NCJ Number
206157
Journal
Campus Law Enforcement Journal Volume: 34 Issue: 3 Dated: May/June 2004 Pages: 27-29
Date Published
May 2004
Length
3 pages
Annotation
This study compared the prevalence of on-campus theft to “officially” reported crime categories and assessed the impact of theft victimization on undergraduate perceptions.
Abstract
The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (the Clery Act) was enacted by the United States Congress to ensure that information about criminal activities occurring on United States college campuses would be publicized. The Clery Act requires that all colleges and universities participating in Federal student aid programs prepare and distribute information about the following crimes during the three most recent years: murder, manslaughter, forcible and non-forcible sex offenses, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, arson, hate crime, and all disciplinary referrals for liquor, drug, and weapons violations. Theft is not included as a mandatory reporting category. The current research employed an ex ante and ex post facto design to examine undergraduate on-campus theft victimization among students at a United States university. The ex ante portion of the research examined on-campus theft victimization among undergraduates, while the ex post facto portion examined the consequences of undergraduate on-campus theft victimization. Data included over 3,000 incident reports compiled by the campus security office over a 3-year period and 495 undergraduate survey questionnaire responses. The survey questioned students’ routine activities, university ecology, collegiate lifestyle, and perceptions resulting from on-campus theft victimization. Results of statistical analyses including cross-tabulation, chi square, Pearson r correlation, and regression analysis revealed that theft, in comparison to the crimes stipulated in the Clery Act, is overwhelmingly the most prevalent type of criminal victimization on college campuses. Other findings indicated that freshman, on-campus residents, and student athletes are more likely to be victimized by theft than other students; direct victimization positively impacted student’s perception of risk but was not predictive of fear; and non-victims were more likely to express satisfaction with college than were theft victims. Finally, the experience of indirect victimization was found to be significant in determining perceptions of risk, prevention, deterrence, and satisfaction with college. References