Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Barnett-Ryan, C., & Swanson, G. (2008). The role of state programs n NIBRS data quality: A case study of two states. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24, 18–31.
Abstract: This study explores the question of how the organization of state programs might positively influence the data quality of the state's incident-based reporting data and its National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) data submissions. To investigate this topic, the programs of two states (Tennessee and Vermont) identified as adept at resolving data quality issues are described. These descriptions show that these two state programs have taken measures to implement the quality assurance programs and procedures recommended in The Blueprint for the Future of the Uniform Crime Reporting Program: Final Report of the UCR Study. Given that some states have undertaken very different and very aggressive quality control programs, subsequent research should be done to assess the effects of these programs on the quality of NIBRS submissions.

Journal Article 2: Lynch, J.P., & Jarvis, J.P. (2008). Missing data and imputation in the uniform crime reports and the effects on national estimates. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24, 69–85.
Abstract: The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program has been a major source of data on crime since 1929. These data were long considered authoritative, but lately, questions have arisen about their accuracy. Maltz has documented the magnitude of missing data in the series and demonstrated their import for research on policy issues. Maltz's work focuses on agency-level estimates for specific months, but the UCR program was never meant to provide estimates for this unit or time period. So, although Maltz's work is important, it has not addressed the consequences of missing data for the principal purpose of the UCR program—providing annual national estimates of the level and change in crimes known to the police. This article complements Maltz's work by assessing the magnitude and distribution of missing data nationally and their effect on national-level and change estimates. It also examines the effects of the FBI's imputation practices on these estimates.

Journal Article 3: Rennison, C.M., & Melde, C. (2009). Exploring the use of victim surveys to study gang crime: prospects and possibilities. Criminal Justice Review, 34, 489–514.
Abstract: There has long been debate on the appropriate method to collect valid and reliable data on gang member involvement in crime and delinquency. In general, research in this area is based on data from self-report surveys, qualitative field work, and official reports which have well-documented limitations. Given these limitations, triangulation of methods is important to fully understand the unique contribution of gang members to the problem of crime and delinquency. This article proposes an additional data source to study gang violence and enhance triangulation: The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which added a measure of the victim’s perception of the offender’s gang status in 1992. We highlight the advantages and disadvantages of using the NCVS for gang violence research and present a comparison of victimizations reportedly committed by gang and nongang perpetrators across situational, offender, and victim characteristics. Findings demonstrate promise for the use of victimization data in future gang research. Like Egley, Maxson, Miller, and Klein, we encourage the use of a ‘‘pluralistic approach’’ for the study of gangs and suggest that victimization data such as the NCVS be used to provide greater insight into gang crime.