and perceived levels of disorder and crime in the targeted hot spots?

To answer these questions, a block randomized experimental design was employed to deliver a police intervention targeting disorder to 55 treatment street segments with an equal number of segments serving as controls.

Data were collected on the type and amount of crime before, during, and after implementation as well as interviews of residents before and after the crackdown in order to gauge their perception of its success.

Curated

Attitudes Toward Crime and Punishment in Vermont: Public Opinion About an Experiment With Restorative Justice, 1999 (ICPSR 3016)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: Vermont, United States
By the summer of 1998, the Vermont Department of Corrections (DOC) had completed three years of operational experience with "restorative justice," a concept that involves compensating victims and establishing community-based reparative boards that determine how offenders can make amends for their crimes. The purpose of this project was to update the benchmark findings from an earlier survey of Vermont residents in 1994, to assess public attitudes about the reforms and changes that had been instituted by the Vermont DOC, and to explore the possibility of expansion of responsibilities of the reparative community boards. This project involved a telephone survey of a new sample of 601 adult residents of Vermont. The interviewing was conducted on March 15-21, 1999. Respondents were asked a series of trend questions to update the 1994 findings. Respondents were also asked questions about two other programs: the diversion program, in which selected first offenders who fulfilled the terms of a community-based sanction could have their records expunged, and the furlough program, in which offenders making the transition from prison to the community were supervised for an interim period. The survey also explored whether Vermonters would like to see the responsibilities of the reparative boards expanded to include community notification and other types of cases. Residents assessed whether crime in general, violent crime, and illegal drug use had increased compared to five years prior, whether more prisons should be built, whether Vermont's jails and prisons were overcrowded, and whether violent offenders were being released before completing their sentences because of overcrowding. They commented on how often offenders in four scenarios should go to prison and how often they believed that these offenders in fact did go to prison. Respondents rated the performance of various segments of the Vermont criminal justice system and, given 15 offense scenarios, were asked whether the offender should spend time in jail or in community service and rehabilitation. In addition, respondents were asked whether anyone in their household had been a victim of a crime within the last three years and, if so, whether it was a violent crime. Demographic data include sex, employment, education, race/ethnicity, and age category of the respondent, and the county and region where the resident lived.
Curated

Center for Research on Social Reality [Spain] Survey, April 1992: Justice and Civic Rights (ICPSR 9992)

Released/updated on: 1993-04-09
Geographic coverage: Europe, Global, Spain
This data collection is part of a continuing series of semi-monthly surveys of individuals in Spain. Each survey consists of three sections. The first section collects information on respondents' attitudes regarding personal and national issues. This section includes questions on level of life satisfaction and frequency of relationships, as well as a rating of the importance of national issues. The second section varies according to the monthly topic, with this survey's topic focusing on justice and civic rights. Among the issues investigated are the respondent's personal experience with lawyers and police, evaluation of Spanish prisons and treatment accorded to those in prison, attitudes toward the death penalty, evaluation of the Spanish penal code and the "Corcuera Law," evaluation of government policy with respect to the administration of justice, and perceived image of judicial institutions and justice professionals. The third section collects demographic data such as sex, age, religion, income, and place of residence.
Curated

Educating the Public About Police Through Public Service Announcements in Lima, Ohio, 1995-1997 (ICPSR 2885)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Lima, Ohio
Time period: 1995-01-01--1997-01-01
This study was designed to analyze the impact of four televised public service announcements (PSAs) aired for three months in Lima, Ohio. The researchers sought to answer three specific research questions: (1) Were the PSAs effective in transferring knowledge to citizens about the police? (2) Did the PSAs have an impact on resident satisfaction with the police? and (3) Did the PSAs have an impact on the behavior of citizens interacting with the police? To assess public attitudes about the Lima police and to determine whether the substance of the PSAs was being communicated to the residents of Lima, three waves of telephone interviews were conducted (Part 1). The first telephone interviews were conducted in April 1996 with approximately 500 randomly selected Lima residents. These were baseline interviews that took place before the PSAs aired. The survey instrument used in the first interview assessed resident satisfaction with the police and the services they provided. After completion of the Wave 1 interviews, the PSAs were aired on television for three months (June 5-August 28, 1996). After August 28, the PSAs were removed from general circulation. A second wave of telephone interviews was conducted in September 1996 with a different group of randomly selected Lima residents. The same survey instrument used during the first interviews was administered during the second wave, with additional questions added relating to whether the respondent saw any of the PSAs. A third group of randomly selected Lima residents was contacted via the telephone in January 1997 for the final wave of interviews. The final interviews utilized the identical survey instrument used during Wave 2. The focus of this follow-up survey was on citizen retention, over time, of the information communicated in the PSAs. Official data collected from computerized records maintained by the Lima Police Department were also collected to monitor changes in citizen behavior (Part 2). The records data span 127 weeks, from January 1, 1995, to June 7, 1997, which includes 74 weeks of pre-PSA data and 53 weeks of data for the period during the initial airing of the first PSA and thereafter. Variables in Part 1 include whether respondents were interested in learning about what to do if stopped by the police, what actions they had displayed when stopped by the police, if they would defend another person being treated unfairly by the police, how responsible they felt (as a citizen) in preventing crimes, the likelihood of calling the police if they were aware of a crime, perception of crime and fear of crime, and whether there had been an increase or decrease in the level of crime in their neighborhoods. Respondents were also asked about the amount of television they watched, whether they saw any of the public service announcements and if so to rate them, whether the PSAs provided information not already known, whether any of the PSA topics had come up in conversations with family or friends, and whether the respondent would like to see more PSAs in the future. Finally, respondents were asked whether the police were doing as much as they could to make the neighborhood safe, how responsive the police were to nonemergency matters, and to rate their overall satisfaction with the Lima Police Department and its various services. Demographic variables for Part 1 include the race, gender, age, marital status, level of education, employment status, and income level of each respondent. Variables in Part 2 cover police use-of-force or resisting arrest incidents that took place during the study period, whether the PSA aired during the week in which a use-of-force or resisting arrest incident took place, the number of supplemental police use-of-force reports that were made, and the number of resisting arrest charges made.
Curated

Evaluation of Community Policing Initiatives in Jefferson County, West Virginia, 1996-1997 (ICPSR 2800)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: West Virginia, United States
This data collection was designed to evaluate the implementation of community policing initiatives for three police departments in Jefferson County, West Virginia: the Ranson Town Police Department, the West Virginia State Police (Jefferson County Detachment), and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department. The evaluation was undertaken by the Free Our Citizens of Unhealthy Substances Coalition (FOCUS), a county-based group of citizens who represented all segments of the community, including businesses, churches, local law enforcement agencies, and local governments. The aim was to find answers to the following questions: (1) Can community policing have any detectable and measurable impact in a predominantly rural setting? (2) Did the police department do what they said they would do in their funding application? (3) If they were successful, what factors supported their efforts and were key to their success? and (4) If they were not successful, what problems prevented their success? The coalition conducted citizen surveys to evaluate how much of an impact community policing initiatives had in their county. In January 1996, research assistants conducted a baseline survey of 300 households in the county. Survey responses were intended to gauge residents' fear of crime and to assess how well the police were performing their duties. After one year, the coalition repeated its survey of public attitudes, and research assistants interviewed another 300 households. The research assumption was that any change in fear of crime or assessment of police performance could reasonably be attributed to these new community policing inventions. Crime reporting variables from the survey included which crime most concerned the respondent, if the respondent would report a crime he or she observed, and whether the respondent would testify about the crime in court. Variables pertaining to level of concern for specific crimes include how concerned respondents were that someone would rob or attack them, break into or vandalize their home, or try to sexually attack them/someone they cared about. Community involvement variables covered participation in community groups or activities, neighborhood associations, church, or informal social activities. Police/citizen interaction variables focused on the number of times respondents had called to report a problem to the police in the last two years, how satisfied they were with how the police handled the problem, the extent to which this police department needed improvement, whether children trusted law enforcement officers, whether police needed to respond more quickly to calls, whether the police needed improved relations with the community, and in the past year whether local police performance had improved/gotten worse. Specific crime information variables include whether the crime occurred in the respondent's neighborhood, whether he/she was the victim, if crime was serious in the respondent's neighborhood versus elsewhere, whether the respondent had considered moving as a result of crime in the neighborhood, and how personal safety had changed in the respondent's neighborhood. Variables relating to community policing include whether the respondent had heard the term "community policing" in the past year, from what source, and what community policing activities the respondent was aware of. Demographic variables include job self-classification, racial/ethnic identity, length of residency, age, gender, martial status, educational status, and respondent's town of residence.
Curated

Fortune-Yankelovich Youth Study, 1966 (ICPSR 7348)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey of American youth of college age, including both college students and non-students, was conducted in 1968 by Daniel Yankelovich, Inc., for Fortune Magazine. The questions explored a wide range of issues reflecting personal values, career goals, and social and political philosophies. Among the major topics investigated were the respondents' opinions on the draft, civil disobedience, student riots, science and technology, and the generation gap. In addition, respondents were asked to compare their values with those of their parents, and to indicate societal values that they would adhere to, or reject. Demographic variables include sex, age, marital status, occupation, and income.
Curated
Restricted

Identifying Effective Counter-Trafficking Programs and Practices in the United States, 2003-2012 (ICPSR 36348)

Released/updated on: 2025-05-29
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2003-01-01--2012-01-01, 2003-01-01--2012-01-01

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

After a decade of efforts to combat human trafficking in the United States through legislation, law enforcement, victim services, and public awareness, it was critical to begin to assess what legislative, legal, and civic responses have been most effective in achieving the desired outcome of reducing opportunities and instances of human trafficking. This study began to fill gaps in the understanding of effective anti-trafficking responses by evaluating three strategic platforms to combat human trafficking in the United States.

  1. Researchers examined the effectiveness of state-level human trafficking legislation.
  2. Investigators described how state human trafficking laws have been used to prosecute human trafficking offenders.
  3. Researchers explored public opinion on human trafficking through a nationally representative survey containing embedded experiments.

The collection includes 2 Stata data files: (1) Effective Countertrafficking Law_Legislation Dataset.dta (n=500; 32 variables) and (2) Effective Countertrafficking_State Case Data-ICPSR.dta (n=479; 109 variables). Data from the public opinion survey are not available at this time.

Curated

Impact Assessment of Sex Offender Notification on Wisconsin Communities, 1998 (ICPSR 3015)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Wisconsin
In response to widespread public concern about convicted sex offenders being returned from prison, federal and state laws have been passed authorizing or requiring the notification of local communities where sex offenders would be living. The dilemma associated with community notification is balancing the public's right to be informed with the need to successfully reintegrate offenders within the community. Wisconsin was one of the 50 state jurisdictions that enacted a sex offender community notification statute. This project was an in-depth study of that state's experience from the vantage point of several groups affected by the community notification process. This data collection contains three surveys that were conducted from January 1998 through mid-September 1998: (1) a survey of 704 neighborhood residents at 22 community notification meetings throughout the state (Part 1), (2) a statewide survey of 312 police and sheriff agencies (Part 2), and (3) a statewide survey of 128 probation and parole agents and their supervisors from units with sex offender caseloads (Part 3). Variables in Part 1 include how respondents found out about the date and place of the community notification meeting, respondents' opinions of the purpose of the meeting, how clearly the purpose of meeting was stated, how the meeting went, outcomes, rating of information presented, if materials were handed out, if the materials were helpful, and respondents' level of concern after the meeting. Enforcement agency data (Part 2) include variables such as type of agency, type of jurisdiction, population size, if the agency designated a special staff member to coordinate the sex offender registration and notification functions, if the agency had policies regarding registration of sex offenders and community notification about sex offenders, if the agency attended statewide training, who participated in the Core Notification Team, what kind of information was used to determine a sex offender's risk to the community, which agencies registered to receive notice, and if the agency planned to update or expand their notification list. Additional variables cover the number of requests for information from Neighborhood Watch Programs, what identifying information about the offender the agency released, types of communication the agency received from the public after a notification had been issued, topics discussed in the public communication to the agency, benefits of the community notification law, difficulties in carrying out the requirements of the law, and methods developed to handle the problems. Probation and parole survey (Part 3) variables focused on characteristics of the respondent's supervising area, the number of agents assigned to the respondents' unit, the number of agents designated as Sex Offender Intensive Supervision Program (SO-ISP) agents or SO-ISP back-up agents, the number of child or adult sex offenders under probation or parole, if the respondent participated in any meetings regarding the provisions of the notification law and its implementation, if the supervisor received specialized training, and areas covered in the training. Other variables include whether the notification level was decided by the Core Notification Team, difficulties the respondent had with Special Bulletin Notification (SBN) offenders assigned to his/her caseload, if the respondent's field unit utilized SO-ISP or "high risk" agent teams to manage sex offenders, which individuals worked with the respondent's team, the type of caseload the respondent supervised, the number of sex offenders on the respondent's caseload, if the respondent used a special risk assessment or classification instrument for sex offenders, other information used to determine the supervision level for a sex offender, if child sex offenders were managed differently than other sex offenders, how often a polygraph was used on sex offenders, who paid for the polygraph, who chose the treatment provider, the number of supervision contacts with high-risk, SBN, or medium-risk sex offenders per week, victim policies and procedures used, rules or policies regarding revocation, and prerevocation sanctions used.
Curated

Measuring Perceptions of Appropriate Prison Sentences in the United States, 2000 (ICPSR 3988)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-05-16--2000-08-08
This study examined the public's preferences regarding sentencing and parole of criminal offenders. It also investigated the public's willingness to pay for particular crime prevention and control strategies and tested new methods for gathering this kind of information from the public. This involved asking the public to respond to a series of crime vignettes that involved constrained choice. The study consisted of a telephone survey of 1,300 adult respondents conducted in 2000 in the United States. Following a review by a panel of experts and extensive pretesting, the final instrument was programmed for computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI). The questionnaire specifically focused on: (1) the attitudes of the public on issues such as the number of police on the street, civil rights of minority groups, and the legal rights of people accused of serious crimes, (2) the randomized evaluation of preferred sentencing alternatives for eight different crime scenarios, (3) making parole decisions in a constrained choice setting by assuming that there is only enough space for one of two offenders, (4) the underlying factors that motivate the public's parole decisions, and (5) respondents' willingness to pay for various crime prevention strategies.
Curated

National Firearms Survey, 1999 (ICPSR 4552)

Released/updated on: 2007-07-06
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey was undertaken to obtain information on the characteristics of gun ownership, gun storage and gun carrying practices, and weapons-related incidents in the United States--specifically, use of guns and other weapons in self-defense against other people. Data were collected using national random-digit dial telephone surveys completed between March 19, 1999 and July 13, 1999. Sampling was suspended after the school shooting in Littleton, Colorado on April 20, 1999, and resumed after a cool-down period. Part 1, Survey Data, contains the coded data obtained during the interviews, and Part 2, Open-Ended Verbatim Responses, consists of open-ended answers provided by the respondents. Four qualifying questions were asked, dealing with: (1) gun ownership, (2) gun display against the respondent, (3) gun use in self-defense against another person, and (4) the use of a weapon other than a gun in self-defense against another person. A "yes" response to a qualifying question led to a series of additional questions on the same topic as the qualifying question. Information was collected from all respondents on the perceived safety of their neighborhood, whether they would feel safer if more people owned guns, whether guns should be allowed in public places, whether gun injuries were a problem in their community, whether they would favor or oppose a program to reduce gun injuries, and whether they had ever been shot with a gun. Respondents living in households that currently contained a gun were asked how many and what type of guns were present, the main reasons for owning a gun, whether any of the guns were loaded and unlocked, and whether they had received formal firearms training. Questions about incidents in which a gun was displayed in a hostile manner against the respondent included the number of times it took place, how long ago it had occurred, whether the respondent was in the military or police force at the time, the location of the incident, whether the individual displaying the gun was known to the respondent, whether the respondent had a gun, and whether the police were contacted. Respondents who had used a gun or other weapon in self-defense in the last five years were asked about the number of times it took place, the location of the incident, whether they were in the military or police force at the time, the type of weapon used, whether they knew the other person, whether this individual also had a weapon, whether the police were contacted and arrests made, and what crime was committed. Additional questions asked respondents whether they smoked cigarettes, drank alcohol, whether they had gotten married, had had a fire in their home, and had been hospitalized for a fracture in the past year, and whether they had ever had contact with extraterrestrial life. Demographic variables include sex, age, race, education level, household income, type of residential area (e.g., urban, rural, etc.), and age and number of children in the household.
Curated

National Opinion Survey of Crime and Justice, 1995 (ICPSR 6720)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Texas
The purpose of this survey was to provide legislators, public officials, and Texas residents with a reliable source of information about citizens' opinions and attitudes concerning crime and criminal justice related-topics. The data collection consists of two distinctly different files, National Data (Part 2) and Texas Data (Part 1), which can be linked or used separately for analysis. The survey questions concern neighborhood atmosphere and presentation of crime in the media, worries regarding possible attacks--both robbery and physical attacks, confidence in and opinions of police and their effectiveness, problems dealing with courts, and attitudes regarding prisoners and prisons, drug laws and drug problems, and juvenile gangs. Other questions focused on attitudes concerning the death penalty, guns, and the availability of firearms. The National Data file contains additional information expanding on the respondent's sources of crime news and gang-related questions. Demographic information on respondents includes sex, age, race, income, education, and religion.
Curated

National Survey of Police-Media Relations, 2000 (ICPSR 3597)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
This study was undertaken to examine the influence police officers have in creating an image of law enforcement through media relations and public information offices/officers (PIO). A survey was mailed nationwide to police departments serving areas with populations exceeding 100,000 residents. The survey items identified the following factors: (1) the presence and nature of a formal departmental media strategy, (2) the prevalence of full-time police PIO, (3) PIO background characteristics, including educational/vocational training in media, journalism, or public relations, (4) specific goals of police media relations offices and PIOs, (5) the various methods by which these goals are achieved, and (6) the perceived quality of police-media interaction, the police image, and the public information office both before and after the adoption of the current media strategy.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 1999: [United States] (ICPSR 3151)

Released/updated on: 2001-06-18
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey was undertaken to learn more about how often and under what circumstances police-public contact becomes problematic. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) initiated surveys of the public on their interactions with police in 1996 with the first Police-Public Contact Survey, a pretest among a nationally representative sample of 6,421 persons aged 12 or older. That initial version of the questionnaire revealed that about 20 percent of the public had direct, face-to-face contact with a police officer at least once during the year preceding the survey. At that time, the principal investigator estimated that about 1 in 500 residents, or about a half million people, who had an encounter with a police officer also experienced either a threat of force or the actual use of force by the officer. The current survey, an improved version of the 1996 Police-Public Contact Survey, was fielded as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (ICPSR 6406) during the last six months of 1999. A national sample nearly 15 times as large as the pretest sample in 1996 was used. The 1999 survey yielded nearly identical estimates of the prevalence and nature of contacts between the public and the police. This survey, because of its much larger sample size, permits more extensive analysis of demographic differences in police contacts than the 1996 pretest. In addition, it added a new and more detailed set of questions about traffic stops by police, the most frequent reason given for contact with police. Variables in the dataset cover type of contact with police, including whether it was face-to-face, initiated by the police or the citizen, whether an injury to the officer or the citizen resulted from the contact, crimes reported, and police use of force. Demographic variables supplied for the citizens include gender, race, and Hispanic origin.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2002 [United States] (ICPSR 4273)

Released/updated on: 2005-08-18
Geographic coverage: United States
The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS), was designed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to document contacts between police and the public that culminated in police using force. The 2002 survey was conducted as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). To date, the PPCS has been conducted three times by BJS. The first survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data" (NCJ 165040) -- documented levels of contacts with police during 1996. The second survey -- described in "Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey" (NCJ 184957) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived in POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151). The third survey -- described here under the title "Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings From the 2002 National Survey" (NCJ 207845) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2002. The results of this survey are contained in this data collection.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2005 [United States] (ICPSR 20020)

Released/updated on: 2008-05-06
Geographic coverage: United States
The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS), was designed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to document contacts between police and the public that culminated in police using force. The 2005 survey was conducted as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). To date, the PPCS has been conducted four times by BJS. The first survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data" (NCJ 165040) -- documented levels of contacts with police during 1996. The second survey -- described in "Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey" (NCJ 184957) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived in POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999 (ICPSR 3151). The third survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Contacts Between Police and the Public, Findings from the 2002 National Survey" (NCJ 207845) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 2002. These data are archived in POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273). The fourth survey -- described in the BJS publication, "Contacts Between Police and the Public, 2005" (NCJ 215243) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2005. The results of this survey are contained in this data collection.
Curated

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2008 (ICPSR 32022)

Released/updated on: 2011-10-05
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact. The PPCS interviews a nationally representative sample of United States residents aged 16 years or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted five times by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS):

  • The first survey -- described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040) -- documented levels of contacts with police during 1996.
  • The second survey -- described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957) -- recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).
  • The third survey -- described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2002. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).
  • The fourth survey -- described in the BJS publication, Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2005. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 20020).
  • The fifth survey -- described in the BJS publication, Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599) -- covered interactions between police and the public in 2008. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2011 (ICPSR 34276)

Released/updated on: 2014-03-18
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact. The PPCS interviews a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted six times by BJS:

The first survey - described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040) - documented levels of contacts with police during 1996.

The second survey - described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957) - recorded police-citizen contacts in 1999. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

The third survey - described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845) - covered interactions between police and the public in 2002. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

The fourth survey - described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243) - covered interactions between police and the public in 2005. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 020020).

The fifth survey - described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599) - covered interactions between police and the public in 2008. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

The sixth survey (split sample design due to instrument changes) - new instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938) - covered interactions between police and publice and public perceptions of police in 2011. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2015 (ICPSR 36653)

Released/updated on: 2018-04-11
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted seven times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 020020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2018 (ICPSR 37916)

Released/updated on: 2021-12-13
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted eight times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 020020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

8. 2018.Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2018. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2018 (ICPSR 37916).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2020 (ICPSR 38320)

Released/updated on: 2022-11-17
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted nine times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 20020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

8. 2018. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2018. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2018 (ICPSR 37916).

9. 2020. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2020. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2020 (ICPSR 38320).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Police-Public Contact Survey, 2022 (ICPSR 38872)

Released/updated on: 2024-10-03
Geographic coverage: United States

The Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) provides detailed information on the nature and characteristics of face-to-face contacts between police and the public, including the reason for and outcome of the contact and the respondent's satisfaction with the contact. The data can be used to estimate the likelihood of different types of contact for residents with different demographic characteristics, including contacts involving the use of nonfatal force by police. The PPCS is used to collect data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents age 16 or older as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. To date, the PPCS has been conducted ten times by BJS:

1. 1996. Described in the BJS publication Police Use of Force: Collection of National Data (NCJ 165040).

2. 1999. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey (NCJ 184957). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 1999: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3151).

3. 2002. Described in Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey (NCJ 207845). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2002: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 4273).

4. 2005. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2005 (NCJ 215243). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2005: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 20020).

5. 2008. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008 (NCJ 234599). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2008 (ICPSR 32022).

6. 2011. Split sample design due to instrument changes. New instrument findings described in two publications: Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011 (NCJ 242937) and Requests for Police Assistance, 2011 (NCJ 242938). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2011 (ICPSR 34276).

7. 2015. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2015 (NCJ 251145). These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2015 (ICPSR 36653).

8. 2018. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2018. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2018 (ICPSR 37916).

9. 2020. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2020. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2020 (ICPSR 38320).

10. 2022. Described in the BJS publication Contacts between Police and Public, 2022. These data are archived as POLICE-PUBLIC CONTACT SURVEY, 2022 (ICPSR 38872).

Curated

Police Response Time Analysis, 1975 (ICPSR 7760)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Time period: 1975-03-01--1975-12-01
This is a study of the relationship between the amount of time taken by police to respond to calls for service and the outcomes of criminal and noncriminal incidents in Kansas City, Missouri. Outcomes were evaluated in terms of police effectiveness and citizen satisfaction. Response time data were generated by timing telephone and radio exchanges on police dispatch tapes. Police travel time was measured and recorded by highly trained civilian observers. To assess satisfaction with police service, personal and telephone interviews were conducted with victims and witnesses who had made the calls to the police.
Curated

Police Use of Force Data, 1996: [United States] (ICPSR 6999)

Released/updated on: 1998-01-13
Geographic coverage: United States
In 1996, the Bureau of Justice Statistics sponsored a pretest of a survey instrument designed to compile data on citizen contacts with police, including contacts in which police use force. The survey, which involved interviews (both face-to-face and by phone) carried out by the United States Census Bureau, was conducted as a special supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), an ongoing household survey of the American public that elicits information concerning recent crime victimization experiences. Questions asked in the supplement covered reasons for contact with police officer(s), characteristics of the officer, weapons used by the officer, whether there were any injuries involved in the confrontation between the household member and the officer, whether drugs were involved in the incident, type of offense the respondent was charged with, and whether any citizen action was taken. Demographic variables include race, sex, and age.
Curated

Public Attitudes Toward Lawyers and Legal Disputes, 1993: [United States] (ICPSR 6403)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
This data collection examines public attitudes, opinions, and experiences with respect to lawyers and legal disputes and the effects that prior experiences have on the future likelihood of using the law to settle disputes. Variables refer to types and outcomes of legal disputes, selection of lawyers, gender and age of lawyers, number of contacts, size of legal firms, the extent of services the lawyers provided to clients, and the behavior of lawyers. The unit of analysis is the individual.
Curated

Public Attitudes Toward the Criminal Justice System and Criminal Victimization in North Carolina, 1971 (ICPSR 7670)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, United States
Time period: 1971-03-01--1971-07-01
This data collection contains the results of a survey of North Carolinians' attitudes about crime. The survey was conducted in 1971 by the Institute for Research in Social Science at the University of North Carolina. The purpose of the study was to assist agencies in assessing public attitudes toward policies in effect or under consideration, and to measure crime in the state. Questions were asked regarding citizen attitudes toward crime (e.g., the most important problem facing the country, the meaning of "law and order", and the degree of worry about and precaution taken by respondents against personal and property crimes), the frequency of respondents' criminal victimization, the reporting of crime by respondents, the amount of contact and satisfaction with criminal justice agencies such as the police, and respondents' attitudes toward the agencies that were part of the legal justice system in North Carolina. Other data include respondents' receipt of government scholarships, loans, and social services, and information about respondents' political participation, party/candidate support, feelings of political efficacy, and voting history. In addition, respondents were asked the degree of their knowledge and sources of information about federal district court decisions (e.g., on school busing in North Carolina), drug arrests, and the North Carolina Council on Crime and Delinquency. Demographic data include household composition, race, age, sex, marital status, occupation, military service, and length of residence.
Curated
Partially restricted

Public Opinion on the Courts in the United States, 2000 (ICPSR 3864)

Released/updated on: 2006-12-15
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-03-22--2000-05-03
This study centered on two questions fundamental to understanding public opinion about the courts: (1) Do African Americans, Latinos, and Whites view the state courts differently? and (2) What impact did recent direct court experience have on people's opinions about state courts? Between March 22, 2000, and May 3, 2000, interviewers conducted 1,567 telephone interviews with randomly selected United States residents. Variables include respondents' gender, race, age, education, and other demographic information, respondents' perception of the fairness of local courts, including whether African Americans and Latinos were discriminated against, whether the respondent or a member of the respondent's household had been involved with the courts in the past 12 months, and if so, how fairly that case was conducted.
Curated

Public Support for Rehabilitation in Ohio, 1996 (ICPSR 2543)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio
Time period: 1996-05-28--1996-08-26
The main focus of this research was on identifying the conditions under which public support for rehabilitation varies. A single, multivariate analysis method was used so that the influence of each respondent, criminal, crime, and treatment characterististic could be determined within the context of all other factors. The research also explored differences between global and specific attitudes toward rehabilitation. Data for this study were collected through a mail survey of 1,000 Ohio residents (Part 1). The initial mailing was sent to all 1,000 members of the sample on May 28, 1996. Several followups were conducted, and data collection efforts ended on August 26, 1996. Questionnaire items elicited demographic, experiential, and attitudinal information from each respondent. To assess the potential influence of offender, offense, and treatment characteristics on the respondent's support for rehabilitation, several variables were combined to create a factorial vignette. This method allowed the independent effects of each factor on support for rehabilitation to be determined. The respondents were asked to express their agreement or disagreement with five statements following the vignette: (1) general support for rehabilitation, (2) effectiveness of intervention, (3) basing release decisions on progress in rehabilitation programs, (4) individualizing sentences to fit treatment needs, and (5) expanding treatment opportunities for offenders. Types of offenses included in the vignettes were robbery, burglary, aggravated assault, larceny, motor vehicle theft, fraud, drug sales, and drug use. These offenses were selected since they are well-known to the public, offenders are arrested for these offenses fairly frequently, and the offenses are potentially punishable by a sentence of either prison or probation. Several attributes within the particular offenses in the vignettes were designed to assess the influence of different levels of harm, either financial or physical. Offender characteristics and offense selection for use in the vignettes were weighted by their frequency of arrests as reported in the Federal Bureau of Investigation's 1995 Uniform Crime Report data. A rating of the seriousness of each offense was assigned using a separate survey of 118 undergraduate university students (Part 2), and the resulting seriousness score was used in the analysis of the vignettes. Additional items on the mail survey instrument assessed the respondent's global and specific attitudes toward treatment. Independent variables from the mail survey include the respondent's age, education, income category, sex, race, political party, rating of political conservativism, personal contact with offenders, religious identity salience, religiosity, attitudes toward biblical literalness and religious forgiveness, fear of crime, and victimization. Variables from the vignettes examined whether support for rehabilitation was influenced by offender age, race, sex, type of offense committed, employment status, substance use, prior record, sentence, and treatment program. Global support for rehabilitation was measured by responses to two questions: what the respondent thought the main emphasis in most prisons was (to punish, to rehabilitate, to protect society), and what the main emphasis should be. Items assessed variations in the respondent's attitudes toward rehabilitation by offender's age, sex, and prior record, location of treatment, and the type of treatment provided. Variables from the crime seriousness survey recorded the respondent's rating of various crime events, including assault and robbery (with or without a weapon, with varying degrees of injury, or no injury to the victim), burglary, larceny, and auto theft (with varying values of the property stolen), drug dealing, drug use, and writing bad checks.
Curated
Restricted

Racialized Cues and Support for Justice Reinvestment: A Mixed-Method Study of Public Opinion, Boston, 2016 (ICPSR 36778)

Released/updated on: 2018-05-16
Geographic coverage: United States, Massachusetts, Boston
Time period: 2016-09-01--2016-10-01

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

Within the past fifteen years, policymakers across the country have increasingly supported criminal justice reforms designed to reduce the scope of mass incarceration in favor of less costly, more evidence-based approaches to preventing and responding to crime. One of the primary reform efforts is the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), a public-private partnership through which state governments work to diagnose the primary drivers of their state incarceration rates, reform their sentencing policies to send fewer nonviolent offenders to prison, and reinvest the saved money that used to go into prisons into alternatives to incarceration, instead.

This mixed-methods study sought to assess public opinion about the justice reinvestment paradigm of reform and to determine whether exposure to racialized and race-neutral cues affects people's willingness to allocate money into criminal justice institutions versus community-based social services in order to reduce and prevent crime.

Curated

Seattle Neighborhoods and Crime Survey, 2002-2003 (ICPSR 28701)

Released/updated on: 2010-12-10
Geographic coverage: Seattle, United States, Washington
Time period: 2002-01-01--2003-01-01

The objective of the Seattle Neighborhoods and Crime Survey (SNCS) was to test multilevel theories of neighborhood social organization and criminal violence. It was funded by the National Science Foundation (SES-0004324), and the National Consortium on Violence Research (SBR-9513040). Using the concept of differential neighborhood organization, the investigators posited that neighborhood crime is a function of informal social control against crime and informal organization in favor of crime. Informal neighborhood control against crime consists of neighborhood attachment, social capital, and collective efficacy. The study tested the hypothesis that individual social ties are explained by a rational choice model, which in turn produces neighborhood social capital that can be used to achieve collective goals. It also tested the hypothesis that neighborhoods rich in social capital had greater collective efficacy, which in turn, helped produce safe neighborhoods. Organization in favor of crime consists of violent codes of the street. The study tested the hypothesis that residents from disadvantaged neighborhoods tend to distrust police and other agents of conventional institutions, and consequently are more likely to participate in street culture, in which violence is a way of obtaining street credibility and status, as well as resolving disputes. The project has also examined dimensions of neighboring, and the causes and consequences of fear of crime.

The study used a telephone survey of households within all 123 census tracts in the city of Seattle, WA, conducted in 2002-2003. The sampling frame was designed by investigators at the University of Washington, with three objectives in mind: (a) to gain a random sample of households within each of 123 census tracts; (b) to obtain a disproportionate number of racial and ethnic minorities using an ethnic oversample; and (c) to obtain a replication sample of Terrance Miethe's 1990 victimization survey in 100 Seattle neighborhoods [Testing Theories of Criminality and Victimization in Seattle, 1960-1990]. Specific samples were drawn by Genesys, a sampling firm in Philadelphia, PA, using a constantly-updated compilation of white pages. Telephone interviews were conducted by the Social and Behavioral Research Institute at California State University, San Marcos, using computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) technology.

Respondents were asked about household demographics, such as race, gender, residential mobility, age distribution of the household, and income, their perceptions and assessments of their neighborhoods (including safety, disorder, and crime), neighbors, and relations with police. A variety of questions about neighboring were asked, including social capital (intergenerational closure, reciprocated exchange, and participation in neighborhood associations), attachment to their neighborhood, and collective efficacy (child-centered social control). Respondents were asked about routine activities including taking steps to protect their homes, spending time in bars and nightclubs, and leaving their home unattended. Questions about fear of crime included personal fear as well as altruistic fear for other members of the household, and questions about racial attitudes included residential preferences by race composition of the neighborhood. A victimization inventory modeled after the National Crime Victimization Survey was used for burglary, vandalism, stolen property, violence, and robbery. Demographic information includes age, race, sex, education, martial status, household income, whether respondent was a student, employment status, religious affiliation, approximate value of home, monthly rent including utilities, residence history in the last five years, whether respondent was born in the Unites States, and number of people currently living in the respondent's household.

Curated

Survey of Victimization and Attitudes Towards Crime and Law Enforcement in Boston and Chicago, 1966 (ICPSR 9085)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois, Massachusetts, Boston
Time period: 1965-07-01--1966-06-30
This data collection was designed to explore attitudes toward crime and the police and to examine factors related to criminal victimization and the reporting of crime incidents to the police. It combines a victimization survey with data on citizens' attitudes toward crime and the police, and information on behavior in response to crime or the threat of crime. Variables provide information about respondents' neighborhood characteristics, individual demographic attributes (e.g., age, race, gender, education, income, religion, marital status), perceptions of crime, social environment, respondents' views of the criminal justice system, experiences with the police, criminal victimization experiences, protective measures taken, victim-offender relationship, characteristics of the crime incident, police response to crime reports, and victim perceptions of and satisfaction with police response.