Showing 1 – 45 of 45 results.
Curated
Characteristics of High and Low Crime Neighborhoods in Atlanta, 1980 (ICPSR 7951)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Atlanta, Georgia
Time period: 1980-08-01--1980-10-01
This study examines the question of how some urban neighborhoods maintain a low crime rate despite their proximity and similarity to relatively high crime areas. The purpose of the study is to investigate differences in various dimensions of the concept of territoriality (spatial identity, local ties, social cohesion, informal social control) and physical characteristics (land use, housing, street type, boundary characteristics) in three pairs of neighborhoods in Atlanta, Georgia. The study neighborhoods were selected by locating pairs of adjacent neighborhoods with distinctly different crime levels. The criteria for selection, other than the difference in crime rates and physical adjacency, were comparable racial composition and comparable economic status. This data collection is divided into two files. Part 1, Atlanta Plan File, contains information on every parcel of land within the six neighborhoods in the study. The variables include ownership, type of land use, physical characteristics, characteristics of structures, and assessed value of each parcel of land within the six neighborhoods. This file was used in the data analysis to measure a number of physical characteristics of parcels and blocks in the study neighborhoods, and as the sampling frame for the household survey. The original data were collected by the City of Atlanta Planning Bureau. Part 2, Atlanta Survey File, contains the results of a household survey administered to a stratified random sample of households within each of the study neighborhoods. Variables cover respondents' attitudes and behavior related to the neighborhood, fear of crime, avoidance and protective measures, and victimization experiences. Crime rates, land use, and housing characteristics of the block in which the respondent resided were coded onto each case record.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Citizenship, Democracy, and Drug-Related Violence (CIDENA, 2011) (ICPSR 34670)
Released/updated on: 2013-10-23
Geographic coverage: Estado de México, Nuevo León, Distrito Federal (Mexico), Michoacán, Mexico, Guerrero, Chihuahua, Jalisco
The survey Citizenship, Democracy, and Drug-Related Violence (CIDENA, 2011) was implemented with the goal of providing information towards understanding the complex relationship between society and drug-related violence in Mexico. Cognitive interviews, face-to-face interviews, and list experiments were utilized in Mexico. The survey was conducted in face-to-face interviews (at the residence of the interviewee) based on a sample of men and women over 18 years of age and residents of Mexico. The sample was representative nationwide of 7 states with different levels of violence: High (Chihuahua, Guerrero, Michoacán, and Nuevo León), Intermediate (Jalisco, and Estado de México), and Low (Distrito Federal). These states were selected according to their violence indexes (deaths associated with drug related violence reported in local newspapers). Demographic variables include age, sex, marital status, occupation, party affiliation, territories of residence, education, and income.
Curated
Crime Factors and Neighborhood Decline in Chicago, 1979 (ICPSR 7952)
Released/updated on: 1997-09-26
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
This study explores the relationship between crime and neighborhood deterioration in eight neighborhoods in Chicago. The neighborhoods were selected on the basis of slowly or rapidly appreciating real estate values, stable or changing racial composition, and high or low crime rates. These data provide the results of a telephone survey administered to approximately 400 heads of households in each study neighborhood, a total of 3,310 completed interviews. The survey was designed to measure victimization experience, fear and perceptions of crime, protective measures taken, attitudes toward neighborhood quality and resources, attitudes toward the neighborhood as an investment, and density of community involvement. Each record includes appearance ratings for the block of the respondent's residence and aggregate figures on personal and property victimization for that city block. The aggregate appearance ratings were compiled from windshield surveys taken by trained personnel of the National Opinion Research Center. The criminal victimization figures came from Chicago City Police files.
Curated
Detroit Area Study, 1979: A Study of Metropolitan Issues (ICPSR 9301)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-17
Geographic coverage: Detroit, United States, Michigan
Crime and other matters of criminal justice were the main focus of inquiry for this Detroit Area Study. Respondents were asked to report on incidents of crime against themselves, relatives, and friends. They also were queried about their fears of being victimized by crime and about measures they had undertaken to protect themselves against crime. In addition, the survey elicited views on wide range of criminal justice issues such as the death penalty, the causes of crime and ways to reduce it, the salience of crime as a social problem, the legalization of marijuana use, handgun laws, the criminality of certain acts such as shooting a fleeing burglar, the construction of new prisons, the imposition of new taxes to improve law enforcement, the allocation of federal funds to police and other services, the activities of the police and courts including their fairness toward blacks, and whether or not convicting the innocent was better than letting the guilty go free. The survey also sought respondents' views on other social issues, such as prayer in public schools, labor unions, the Equal Rights amendment, defense spending, abortion, the quality of public schools, and affirmative action. Additional information gathered by the survey includes duration of residence in the tri-county area and at the current address, place of previous residence, moves planned for the future, television viewing habits, which newspapers were read, gun ownership, shopping habits, home and motor vehicle ownership, use of public transportation, travel to work, political and social class affiliation, satisfaction with neighborhoods and with the tri-county area, and information on age, sex, place of birth, marital status, education, employment, occupation, income, religion, race, ethnicity, and household composition.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Drug Use Among Young American Indians: Epidemiology and Prediction, 1993-2006 and 2009-2013 (ICPSR 35062)
Released/updated on: 2015-06-18
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1993-01-01--2000-01-01, 2001-01-01--2006-01-01, 2009-01-01--2013-01-01
The Drug Use Among Young Indians: Epidemiology and Prediction study is an annual surveillance effort assessing the levels and patterns of substance use among American Indian (AI) adolescents attending schools on or near reservations. In addition to annual epidemiology of substance use, data pertaining to the normative environment for adolescent substance use were also obtained. For this data collection data comes from annual in-school surveys completed between the years 1993 to 2006, and 2009 to 2013. Students completed the surveys at school during a specified class period. The dataset contains 534 variables for 26,451 students in grades 7 to 12.
Curated
Governmental Responses to Crime in the United States, 1948-1978 (ICPSR 8076)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1948-01-01--1978-01-01
The Governmental Responses to Crime Project was initiated in October 1978 as a result of the rising crime rate in urban areas of the United States and the wide variety of programs seeking to contain it. The project investigated the way in which urban governments, citizens, newspapers and state governments responded to the growth and increasing complexity of crime during the period from 1948 to 1978. Pertinent variables in this data collection include the number of police officers in cities and police expenditures, changes in laws as crime changes, populations, employment rates, family incomes, percent of non-white population, media tracking of crime, city land area, kinds of crimes, crime rates, actual numbers of offenses, penalties given out for crimes committed (time in jail or prison and fines), focus on crimes within certain geographical areas (from within cities or outside the United States), editorial page content, level of prominence of newspaper articles on individual crimes, and the number of editorials relating to specific crimes.
Curated
ICPSR Instructional Subset: Justifying Violence: Attitudes of American Men, 1969 (ICPSR 7517)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey of attitudes of 1,374 American men aged 16-64 toward violence was conducted in the summer of 1969 by the Survey Research Center of the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan. The investigators examined the level of violence that respondents viewed as justified to accomplish social control and social change and also probed the respondents' personal values, their definition of violence, and their identification with groups involved in violence. To examine the degree of violence that American men felt could be justified for social control, the investigators asked respondents to react to situations involving protests and other disturbances. These situations included hoodlum gang disturbances, student protests, and Black protest demonstrations. The respondents were asked what police actions from "letting it go" to "shooting to kill" were appropriate as police control measures. Several such items were combined to form an index of "violence for social control." In questions dealing with the level of violence necessary to bring about social change, respondents were asked if they agreed with the necessity of "protest in which some people will be killed" in order to bring about changes sought by Blacks, by student demonstrators, and in general. These items were combined into an index of "violence for social change." This instructional subset from the original study also includes an initial series of questions that asked whether respondents viewed such actions as protest demonstrations, police frisking, looting, burglary, and draft-card burning as violence. This was followed by inquiries into the possible causes of violence and motives of those who participate in violence. Another set of variables deals with respondents' relative views of property damage and personal injury and their opinions on the use of violence to prevent violence, violence as a teaching tool, forgiveness of one's attacker, and the roles of courts and police agencies in combating crime. The subset concludes with a number of derived indices of violence attitudes that drew upon survey questions to form general patterns. These derived indices include retributive justice, self-defense, humanism, property-person priority, kindness, police-court power, court fairness, social causes, trust, and peer consensus indices. Finally, several summary measures gauge the respondents' general approval of violence for social control and social change purposes. Demographic variables specify education, age, religion, socioeconomic status, and region of the country.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Illegal Immigration, Immigration Enforcement Policies, and American Citizens' Victimization Risk, [United States], 2005-2015 (ICPSR 39329)
Released/updated on: 2026-01-28
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2005-01-01--2015-01-01
This project was designed to examine two research questions:
- Does living in a county with a larger or growing share of undocumented immigrants increase personal non-fatal victimization risk?
- Does the presence of selected immigration policies within U.S. communities--the 2008 Secure Communities program, Section 287(g) of the 1996 Immigration and Nationality Act task force agreements and jail enforcement programs, or "sanctuary" anti-detainer policies--and the actual immigration enforcement applied impact personal non-fatal victimization risk?
These questions were addressed with a longitudinal multilevel dataset that integrated publicly accessible county-level data on legal and undocumented immigrant concentration, immigration policies, and immigration law enforcement actions to individual-level panel data on victimization from the restricted-use, area-identified, 2005-2015 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). Contextual data on social, economic, and racial-ethnic indicators at the county- and tract-level were also used.
This collection includes analytic datasets drawn from publicly accessible secondary sources and syntax files containing code for variable construction. The restricted NCVS data will not be archived at ICPSR.
Curated
Immigrant Populations as Victims in New York City and Philadelphia, 1994 (ICPSR 6793)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
The purpose of this study was to examine interrelated issues surrounding the use of the criminal justice system by immigrant victims and to identify ways to improve the criminal justice response to immigrants' needs and problems. Two cities, New York City and Philadelphia, were selected for intensive investigation of victimization of immigrants. In each of these cities, three immigrant communities in a neighborhood were chosen for participation. In New York's Jackson Heights area, Colombians, Dominicans, and Indians were the ethnic groups studied. In Philadelphia's Logan section, Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Koreans were surveyed. In all, 87 Jackson Heights victims were interviewed and 26 Philadelphia victims were interviewed. The victim survey questions addressed can be broadly divided into two categories: issues pertaining to crime reporting and involvement with the court system by immigrant victims. Variables include type of crime, respondent's role in the incident, relationship to the perpetrator, whether the incident was reported to police, and who reported the incident. Respondents were also asked whether they were asked to go to court, whether they understood what the people in court said to them, whether they understood what was happening in their case, and, if victimized again, whether they would report the incident to the police.
Curated
Impact of Immigration on Ethnic-Specific Violence in Miami, Florida, 1997 (ICPSR 3872)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Florida, Miami
Does the rate of violent victimization differ across race and ethnic groups? In an effort to answer this question, this study sought to examine the violent victimization rate and the factors influencing ethnic-specific rates of violence in the city of Miami. Administrative data were obtained from the United States Bureau of the Census and the Miami Police Department Research Unit. For the groups of people identified as Afro Americans, Latinos, and Haitians, the numbers who were victims of aggravated assault and robbery in 1997 are included along with the assault and robbery rates for each group. The remaining variables are the percent of female-headed households, percent below poverty line, percent of young males out of the labor force and unemployed, residential instability, vacant and household instability, and the percent of 1980-1990 immigrants.
Curated
Impacts of Specific Incivilities on Responses to Crime and Local Commitment, 1979-1994: [Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and Seattle] (ICPSR 2520)
Released/updated on: 2008-04-23
Geographic coverage: Baltimore, Seattle, Minneapolis, United States, Chicago, Atlanta, Illinois, St. Paul, Minnesota, Georgia, Maryland, Washington
Time period: 1979-01-01--1994-01-01
This data collection was designed to test the "incivilities thesis": that incivilities such as extant neighborhood physical conditions of disrepair or abandonment and troubling street behaviors contribute to residents' concerns for personal safety and their desire to leave their neighborhood. The collection examines between-individual versus between-neighborhood and between-city differences with respect to fear of crime and neighborhood commitment and also explores whether some perceived incivilities are more relevant to these outcomes than others. The data represent a secondary analysis of five ICPSR collections: (1) CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH AND LOW CRIME NEIGHBORHOODS IN ATLANTA, 1980 (ICPSR 7951), (2) CRIME CHANGES IN BALTIMORE, 1970-1994 (ICPSR 2352), (3) CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND COMMUNITY CRIME PREVENTION, 1979: CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AREA SURVEY (ICPSR 8086), (4) CRIME, FEAR, AND CONTROL IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTERS: MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL, 1970-1982 (ICPSR 8167), and (5) TESTING THEORIES OF CRIMINALITY AND VICTIMIZATION IN SEATTLE, 1960-1990 (ICPSR 9741). Part 1, Survey Data, is an individual-level file that contains measures of residents' fear of victimization, avoidance of dangerous places, self-protection, neighborhood satisfaction, perceived incivilities (presence of litter, abandoned buildings, vandalism, and teens congregating), and demographic variables such as sex, age, and education. Part 2, Neighborhood Data, contains crime data and demographic variables from Part 1 aggregated to the neighborhood level, including percentage of the neighborhood that was African-American, gender percentages, average age and educational attainment of residents, average household size and length of residence, and information on home ownership.
Curated
Intimate Partner Homicide in California, 1987-2000 (ICPSR 3501)
Released/updated on: 2003-06-19
Geographic coverage: United States, California
Time period: 1987-01-01--2000-01-01
Since 1976, the United States has witnessed a steady and precipitous decline in intimate partner homicides. This study builds on the work of Dugan et al. (1999, 2000) and Browne and Williams (1989) by examining, in greater detail, the relationship between intimate partner homicide and gender, race, criminal justice system response, and domestic violence services. Specifically, the study examines the net effect of criminal justice system response and federally-funded domestic violence shelters on victimization of white, African American, and Hispanic males and females. This study used aggregated data from the 58 counties in California from 1987 to 2000. Homicide data were gathered by the State of California Department of Justice, Criminal Justice Statistics Center. Data on domestic violence resources were obtained from the Governor's Office of Criminal Justice Planning, Domestic Violence Branch, in the form of detailed reports from domestic violence shelters in the state. Based on these records, the researchers computed the number of federally-funded shelter-based organizations in a given county over time. Data on criminal justice responses at the county level were gathered from the State of California Department of Justice, Criminal Justice Statistics Center. These data included domestic violence arrests and any convictions and incarceration that followed those arrests. The researchers disaggregated these criminal justice system measures by race and gender. In order to account for population differences and changes over time, rates were computed per 100,000 adults (age 18 and older).
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Monitoring the Future: A Continuing Study of American Youth (12th-Grade Survey), 2018 (ICPSR 37416)
Released/updated on: 2019-11-19
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey of 12th-grade students is part of a series that explores changes in important values, behaviors, and lifestyle orientations of contemporary American youth. Students are randomly assigned to complete one of six questionnaires, each with a different subset of topical questions, but all containing a set of "core" questions on demographics and drug use. There are about 1,400 variables across the questionnaires. Drugs covered by this survey include tobacco, smokeless tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, hashish, prescription medications, over-the-counter medications, LSD, hallucinogens, amphetamines (stimulants), Ritalin (methylphenidate), Quaaludes (methaqualone), sedatives/barbiturates, tranquilizers, cocaine, crack cocaine, GHB (gamma hydroxybutyrate), ecstasy, methamphetamine, and heroin. Other topics include attitudes toward religion, changing roles for women, educational aspirations, self-esteem, exposure to drug education, and violence and crime (both in and out of school).
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Monitoring the Future: A Continuing Study of American Youth (12th-Grade Survey), 2019 (ICPSR 37841)
Released/updated on: 2020-10-29
Geographic coverage: United States
These surveys of 12th-grade students are part of a series that explores changes in important values, behaviors, and lifestyle orientations of contemporary American youth. Students are randomly assigned to complete one of six questionnaires, each with a different subset of topical questions, but all containing a set of "core" questions on demographics and drug use. There are about 1,400 variables across the questionnaires. Drugs covered by this survey include tobacco, smokeless tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, hashish, prescription medications, over-the-counter medications, LSD, hallucinogens, amphetamines (stimulants), Ritalin (methylphenidate), sedatives/barbiturates, tranquilizers, cocaine, crack cocaine, GHB (gamma hydroxybutyrate), ecstasy, methamphetamine, and heroin. Other topics include attitudes toward religion, changing roles for women, educational aspirations, self-esteem, exposure to drug education, and violence and crime (both in and out of school).
Highlights for 2019:
- Change in methodology: half of the MTF schools completed in-class surveys on tablets loaded with the survey; the other half completed traditional paper-and-pencil surveys. Also see the Methodology section on this page for an overview and the codebook for details.
- Expansion and revision of the study documentation in the codebook
- New documentation available for download detailing the question adds/drops/changes to the surveys
- Availability of supplemental data sets for previously unreleased questions
Two supplemental data files (DS8 and DS9) have been included this year by the Principal Investigators. These files each include three administrative variables for year (V1), form (V3), and ID (RESPONDENT_ID) along with a few additional variables of survey questions not previously released for Form 5 (DS8) and Form 6 (DS9) between the years 2016 to 2018. These same variables are already present in the main 2019 data files for Form 5 (DS6) and Form 6 (DS7). The front section of the codebook provides details about each of the variables. There are also instructions on how to merge the supplemental data on to the main data files for the previous three years:
- 2018 data (ICPSR 37416)
- 2017 data (ICPSR 37182)
- 2016 data (ICPSR 36798)
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Monitoring the Future: A Continuing Study of American Youth (12th-Grade Survey), 2020 (ICPSR 38156)
Released/updated on: 2021-10-26
Geographic coverage: United States
This survey of 12th-grade students is part of a series that explores changes in important values, behaviors, and lifestyle orientations of contemporary American youth. Students are randomly assigned to complete one of six questionnaires, each with a different subset of topical questions, but all containing a set of "core" questions on demographics and drug use. There are about 1,400 variables across the questionnaires. Drugs covered by this survey include tobacco, smokeless tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, hashish, prescription medications, over-the-counter medications, LSD, hallucinogens, amphetamines (stimulants), Ritalin (methylphenidate), barbiturates (tranquilizers), cocaine, crack cocaine, GHB (gamma hydroxybutyrate), ecstasy, methamphetamine, and heroin. Other topics include attitudes toward religion, changing roles for women, educational aspirations, self-esteem, exposure to drug education, and violence and crime (both in and out of school).
Highlights for 2020:
- All students recorded their survey answers on tablets that the project brought to the schools, preloaded with the MTF surveys.
- Data collection was halted prematurely on March 15, 2020 when the University of Michigan stopped all projects that involved face-to-face data collection because of COVID-19 concerns. This resulted in a 2020 sample size about 25% the size of a regular data collection.
- Guidance for combining grades for analysis: see Appendix C of the codebook.
- Information about potential mode effects for questions on student attitudes and beliefs when comparing previous years' paper-based survey responses to the current tablet method of collection. Please see the codebook Introduction - Survey Mode section for details.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Monitoring the Future: A Continuing Study of American Youth (8th- and 10th-Grade Surveys), 2018 (ICPSR 37415)
Released/updated on: 2019-10-31
Geographic coverage: United States
These surveys of 8th- and 10th-grade students are part of a series that explores changes in important values, behaviors, and lifestyle orientations of contemporary American youth. Students in each grade are randomly assigned to complete one of four questionnaires, each with a different subset of topical questions but containing a set of "core" questions on demographics and drug use. There are more than 450 variables across the questionnaires. Drugs covered by this survey include amphetamines (stimulants), barbiturates (tranquilizers), other prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, tobacco, smokeless tobacco, vaping, alcohol, inhalants, steroids, marijuana, hashish, LSD, hallucinogens, cocaine, crack, ecstasy, methamphetamine, and injectable drugs such as heroin.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Monitoring the Future: A Continuing Study of American Youth (8th- and 10th-Grade Surveys), 2019 (ICPSR 37842)
Released/updated on: 2020-10-29
Geographic coverage: United States
These surveys of 8th- and 10th-grade students are part of a series that explores changes in important values, behaviors, and lifestyle orientations of contemporary American youth. Students in each grade are randomly assigned to complete one of four questionnaires, each with a different subset of topical questions but containing a set of "core" questions on demographics and drug use. There are more than 500 variables across the questionnaires. Drugs covered by this survey include amphetamines (stimulants), barbiturates (tranquilizers), other prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, tobacco, smokeless tobacco, vaping, alcohol, inhalants, steroids, marijuana, hashish, LSD, hallucinogens, cocaine, crack, ecstasy, methamphetamine, and injectable drugs such as heroin.
Highlights for 2019:
- Change in methodology: half of the MTF schools completed in-class surveys on tablets loaded with the survey; the other half completed traditional paper-and-pencil surveys. Also see the Methodology section on this page for an overview and the codebook for details.
- Expansion and revision of the study documentation in the codebook
- New documentation available for download detailing the question adds/drops/changes to the surveys
- Availability of supplemental data sets for previously unreleased questions
A supplemental data file (DS2) has been included this year by the Principal Investigators. This file includes 17 variables (6 administrative and 11 survey questions) and 93,034 cases from the years 2016 to 2018. These same 11 variables are already in the main data file (DS1) for 2019. The front section of the codebook provides details about each of the variables. There are also instructions on how to merge the supplemental data on to the main data files for the previous three years:
- 2018 data (ICPSR 37415)
- 2017 data (ICPSR 37183)
- 2016 data (ICPSR 36799)
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Monitoring the Future: A Continuing Study of American Youth (8th- and 10th-Grade Surveys), 2020 (ICPSR 38189)
Released/updated on: 2021-10-26
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2020-01-01--2020-12-31
These surveys of 8th- and 10th-grade students are part of a series that explores changes in important values, behaviors, and lifestyle orientations of contemporary American youth. Students in each grade are randomly assigned to complete one of four questionnaires, each with a different subset of topical questions but containing a set of "core" questions on demographics and drug use. There are more than 500 variables across the questionnaires. Drugs covered by this survey include amphetamines (stimulants), barbiturates (tranquilizers), other prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, tobacco, smokeless tobacco, vaping, alcohol, inhalants, steroids, marijuana, hashish, LSD, hallucinogens, cocaine, crack, ecstasy, methamphetamine, and injectable drugs such as heroin.
Highlights for 2020:
- All students recorded their survey answers on tablets that the project brought to the schools, preloaded with the MTF surveys.
- Data collection was halted prematurely on March 15, 2020 when the University of Michigan stopped all projects that involved face-to-face data collection because of COVID-19 concerns. This resulted in a 2020 sample size about 25% the size of a regular data collection.
- Guidance for combining grades for analysis: see Appendix C of the codebook
- Information about potential mode effects for questions on student attitudes and beliefs when comparing previous years' paper-based survey responses to the current tablet method of collection. Please see the codebook Introduction - Survey Mode section for details.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Monitoring the Future: A Continuing Study of American Youth (8th- and 10th-Grade Surveys), 2021 (ICPSR 38502)
Released/updated on: 2022-10-31
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2021-01-01--2021-12-31
These surveys of 8th- and 10th-grade students are part of a series that explores changes in important values, behaviors, and lifestyle orientations of contemporary American youth. Students in each grade are randomly assigned to complete one of four questionnaires, each with a different subset of topical questions but containing a set of "core" questions on demographics and drug use. There are more than 450 variables across the questionnaires. Drugs covered by this survey include amphetamines (stimulants), barbiturates (tranquilizers), other prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, tobacco, smokeless tobacco, alcohol, inhalants, steroids, marijuana, hashish, LSD, hallucinogens, cocaine, crack, ecstasy, methamphetamine, and injectable drugs such as heroin.
Highlights for 2021:
- Data collection resumed in 2021, with a change to all web-based surveys.
- Students completed the surveys on their personal or school-provided device.
- Non-survey variables have been changed or added to facilitate analyses. For details, please see the codebook section "MTF Variable Information - Non-survey variables included in the data files - Survey mode and design variables for 2021".
- Information about "screen break" issues, where series of questions were originally presented differently in the web-based survey as compared to the 2019/2020 tablet surveys. Please see the codebook and Appendix D for details.
Curated
National Crime Surveys: Cities, 1972-1975 (ICPSR 7658)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: Oregon, Milwaukee, Detroit, United States, Cincinnati, Oakland, Cleveland, New York City, San Diego, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, New Orleans, Denver, Dallas, St. Louis, Wisconsin, Buffalo, Boston, Pittsburgh, District of Columbia, Chicago, Minnesota, California, Florida, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Miami, San Francisco, Baltimore, Illinois, Texas, Portland (Oregon), Louisiana, Ohio, Los Angeles, Newark, Georgia, Maryland, Philadelphia, Houston
Time period: 1972-01-01--1975-01-01
This sample of the National Crime Survey contains information about victimization in 26 central cities in the United States. The data are designed to achieve three primary objectives: 1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, 2) to estimate the numbers and types of crimes not reported to police, and 3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes and permit reliable comparisons over time and between areas of the country. Information about each household or personal victimization was recorded. The data include type of crime (attempts are covered as well), description of offender, severity of crime, injuries or losses, time and place of occurrence, age, race and sex of offender(s), relationship of offenders to victims, education, migration, labor force status, occupation, and income of persons involved.
Curated
National Crime Surveys Extract: Personal Crime Longitudinal Files, 1976-1982 (ICPSR 8315)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1976-01-01--1982-01-01
The National Crime Survey (NCS) collects data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing national survey of households and household members. Only data for robbery and assaults are included in this dataset. There are two data files: Assault Victim Experiences, and Victim and Non-Victim Responses. Items included are time and place of occurrence, injuries suffered, medical expenses incurred, number, age, race, and sex of offender(s), relationship of offender(s) to victim, marital status, employment, military experience, and residency.
Curated
National Crime Surveys Longitudinal File, 1988-1989: [Selected Variables] (ICPSR 6063)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1988-07-01--1989-12-01
This longitudinal file for the National Crime Surveys (NCS) contains selected variables related to whether a crime was reported to the police for households that responded to the NCS on three consecutive interviews between July 1988 and December 1989 and had experienced at least one criminal victimization during that time period. Variable names, for the most part, are identical to those used in the hierarchical files currently available for the National Crime Surveys (see NATIONAL CRIME SURVEYS: NATIONAL SAMPLE, 1986-1991 [NEAR-TERM DATA] [ICPSR 8864]). Three new variables were created, and one existing variable was altered. The TIME variable describes whether the interview was the first, second, or third for the household in the period between July 1988 and December 1989. V4410 was recoded to give the most important reason the crime was not reported to the police for all households that responded to questions V4390-V4410. RELNOFF was created from variables V4209-V4267 to reflect the closest relation any offender had to the victim, and INJURE was created from variables V4100-V4107 to indicate minor injury, serious injury, or none at all. The file is sorted by households.
Curated
National Crime Surveys: National Sample, 1973-1983 (ICPSR 7635)
Released/updated on: 1998-10-05
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1973-01-01--1983-01-01
The National Crime Survey (NCS), a study of personal and
household victimization, measures victimization for six selected
crimes, including attempts. The NCS was designed to achieve three
primary objectives: to develop detailed information about the victims
and consequences of crime, to estimate the number and types of crimes
not reported to police, and to provide uniform measures of selected
types of crime. The surveys cover the following types of crimes,
including attempts: rape, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny, and
auto or motor vehicle theft. Crimes such as murder, kidnapping,
shoplifting, and gambling are not covered. Questions designed to
obtain data on the characteristics and circumstances of the
victimization were asked in each incident report. Items such as time
and place of occurrence, injuries suffered, medical expenses incurred,
number, age, race, and sex of offender(s), relationship of offender(s)
to victim (stranger, casual acquaintance, relative, etc.), and other
detailed data relevant to a complete description of the incident were
included. Legal and technical terms, such as assault and larceny, were
avoided during the interviews. Incidents were later classified in more
technical terms based upon the presence or absence of certain
elements. In addition, data were collected in the study to obtain
information on the victims' education, migration, labor force status,
occupation, and income. Full data for each year are contained in Parts
101-110. Incident-level extract files (Parts 1-10, 41) are available
to provide users with files that are easy to manipulate. The
incident-level datasets contain each incident record that appears in
the full sample file, the victim's person record, and the victim's
household information. These data include person and household
information for incidents only. Subsetted person-level files also are
available as Parts 50-79. All of the variables for victims are
repeated for a maximum of four incidents per victim. There is one
person-level subset file for each interview quarter of the complete
national sample from 1973 through the second interview quarter in
1980.
Curated
National Crime Surveys: National Sample, 1979-1987 [Revised Questionnaire] (ICPSR 8608)
Released/updated on: 2004-06-17
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1979-01-01--1987-01-01
The purpose of the National Crime Surveys is to provide
data on the level of crime victimization in the United States and to
collect data on the characteristics of crime incidents and victims.
Information about each household and personal victimization was
recorded. The data include type of crime, description of the offender,
severity of crime, injuries or losses, and demographic characteristics
of household members.
Curated
National Crime Surveys: National Sample, 1986-1992 [Near-Term Data] (ICPSR 8864)
Released/updated on: 2000-09-11
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1986-01-01--1993-01-01
The objective of the National Crime Surveys is to provide data on the level of crime victimization in the United States and to collect information on the characteristics of crime incidents and victims. Each respondent was asked a series of screen questions to determine if he or she was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. Screen questions cover the following types of crimes, including attempts: rape, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. The data include type of crime, description of the offender, severity of the crime, injuries or losses, and demographic information on household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, marital status, and military history.
Curated
National Crime Surveys: National Sample of Rape Victims, 1973-1982 (ICPSR 8625)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1973-01-01--1982-01-01
The purpose of this study was to provide an in-depth look
at rapes and attempted rapes in the United States. Part 1 of the
collection offers data on rape victims and contains variables
regarding the characteristics of the crime, such as the setting, the
relationship between the victim and offender, the likelihood of
injury, and the reasons why rape is not reported to police. Part 2
contains data on a control group of females who were victims of no
crime or of crimes other than rape. The information contained is
similar to that found in Part 1.
Curated
National Crime Surveys: Redesign Data, 1975-1979 (ICPSR 8484)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1975-01-01--1979-06-01
These data are a product of the National Crime Surveys Redesign Project. The purpose of the data collection was to create several different data files from existing public-use National Crime Surveys files. For each crime, information is gathered on the victim's housing unit and household and the incident itself. A personal history and interview are also included. Several data files contain National Crime Survey and Uniform Crime Report data on the following index crimes: robbery, larceny-theft, burglary, motor vehicle theft, rape, and aggravated assault.
Curated
National Crime Surveys: Victim Risk Supplement, 1983 (ICPSR 8316)
Released/updated on: 1999-02-25
Geographic coverage: United States
This special one-time survey was designed to collect data on persons aged 12 and over reporting household victimizations. The supplement, administered over a one-month period as part of the National Crime Survey, gathered data on people's lifestyles in order to determine whether certain lifestyles were related to crime victimization. Five questionnaires used by the Census Bureau for data collection served as the data collection model for this supplement. The first and second questionnaires, VRS-1 and VRS-2, contained basic screen questions and an incident report, respectively. VRS-3, the third questionnaire, was completed for every household member aged 16 or older, and included items specifically designed to determine whether a person's lifestyle at work, home, or during leisure time affected the risk of crime victimization. The interviewers completed the fourth and fifth questionnaires, VRS-4 and VRS-5. They were instructed to answer questions about the respondents' neighborhoods and behavior during the interview.
Curated
National Crime Victimization Survey, 1992-2005: Concatenated Incident-Level Files (ICPSR 4699)
Released/updated on: 2008-12-16
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1992-01-01--2005-01-01
This data collection is an extract created from the individual years of the National Crime Victimization Survey. Each record contains information on a crime incident occurring in the given calendar year. Part 1 contains all crime incidents, and data Part 2 contains the crimes of rape and attempted rape only. The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), previously called the National Crime Surveys (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1973. The NCVS was designed with four primary objectives: (1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected types of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas. The survey categorizes crimes as "personal" or "property." Personal crimes include rape and sexual attack, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, and purse-snatching/pocket-picking, while property crimes include burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft, and vandalism. Each respondent is asked a series of screen questions designed to determine whether she or he was victimized during the six-month period preceding the first day of the month of the interview. A "household respondent" is also asked to report on crimes against the household as a whole (e.g., burglary, motor vehicle theft). The data include type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime, relationship between victim and offender, characteristics of the offender, self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions, consequences of the victimization, type of property lost, whether the crime was reported to police and reasons for reporting or not reporting, and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Basic demographic information such as age, race, gender, and income is also collected, to enable analysis of crime by various subpopulations.
Curated
National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 1995 (ICPSR 6739)
Released/updated on: 1998-04-06
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Surveys (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including type of school, distance from home, and general attendance and monitoring policies. The data present information on the response of the school to student violation of rules, accessibility of drugs, and violence in school, including types of violence and student reaction. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated
National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 1999 (ICPSR 3137)
Released/updated on: 2001-09-20
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in school, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated
National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2001 (ICPSR 3477)
Released/updated on: 2002-09-19
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated
National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2003 (ICPSR 4182)
Released/updated on: 2005-07-29
Geographic coverage: United States
This supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (formerly the National Crime Surveys) was designed to collect data on crime victimization in schools in the United States. Student respondents were asked a series of questions to determine their school attendance in the last six months. Other questions concerning schools were posed, including preventive measures employed by schools, students' participation in after-school activities, students' perception of school rules and enforcement of these rules, the presence of weapons, drugs, alcohol, and gangs in schools, student bullying, hate-related incidents, and attitudinal questions relating to the fear of victimization at school. Other variables cover general violent crimes, personal larceny crimes, and household crimes and offer information on date, time, and place of crime. Demographic characteristics of household members such as age, sex, race, education, employment, median family income, and marital status are provided.
Curated
National Household Education Survey, 1993 (ICPSR 6877)
Released/updated on: 1997-05-30
Geographic coverage: United States
The National Household Education Survey (NHES) series reports information on the condition of education in the United States by collecting data at the household level rather than using a traditional, school-based data collection system. The surveys attempt to address many current issues in education, such as preprimary education, school safety and discipline, adult education, and activities related to citizenship. This data collection has two major components. The School Safety and Discipline (SS&D) component (Part 1) gathered general perceptions of the school learning environment from students in grades 6 through 12 and parents/guardians of students in grades 3 through 12. Respondents were asked about academic challenge, classroom and school discipline, and student norms for hard work and good behavior. They also evaluated the safety of their schools regardless of whether they or their children had been personally victimized. This component incorporated a broad concept of victimization, including measures of "secondary victimization," such as knowledge of and witness to occurrences. These measures were included because these experiences can adversely affect the learning environment, even if the student has not been victimized directly. Parent and youth perceptions of school discipline policy were assessed. Exposure to alcohol and other drugs at school was gauged, as was parent and youth knowledge of alcohol/drug education programs. Perceptions of both parents and youths regarding peer norms for substance use, the availability of alcohol and other drugs at school, and the presence of students under the influence of alcohol or other drugs at school were also collected. Additional items covered parental expectations for academic achievement and for tobacco and alcohol use, parental efforts to educate and protect children regarding safety and substance use, parental involvement in the child's school, and the safety of the school relative to the child's neighborhood. The School Readiness (SR) component (Part 2) covers experiences in early childhood programs, the child's accomplishments and difficulties in several developmental domains, school adjustment and related problems, delayed kindergarten entry, early primary school experiences including repeating grades, the child's general health and nutritional status, home activities, and family characteristics such as stability and economic risk factors. This component of the survey, which encompasses a variety of characteristics important to school readiness, emphasizes the "whole child" approach. Altogether, 10,888 parents/guardians of children aged 3 through 7 or in second grade or below were interviewed. Interviews were conducted with 4,423 parents of preschool children, 2,126 parents of kindergartners, 4,277 parents of primary school children, and 62 parents of home-schooled children.
Curated
National Survey of Adolescents in the United States, 1995 (ICPSR 2833)
Released/updated on: 2000-06-05
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1995-01-01--1995-06-01
The goal of this study was to test specific hypotheses illustrating the relationships among serious victimization experiences, the mental health effects of victimization, substance abuse/use, and delinquent behavior in adolescents. The study assessed familial and nonfamilial types of violence. It was designed as a telephone survey of American youth aged 12-17 living in United States households and residing with a parent or guardian. One parent or guardian in each household was interviewed briefly to establish rapport, secure permission to interview the targeted adolescent, and to ensure the collection of comparative data to examine potential nonresponse bias from households without adolescent participation. All interviews with both parents and adolescents were conducted using Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) technology. From the surveys of parents and adolescents, the principal investigators created one data file by attaching the data from the parents to the records of their respective adolescents. Adolescents were asked whether violence and drug abuse were problems in their schools and communities and what types of violence they had personally witnessed. They were also asked about other stressful events in their lives, such as the loss of a family member, divorce, unemployment, moving to a new home or school, serious illness or injury, and natural disaster. Questions regarding history of sexual assault, physical assault, and harsh physical discipline elicited a description of the event and perpetrator, extent of injuries, age at abuse, whether alcohol or drugs were involved, and who was informed of the incident. Information was also gathered on the delinquent behavior of respondents and their friends, including destruction of property, assault, theft, sexual assault, and gang activity. Other questions covered history of personal and family substance use and mental health indicators, such as major depression, post-traumatic stress disorders, weight changes, sleeping disorders, and problems concentrating. Demographic information was gathered from the adolescents on age, race, gender, number of people living in household, and grade in school. Parents were asked whether they were concerned about violent crime, affordable child care, drug abuse, educational quality, gangs, and the safety of their children at school. In addition, they were questioned about their own victimization experiences and whether they discussed personal safety issues with their children. Parents also supplied demographic information on gender, marital status, number of children, employment status, education, race, and income.
Curated
National Youth Survey [United States]: Wave I, 1976 (ICPSR 8375)
Released/updated on: 2008-08-01
Geographic coverage: United States
This dataset contains parent and youth data for the National Youth Survey. Youths and one of their parents or legal guardians were interviewed in early 1977 about events and behavior occurring during calendar year 1976. Included is information on the demographics and socioeconomic status of respondents, disruptive events in the home, neighborhood problems, parental aspirations for youth, labeling, integration of family and peer contexts, attitudes toward deviance in adults and juveniles, parental discipline, community involvement, and drug use.
Curated
National Youth Survey [United States]: Wave II, 1977 (ICPSR 8424)
Released/updated on: 2008-08-26
Geographic coverage: United States
Youth data for the second wave of the National Youth Survey are contained in this data collection. The first wave was conducted in 1976 (ICPSR 8375). Youths were interviewed in early 1978 about events and behavior that had occurred in 1977. Data were collected on demographic and socioeconomic status of respondents, aspirations, social isolation, normlessness, labeling, attitudes toward deviance, exposure to delinquent peers, commitment to delinquent peers, sex roles, interpersonal violence, exposure to substance abuse, self-reported delinquency, drug and alcohol use, and victimization.
Curated
National Youth Survey [United States]: Wave III, 1978 (ICPSR 8506)
Released/updated on: 2008-09-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Youth data for the third wave of the National Youth Survey are contained in this data collection, which includes data for youth interviewed in 1979 about events and behavior of the preceding year. The first wave of this study was conducted in 1976 (ICPSR 8375) and the second wave in 1977 (ICPSR 8424). Data were collected on the demographic and socioeconomic status of respondents, disruptive events in the home, youth aspirations, expectations for future goals, social isolation, normlessness, labeling, perceived disapproval, attitudes toward deviance, exposure and commitment to delinquent peers, sex roles, attitudes toward sexual assault, interpersonal violence, pressure for substance abuse by peers, exposure to substance abuse by parents, self-reported delinquency, and drug and alcohol use.
Curated
National Youth Survey [United States]: Wave IV, 1979 (ICPSR 8917)
Released/updated on: 2008-09-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Youth data for the fourth wave of the National Youth Survey are contained in this data collection. The first wave of this survey was conducted in 1976 (ICPSR 8375), the second wave in 1977 (ICPSR 8424), and the third wave in 1978 (ICPSR 8506). Data are available in this wave on the demographic and socioeconomic status of respondents, disruptive events in the home, youth aspirations and expectations, social isolation, normlessness, perceived disapproval by parents and peers, attitudes toward deviance, exposure and commitment to delinquent peers, sex roles, interpersonal violence, pressure for substance abuse by peers, self-reported delinquency, drug and alcohol use, and victimization.
Curated
National Youth Survey [United States]: Wave V, 1980 (ICPSR 9112)
Released/updated on: 2008-09-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Youth data for the fifth wave of the National Youth Survey are contained in this collection. The first wave of this survey was conducted in 1976 (ICPSR 8375), the second wave in 1977 (ICPSR 8424), the third wave in 1978 (ICPSR 8506), and the fourth wave in 1979 (ICPSR 8917). For this wave, youths in the United States were interviewed in early 1981 about events and behavior occurring in calendar year 1980. Data are available on the demographic and socioeconomic status of respondents, disruptive events in the home, neighborhood problems, youth aspirations and current successes, normlessness, labeling by parents, friends, and co-workers, perceived disapproval, attitudes toward deviance, exposure and commitment to delinquent peers, sex roles, interpersonal violence, attitudes toward sexual violence, pressure for substance abuse by peers, drug and alcohol use, and victimization.
Curated
National Youth Survey [United States]: Wave VI, 1983 (ICPSR 9948)
Released/updated on: 2008-10-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Youth data for the sixth wave of the National Youth Survey are contained in this collection. This research project, which was designed to gain a better understanding of both conventional and deviant types of behavior by youths, involved collecting information from a representative sample of young people in the United States. The first wave of this survey was conducted in 1976 (ICPSR 8375), the second wave in 1977 (ICPSR 8424), the third wave in 1978 (ICPSR 8506), the fourth wave in 1979 (ICPSR 8917), and the fifth wave in 1980 (ICPSR 9112). For this wave, youths and young adults were interviewed in early 1984 about events and behavior occurring in calendar year 1983, when they were 17 to 26 years of age. Data are available on the demographic and socioeconomic status of respondents, disruptive events for parents, neighborhood problems, employment, children, aspirations and current successes, normlessness, labeling by parents, perceived disapproval by parents, peers, co-workers, and partner, attitudes toward deviance, exposure to delinquent peers, self-reported delinquency, drug and alcohol use, victimization, pregnancy, depression, use of outpatient services, spouse violence by respondent and partner, and sexual activity.
Curated
National Youth Survey [United States]: Wave VII, 1987 (ICPSR 6542)
Released/updated on: 2009-04-01
Geographic coverage: United States
Youth data for the seventh wave of the National Youth Survey are contained in this collection. This research project, designed to gain a better understanding of both conventional and deviant types of behavior by youths, involved collecting information from a representative sample of young people in the United States. The first wave of this survey was conducted in 1976 (ICPSR 8375), the second in 1977 (ICPSR 8424), the third in 1978 (ICPSR 8506), the fourth in 1979 (ICPSR 8917), the fifth in 1980 (ICPSR 9112), and the sixth in 1983 (ICPSR 9948). For this wave, young adults were interviewed in early 1987 about events and behavior occurring in calendar year 1986, when they were 20 to 29 years of age. Data are available on the demographic and socioeconomic status of respondents, parents and friends, neighborhood problems, education, employment, skills, aspirations, encouragement, normlessness, attitudes toward deviance, exposure to delinquent peers, self-reported depression, delinquency, drug and alcohol use, victimization, pregnancy, abortion, use of mental health and outpatient services, violence by respondent and acquaintances, use of controlled drugs, and sexual activity.
Curated
Operation Hardcore [Crime] Evaluation: Los Angeles, 1976-1980 (ICPSR 9038)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California
Time period: 1976-01-01--1980-01-01
This evaluation was developed and implemented by the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office to examine the effectiveness of specialized prosecutorial activities in dealing with the local problem of rising gang violence, in particular the special gang prosecution unit Operation Hardcore. One part of the evaluation was a system performance analysis. The purposes of this system performance analysis were (1) to describe the problems of gang violence in Los Angeles and the ways that incidents of gang violence were handled by the Los Angeles criminal justice system, and (2) to document the activities of Operation Hardcore and its effect on the criminal justice system's handling of the cases prosecuted by that unit. Computer-generated listings from the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office of all individuals referred for prosecution by local police agencies were used to identify those individuals who were subsequently prosecuted by the District Attorney. Data from working files on all cases prosecuted, including copies of police, court, and criminal history records as well as information on case prosecution, were used to describe criminal justice handling. Information from several supplementary sources was also included, such as the automated Prosecutors Management Information System (PROMIS) maintained by the District Attorney's Office, and court records from the Superior Court of California in Los Angeles County, the local felony court.
Curated
Residential Neighborhood Crime Control Project: Hartford, Connecticut, 1973, 1975-1977, 1979 (ICPSR 7682)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States, Connecticut, Hartford
This data collection contains responses to victimization
surveys that were administered as part of both the planning and
evaluation stages of the Hartford Project, a crime opportunity
reduction program implemented in a residential neighborhood in
Hartford, Connecticut, in 1976. The Hartford Project was an experiment
in how to reduce residential burglary and street robbery/purse snatching
and the fear of those crimes. Funded through the Hartford Institute of
Criminal and Social Justice, the project began in 1973. It was based
on a new "environmental" approach to crime prevention: a comprehensive
and integrative view addressing not only the relationship among
citizens, police, and offenders, but also the effect of the physical
environment on their attitudes and behavior. The surveys were
administered by the Center for Survey Research at the University of
Massachusetts at Boston. The Center collected Hartford resident survey
data in five different years: 1973, 1975, 1976, 1977, and 1979. The
1973 survey provided basic data for problem analysis and
planning. These data were updated twice: in 1975 to gather baseline
data for the time of program implementation, and in the spring of 1976
with a survey of households in one targeted neighborhood of Hartford
to provide data for the time of implementation of physical changes
there. Program evaluation surveys were carried out in the spring of
1977 and two years later in 1979. The procedures for each survey were
essentially identical each year in order to ensure comparability
across time. The one exception was the 1976 sample, which was not
independent of the one taken in 1975. In each survey except 1979,
respondents reported on experiences during the preceding 12-month
period. In 1979 the time reference was the past two years. The survey
questions were very similar from year to year, with 1973 being the most
unique. All surveys focused on victimization, fear, and perceived risk
of being victims of the target crimes. Other questions explored
perceptions of and attitudes toward police, neighborhood problems, and
neighbors. The surveys also included questions on household and
respondent characteristics.
Curated
WCBS-TV News/New York Times Race Relations Poll, June 1990 (ICPSR 9502)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-17
Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)
This data collection is a survey of social issues in the New York city area. Respondents were asked for their opinions on the quality of life in New York City, the job being done by Mario Cuomo as governor and David Dinkins as mayor, and the most important problem facing New York City that the mayor needed to address. Additional information was gathered from Black respondents concerning race relations. Items covered were quality of the city's economy, the mayor's handling of race relations in the city, leadership among the Black community, treatment of individuals by courts and police, neighborhood safety of individuals, criminal victimization, media involvement in race relations, and specific incidents of racial insults. Background information on respondents includes political party affiliation, ethnicity, amount of media usage, age, income, sex, religious preference, education, and race.