The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

ANNEX 1 2006 DATA TABLES

Table A2.1: Estimates of the extent of victimisation in Scotland, April 2005 - March 2006

1. All survey crime is calculated by adding all household crime and all personal crime together, as the different weights for each do not allow for this to be calculated directly.
2. Upper and lower estimates are based on 95% confidence intervals.
3. Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4988)

Table A2.2: Estimates of the extent of victimisation in Scotland: 1992 to 2005/6

1. All survey crime is calculated by adding all household crime and 'all personal crime' together, as the different weights for each do not allow for this to be calculated directly.
2. Source: 2006 SCVS n= 4988; 2004 SCVS n = 3034; 2003 SCS n = 5,041; 2000 SCS n = 5,059; 1996 SCS n = 5,045; 1993 SCS n = 5,030

Table A2.3: Rates of victimisation in Scotland, per 10,000 households / individuals, April 2005 - March 2006

1. Upper and lower estimates are based on 95% confidence intervals.
2. Rate for all survey crime cannot be calculated because the combination of household and personal crimes cannot be weighted.
3. For violence, theft from the person, assault, robbery, other personal theft and all personal offences rates are quoted per 10,000 adults. For acquisitive crime, vandalism, housebreaking, vehicle offences, bicycle theft, other household theft and all household offences rates are quoted per 10,000 households.
4. For the distinction between crimes which are 'comparable with police' and 'other survey crimes', see Annex 4.
5. Source: 2006 SCVS n = 4988; Motor vehicle owners, n = 3583; Bicycle owners, n = 2041

Table A2.4: Rates of victimisation in Scotland, per 10,000 households / individuals, 1992 to 2005/6

Notes:
1. For violence, theft from the person, assault, robbery, other personal theft and all personal offences, rates are quoted per 10,000 adults. For acquisitive crime, vandalism, housebreaking, vehicle offences, bicycle theft, other household theft and all household offences, rates are quoted per 10,000 households.
2. Rate for all survey crime cannot be calculated because the combination of household and personal crimes cannot be weighted.
3. Source: 2006 SCVS, n = 4988; 2004 SCVS, n = 3034; 2003 SCS, n = 5,041; 2000 SCS, n = 5,059; 1996 SCS, n = 5,045; 1993 SCS n = 5,030

Table A2.5 Prevalence of victimisation: 1992 to 2005/6

Notes:
1. Individual weight is applied for 'All SCVS crimes'. For a description of the weights used in the survey, see Annex 2.
2. Source: 2006 SCVS, n = 4988; 2004 SCVS, n = 3034; 2003 SCS, n = 5,041; 2000 SCS, n = 5,059; 1996 SCS, n = 5,045; 1993 SCS, n = 5,030

Table A3.1 Prevalence of housebreaking by demographic variables, April 2005 - March 2006

Notes:
1. Totals may not equal the sum of columns or rows because of rounding.
2. For an explanation of Scottish * ACORN groups see Annex 5.
3. A dash '-' signifies that no respondents within that demographic group had been victimised.

Table A3.2 Prevalence of vandalism by demographic variables, April 2005 - March 2006

Notes:
1. Totals may not equal the sum of columns or rows because of rounding.
2. For an explanation of Scottish * ACORN groups see Annex 5.
3. A dash '-' signifies that no respondents within that demographic group had been victimised.

Table A3.3 Prevalence of vehicle thefts by demographic variables, April 2005 - March 2006

Notes:
1. Totals may not equal the sum of columns or rows because of rounding.
2. For an explanation of Scottish * ACORN groups see Annex 5.
3. A dash '-' signifies that no respondents within that demographic group had been victimised.

Table A3.4 Prevalence of violent crime by demographic variables, April 2005 - March 2006

Notes:
1. Totals may not equal the sum of columns or rows because of rounding.
2. For an explanation of Scottish * ACORN groups see Annex 5.
3. A dash '-' signifies that no respondents within that demographic group had been victimised.

Table A3.5 Prevalence of victimisation by demographic variables, April 2005 - March 2006

Notes:
1. Totals may not equal the sum of columns or rows because of rounding.
2. For an explanation of Scottish * ACORN groups see Annex 5.
3. A dash '-' signifies that no respondents within that demographic group had been victimised.

Table A3.6: Percentage of crimes reported to the police, 1992 to 2005/6

Notes:
1. 'Don't Knows' were excluded from analysis.
2. Source: 2006 SCVS, n = 4988; 2004 SCVS, n = 3034; 2003 SCS, n = 5,041; 2000 SCS, n = 5,059; 1996 SCS, n = 5,045; 1993 SCS, n = 5,030

Table A3.7: Number and percentage of crimes reported to the police, 2005/6
Estimates are in 000's

Notes:
1. The number of incidents have been grossed up to reflect actual numbers in the population as a whole
2. "Reported to the police" is the proportion of incidents where the survey respondent said that the "police came to know about the matter", which can include being told by the victim or another person, or by being present when the incident took place.
3. Published police recorded crime figures are adjusted to mirror the crimes reflected in the SCS through a survey conducted by Strathclyde Police in February 2003. (More details can be found in Annex 4).
4. This column represents the estimated percentage of SCVS crimes where respondents claimed the crime was reported to the police which were officially recorded by the police.
5. This column represents the percentage of all SCVS crime (whether reported to the police or not) which were estimated to have been officially recorded by the police.
6. The summed figures of 'all survey crimes' reported to the police do not quite add up due to the weighting factor used to calculate the proportion of crimes reported to the police and because calculations were carried out on unrounded figures.
7. Source: 2004 SCVS (n=4,988); adjusted police recorded crime statistics.

Table A4.1 Public perceptions of crime in Scotland, 2006

Notes:
1. Questions: "And now thinking about crime, do you think this is a problem in Scotland today, or not? Options: A big problem, A bit of a problem, Not a problem". How much would you say the crime rate in your local area has changed since two years ago? Would you say there is more, less or about the same? Options: A lot more crime, A little more, About the same, A little less, A lot less.
2. For explanation of Scottish ACORN, see Annex 5.
3. Source: SCVS 2006 (n=4,988)

Table A4.2 Percentage stating that certain crimes are 'very' or 'fairly' common in their local area, 2006

Notes:
1. Questions: "And how common is this in your local area?....." Options: Very common, fairly common, not very common, not at all common.
2. For explanation of Scottish ACORN, see Annex 5.
3. Source: SCVS 2006 Follow Up A respondents (n=2,512)

Table A4.3 Percentage of respondents feeling 'very' or 'fairly' unsafe after dark, 2006

Notes:
1. Questions: "How safe do you feel ( walking alone in your local area after dark / when you are alone at home at night)?" Options: Very safe, fairly safe, not very safe, not at all safe.
2. For explanation of Scottish ACORN, see Annex 5.
3. Source: SCVS 2006 (n=4,988)

Table A4.4 Percentage of respondents feeling 'very' or 'fairly worried' about becoming a victim of crime, 2006

Notes:
1. Questions: "How worried are you about…….? I mean how worried are you about it HAPPENING not how worried you would be if it DID happen?" Options: Very worried, fairly worried, not very worried, not at all worried.
2. For explanation of Scottish ACORN, see Annex 5.
3. Source: SCVS 2006 (n=4,988)

Table A4.5 Percentage of respondents either 'very' or 'fairly worried' about particular crimes (1993-2006)

Source: 2006 SCVS, n = 4988; 2004 SCVS, n = 3034; 2003 SCS, n = 5,041; 2000 SCS, n = 5,059; 1996 SCS, n = 5,045; 1993 SCS, n = 5,030

Table A4.6 Percentage of respondents either 'very' or 'fairly confident' about various aspects of the Scottish Criminal Justice System ( SCJS), 2006

Notes:
1 Questions: "And how confident are you that the Scottish Criminal Justice System……?" Options: Very confident, fairly confident, not very confident, not at all confident.
2. Source: SCVS 2006 Follow Up B respondents (n=2,476)

« Previous | Contents | Next »