Measuring offending: self-reports, official records, systematic observation and experimentation

Abstract

Criminological knowledge can only be as accurate as the measure of crime itself. Concern with crime measurement starts with the definition of crime, which has consequences for the measurement techniques preferred in different domains. The two main methodologies used to measure criminal behaviour are official records (ORs) and self-reports (SRs) of offending. Although some researchers are concerned about ORs being filtered and deeply flawed estimates of criminal activity, others doubt that people can or will provide reliable information about their own criminal behaviour by completing a survey. In this article, we present a historical overview of the development of these techniques and discuss some of the main results of comparing ORs and SRs of offending. Throughout this discussion, we explore to what extent criminological conclusions differ depending on the measurement method and the potential implications of these differences. Finally, we present some alternative ways to measure offending, such as systematic observation, which could prove to be very important in improving criminological knowledge. In a period when criminologists seem to be increasingly concerned with the validity of measures of crime, this article reviews the major issues in crime measurement, as well as the advantages and limitations of the primary methodologies.