Bureau of Justice Statistics Working Paper Series

Interviewing Conditions in the National 

Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Shannan Catalano, Ph.D.

Bureau of Justice Statistics

810 Seventh Street, NW

Washington, DC 20531

NCJ 249682, August 2016
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

ii

Abstract

Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013, describes 

the circumstances under which interviews are conducted with persons in the National Crime 

Victimization Survey (NCVS) from 1993 to 2013. This BJS Working Paper focuses on two types of 

interview conditions: data collection mode and privacy. Data collection mode is how the interview 

is conducted—whether in person, during a face-to-face contact, or by telephone. Interview privacy 

describes whether a person is interviewed alone or in the presence of others during an in-person 

interview. The Working Paper describes the level and pattern of interviewing conditions in the NCVS 

over time, highlighting variations among select survey respondent characteristics. Findings cover 

the percentage of NCVS interviews conducted in person, the percentage of in-person interviews 

conducted privately, and how these conditions vary by characteristics of survey respondents. This BJS 

Working Paper provides information on the unweighted distribution of interviewing characteristics 

and the demographic characteristics of sample respondents who responded to NCVS interviews. In 

addition, weighted data are used to examine the association among interviewing conditions, crime 

rates, and household composition.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

iii

Table of Contents

Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1. Interviewing Conditions in the NCVS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.1 Data collection mode and interview privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

1.2 Changes in interviewing conditions over time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

2. Data Collection Mode in the NCVS, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.1 Respondent characteristics and data collection mode, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

3. Interview Privacy in the NCVS, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

3.1 Respondent characteristics and interview privacy, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

4. Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

iv

List of Figures

Figure 1. Average annual type of interview, data collection mode, and interview privacy in the NCVS

2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Figure 2. NCVS interviews, by type of interview and whether interview was conducted in person or b

telephone, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 3. In-person interviews conducted with NCVS sample respondents, by whether interview wa

conducted under private or nonprivate interviewing conditions, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 4. Percent of NCVS interviews, by in-person or telephone interviewing conditions

1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Figure 5. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s sex, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 6. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s age, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 7. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s race and Hispanic origin

1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Figure 8. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s marital status, 1993–2013 

Figure 9. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by household composition, 1993–2013 . . . 

Figure 10. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by household income, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . 1

Figure 11. Proxy interviews conducted in the NCVS, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Figure 12. Percent of NCVS in-person interviews, by private or nonprivate interviewing conditions,

1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Figure 13. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s sex, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . 1

Figure 14. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s age, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . 1

Figure 15. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s race and Hispanic origin,

1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Figure 16. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s marital status, 1993–2013 . 2

Figure 17. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by household composition,

1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Figure 18. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by household income, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 19. Rate of violent victimizations for single-person and multiperson households, by whether

in-person interview was administered under private or nonprivate interviewing conditions, 

2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

v

List of Tables

Table 1.  NCVS interviews conducted in non-English language, 2011–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Table 2.  Rate of violent victimization per 1,000 persons age 12 or older, by in-person or telephon

interviewing conditions, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Table 3.  Rate of violent victimization, for in-person interview, by private or nonprivate interviewin

conditions, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

List of Appendix Tables

Appendix table 1. Estimates for figure 2: NCVS interviews, by type of interview and whether intervie

was conducted in person or by telephone, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Appendix table 2. Estimates for figure 3: In-person interviews conducted with NCVS sampl

respondents, by whether interview was conducted under private or nonprivate 

interviewing conditions, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Appendix table 3. Estimates for figure 4: Percent of NCVS interviews, by in-person or telephon

interviewing conditions, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Appendix table 4. Estimates for figure 5: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, b

respondent’s sex, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Appendix table 5. Estimates for figure 6: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, b

respondent’s age, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Appendix table 6. Estimates for figure 7: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, b

respondent’s race and Hispanic origin, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Appendix table 7. Estimates for figure 8: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, b

respondent’s marital status, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Appendix table 8. Estimates for figure 9: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by househol

composition, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Appendix table 9. Estimates for figure 10: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, b

household income, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Appendix table 10. Respondent and household characteristics of NCVS sample members, by in-person or

telephone interviewing conditions, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Appendix table 11. Estimates for figure 11: Proxy interviews conducted in the NCVS, 1993–2013 . . . . . 4
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

vi

Appendix table 12. Estimates for figure 12: Percent of NCVS in-person interviews, by private o

nonprivate interviewing conditions, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Appendix table 13. Estimates for figure 13: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, b

respondent’s sex, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Appendix table 14. Estimates for figure 14: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, b

respondent’s age, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Appendix table 15. Estimates for figure 15: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, b

respondent’s race and Hispanic origin, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Appendix table 16. Estimates for figure 16: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, b

respondent’s marital status, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Appendix table 17. Estimates for figure 17: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, b

household composition, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Appendix table 18. Estimates for figure 18: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, b

household income, 1993–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Appendix table 19. Respondent and household characteristics of NCVS sample, by whether in-perso

interview was conducted under private or nonprivate interviewing conditions, 

2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Appendix table 20. Standard errors for table 2: Rate of violent victimization, by in-person or telephon

interviewing conditions, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Appendix table 21. Standard errors for table 3: Rate of violent victimization for in-person interview, b

private or nonprivate interviewing conditions, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Appendix table 22. Rate of violent victimization for single-person and multiperson households

by whether in-person interview was administered under private or nonprivate 

interviewing conditions, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Appendix table 23. Standard errors for appendix table 22: Rate of violent victimization for single-perso

and multiperson households, by whether in-person interview was administered 

under private or nonprivate interviewing conditions, 2009–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

1

Introduction

This report is part of the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) working paper series, which is released 

to inform interested parties of research and to encourage discussion on the topic. It focuses on two types of

interviewing conditions: data collection mode and privacy. Interviewing conditions are the circumstances

under which interviews are conducted with persons in the NCVS. This report describes the distribution

of two interviewing conditions—data collection mode and interview privacy—in the NCVS. Data

collection mode is how the interview is conducted—either in person during a face-to-face contact or by 

telephone. Privacy describes whether a person is interviewed alone or in the presence of others during

an in-person interview. Interviewing conditions vary for self-completed and proxy interviews (figure 1

These interviewing conditions may also vary by the sample characteristics and may be affected by changes 

in survey administration over time. They are important to understand because they can affect the quality

of information collected from persons in a survey and, consequently, the survey estimates. This report

focuses on self-completed interviews

Figure 1. Average annual type of interview, data collection mode, and interview privacy in the 

NCVS, 2009–13

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data.

aIn self-report interviews, respondents are asked directly about their experiences.

bIn proxy interviews, another household member answers questions in the place of the person for whom the interview is 

being conducted.

cOnly the interviewer is present with the respondent.

dOthers present during an interview may include the respondent spouse.

Type of interview

Total interviews

(150,000)

Self-reporta

(143,550)

Proxy reportb

(6,450)

In person

(63,080)

Telephone

(80,470)

In person

(2,480)

Telephone

(3,970)

Private 

(respondent 

only)c

(29,500)

Nonprivate 

(respondent 

and others)d

(33,580)

Private 

(respondent 

only)c

(1,420)

Nonprivate 

(respondent 

and others)d

(1,060)

Data collection mode Interview privacy
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

2

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.

For the period 2009 to 2013, 42% of National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) self-completed 

interviews were conducted in person and 54% were conducted by telephone (figure 2). In some

instances, if the household member could not complete the interview, a proxy respondent was selected 

to respond to questions in the place of that person (4%). Of those self-completed interviews that

were conducted in person, 47% were conducted privately and 53% were conducted in a nonprivate 

setting with others present (figure 3). Privacy can only be determined by an interviewer during an

in-person interview and not for telephone interviews

1

1When the interview is conducted by telephone, although FRs are instructed to encourage respondents to complete the interview 

in a private setting, FRs are unable to verify whether the respondent is alone or if anyone else other than the respondent is present 

for any part of the interview

Figure 2. NCVS interviews, by type of 

interview and whether interview was 

conducted in person or by telephone, 2009–13

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

In person

Telephone

Self-interview Proxy interview

Percent

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. 

See appendix table 1 for estimates.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime 

Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.

Figure 3. In-person interviews conducted 

with NCVS sample respondents, by whether 

interview was conducted under private or 

nonprivate interviewing conditions, 2009–13

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. 

See appendix table 2 for estimates. Only the interviewer 

is present with respondent. Others present during an 

interview may include the respondent’s spouse, other 

household members, and nonhousehold members. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime 

Victimization Survey, 2009–2013.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Private Nonprivate

Percent
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

3

1. Interviewing Conditions in the NCVS

1.1 Data collection mode and interview privacy

The NCVS is a nationally representative, address-based survey in which eligible persons age 12 

or older living in a sampled household are asked to self-report about the number and characteristics of 

victimizations experienced during the previous 6 months. Persons may be interviewed up to seven times

over a 3-year period

The NCVS is an interviewer-administered survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau for th

Bureau of Justice Statistics. Interviewers, also known as field representatives, read the survey questions

out loud and enter the person’s answer onto the data collection form.A person selected to participate in

the NCVS is referred to as an eligible sample member. When a person agrees to participate in the NCVS

and completes an interview, he or she is referred to as a survey respondent. Respondent is used to refer to

survey respondents of the NCVS in the remainder of the report

NCVS interviews are conducted either in person or over the telephone. An FR’s first contact with a

sample household is always attempted in person at the eligible sample member’s home. The first interview

with a household may be conducted during this initial face-to-face contact or sample members may 

request a telephone interview at a later time. Subsequent interviews with the household may be conducted

either in person or by telephone

NCVS FRs are trained to conduct all in-person interviews under private conditions. For the

NCVS, a private interview means that only the person being interviewed and the FR were present, while a 

nonprivate interview means that other persons (usually other members of the family or household) were 

also present. Because interviews are conducted with all eligible members of a household, it is not always

possible to interview all household members under private interviewing conditions. Information on the

presence of others during an interview is determined by an FR when an in-person interview is conducted 

(figure 1)
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

4

1.2 Changes in interviewing conditions over time

Several key aspects of NCVS survey administration have changed over time, potentially affecting 

interviewing conditions. One aspect of survey administration is whether information collected during

an interview is recorded using a paper and pencil interviewing (PAPI) method or a computer-assisted 

interviewing (CAI) method. From 1993 to 2006, the NCVS used a combination of a paper survey (FRs

wrote the survey respondent’s information directly onto paper forms) and computer-assisted telephone 

interviewing (CATI) (Census Bureau telephone interviewers conducted interviews from centralized 

telephone facilities). However, from 2006 to the present, the NCVS has used only CAI methods, in which

FRs enter the responses directly into a computer during both in-person and telephone interviews. In an

interviewer-administered survey like the NCVS that relies on in-person and telephone interviews under 

CAI conditions, the survey questionnaire is programmed into a laptop and the FR reads the questions as 

they are presented on the computer screen

Over the 1993 to 2013 period, the NCVS implemented several changes that affected interviewing 

conditions. Beginning in January 2006, a new sample was introduced to the NCVS based on the 2000

Decennial Census to account for shifts in population that occur over time. This affected the percentage

of in-person interviews, as first interviews with new sample households are always attempted in person

2

An additional change to the samples was implemented in 2010 and 2011 that potentially affected 

interviewing conditions: Between October 2010 and June 2011, sample cases that had been previously cut 

in the mid-2000s were reinstated. The reinstated sample cases amounted to about a 24% increase over the

previous sample size, from about 8,500 households per month to 10,500. As in 2006, the introduction of

this new sample was associated with an increase in first-time in-person interviews

A second change to NCVS survey administration involved the move in 2007 from centralized to 

decentralized telephone interviews. From 1993 through 2007, NCVS CATI interviews were initiated by

Census Bureau interviewers located in a centralized call center. CATI from a centralized call center was

discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007. Beginning in 2008, all NCVS CATI interviews were decentralized,

meaning that, like in-person interviews, they are conducted by FRs working in the field

A third change that potentially affected interviewing conditions was refresher training of NCVS 

FRs. Beginning in August 2011, refresher training was conducted using an experimental split sample

cluster design. Half of the FRs were trained beginning in 2011, while the second half of FRs were trained

in 2012. During refresher training, special emphasis was placed on conducting NCVS interviews in private

when possible. In addition, following refresher training, new FR performance metrics and enhanced field

supervision of FRs were implemented in the NCVS. Refresher training, new performance metrics, and

enhanced supervision may be associated with an increase in in-person interviews conducted privately

2For more information on methodological changes to the NCVS in 2006 and their effect on victimization estimates, see Criminal 

Victimization, 2006 (NCJ 219413. BJS web, December 2007
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

5

2. Data Collection Mode in the NCVS, 1993–2013

From 1993 to 2013, telephone interviews consistently accounted for more than half of all 

completed NCVS interviews (figure 4). The percentage of in-person interviews during this period

fluctuated between 21% and 43%

In part due to a shift away from centralized call centers, the percentage of NCVS in-person 

interviews increased in 2006, and 43% of interviews were conducted in person in 2013. About 58% of

NCVS interviews were conducted by telephone in 2006, compared to 52% in 2013

Figure 4. Percent of NCVS interviews, by in-person or telephone interviewing conditions, 

1993–2013

In person

Telephone

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Data include all NCVS interviews, including 3% to 5% of interviews conducted 

with a proxy respondent. See appendix table 3 for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced. 

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

6

2.1 Respondent characteristics and data collection mode, 1993–2013

Although in-person interviewing in the NCVS increased from 1993 to 2013, the amount of 

the increase may have varied by the characteristics of the survey respondent. Because differences in

interviewing conditions could result in differences in data quality and reported victimization rates, it is 

important to understand demographic differences in data collection mode over time

Sex

Following a slight decrease in the percentage of NCVS in-person interviews from 1993 to 1997, 

the percentage of in-person interviews generally increased at a similar pace for males and females from 

1998 to 2013. Among both females and males, in-person interviews accounted for about 25% of interviews

conducted in 1993, compared to about 45% in 2013 (figure 5)

Figure 5. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s sex, 1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

Female

Male

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. See appendix table 4 for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced. 

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

7

Age

From 1993 to 2000, the percentage of NCVS interviews conducted in person was generally stable 

for all age groups. The highest percentage was observed for persons ages 18 to 24 (32% to 36%), followed

by persons ages 25 to 34 (28% to 30%) (figure 6). The percentages were nearly equal for those ages 12 to 17

and age 35 or older

Figure 6. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s age, 1993–2013

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. See appendix table 5 for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced. 

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

Beginning in 2001 across all age groups, in-person interviewing accounted for an increasingly 

larger percentage of NCVS interviews. For example, from 2001 to 2013, the number of in-person

interviews doubled among persons ages 12 to 17. Twenty-two percent of interviews were conducted

in person with this age group in 2001, compared to 49% in 2013. During the same period the rate of

in-person interviews increased 82% among persons age 35 or older, from 22% in 2001 to 42% in 2013

In-person interviews also increased among persons ages 18 to 24 and among those ages 25 to 34

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

35 or older

25–34

18–24

12–17

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

8

Race and Hispanic origin

From 1993 to 2013, white non-Hispanics consistently had the lowest rates of in-person interviews 

compared to black non-Hispanics and persons of other races (which includes American Indian, Alaska 

Native, Asian, and Pacific Islander) (figure 7). Although white non-Hispanics accounted for the smallest

percentage of in-person interviews in 1993, in-person interviewing among this group nearly doubled 

between 1993 (18%) and 2013 (41%). Beginning in 2004, the percentage of interviews conducted in person

among this group generally increased each year until 2011. From 2011 to 2013, the percentage of in-person

interviews among whites remained stable at about 41%

In contrast, persons of Hispanic or Latino origin consistently had the highest percentage of 

in-person interviews, followed by blacks and African Americans and persons of other races. Although the

highest percentage of in-person interviews was observed among Hispanics, a relatively smaller percentage 

increase was observed among this group from 1993 to 2013. Among Hispanics, in-person interviews

decreased from 45% of all interviews in 1993 to 38% in 1995, and then fluctuated between 37% and 39% 

from 1996 to 2001. Beginning in 2002, in-person interviews among this group generally increased each

year until 2013, when it reached 58% of interviews

Among blacks, following a period of general stability from 1993 to 2001, in-person interviewing 

generally increased each year, from 39% in 2004 to 53% in 2013. Among persons of other races, in-person

interviews accounted for 29% to 34% of all interviews from 1993 to 2003. By 2013, in-person interviews

had increased to account for 48% of NCVS interviews conducted with this group
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

9

Figure 7. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s race and Hispanic 

origin, 1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60 Hispanic/Latino

Other racea,b

Black/African Americana

Whitea

'11 '12 '13 f '10e '07 '08 '09 d '06c '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. See appendix table 6 for estimates. 

aExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

bIncludes American Indians and Alaska Natives; Asians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or 

more races. 

cIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced. 

dComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

eBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

f

Between August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

10

Marital status

From 1993 to 2013, the highest percentage of in-person interviews was consistently observed 

among persons who were separated, followed by persons who were never married and those who were 

divorced or widowed (figure 8)

Figure 8. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s marital status, 

1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Divorced/widowed

Separated

Married

Never married

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 1% missing data on marital status. See appendix table 7 for 

estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced. 

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

From 1993 to 2001, a similar percentage of in-person interviews were conducted among persons 

who were never married and divorced or widowed. Beginning in 2002, in-person interviews conducted

with persons who were never married began increasing at a faster rate than interviews with persons 

who were divorced or widowed. By 2013, a higher percentage of persons who were never married were

interviewed in person than those who were divorced or widowed
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

11

From 1993 to 2005, the lowest percentage of in-person interviews was consistently observed 

for persons who were married. Beginning in 2006, in-person interviews of married persons generally

increased each year, steadily converging with the percentage of in-person interviews observed for divorced 

or widowed persons. In 2013, the percentages of in-person interviews observed for married and divorced

or widowed persons were about equal, accounting for 42% to 43% of all NCVS interviews conducted with 

these two groups

In-person interviews decreased slightly for persons in all marital status groups from 1993 to 

1997, and remained generally stable from 1998 to 2000. Beginning in 2001, the percentage of in-person

interviews conducted generally increased each year for all marital status groups

For those who were never married, in-person interviews increased from 29% of all interviews in 

2001 to 51% in 2013. From 2001 to 2013, the percentage of NCVS interviews conducted in person also

increased for persons who were separated and divorced or widowed

Household composition

From 1993 to 2013, the highest percentage of in-person interviews was consistently observed for 

households composed of a single adult with children (figure 9). From 1993 to 2008, households composed

of a single adult without children had the second largest percentage of in-person interviews. Beginning

in 2007, the percentage of in-person interviews among households composed of a single adult without 

children stabilized, accounting for 43% to 45% of all their interviews until 2013. From 2007 to 2013, the

percentage of in-person interviews among households composed of two or more adults with children 

steadily increased, from 38% in 2007 to 48% in 2013. From 2010 to 2013, a higher percentage of in-person

interviews were conducted with households composed of two or more adults with children than with 

households composed of a single adult without children
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

12

Figure 9. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by household composition, 

1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Single adult with children

Single adult without children

Two or more adults with children

Two or more adults without children

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 0.5% missing data on household composition. 

See appendix table 8 for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced. 

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

In comparison, the percentages of in-person interviews conducted with households composed of 

two or more adults and two or more adults with children were about equal from 1993 to 2008. Beginning

in 2008, in-person interviews increased at a faster rate for households composed of two or more adults 

with children than for two-adult households. By 2013, the two groups were no longer similar in their

percentage of in-person interviews

Although in-person interviews increased for all household composition groups, the greatest 

percentage increase was observed for households composed of two or more adults and two or more 

adults with children. Among these households, the percentage of in-person interviews decreased slightly

from 1993 to 1997 and then generally increased each year until 2006. After a slight decrease in 2007, the

percentage of in-person interviews generally increased each year from 2008 to 2011 before stabilizing in 

2012 and 2013

From 2001 to 2011, in-person interviews among two-person households increased, from 

23% in 2001 to 42% in 2011. From 2011 to 2013, NCVS interviews conducted in person accounted for

42% of interviews among these households
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

13

During the same period, in-person interviews among households composed of two or more adults 

with children increased more than twofold, from 23% in 2001 to 48% in 2011. From 2011 to 2013, NCVS

interviews conducted in person accounted for 48% of interviews among these households

In-person interviews conducted in households composed of a single adult without children 

decreased from 33% in 1993 to 27% in 1997. From 1998 to 2000, in-person interviews accounted for

about 28% of all interviews conducted in these households, compared to 30% in 2001 and 45% in 2006

In-person interviews among households composed of a single adult with no children did not increase from 

2007 to 2013, but fluctuated between 43% and 44%

Household income

From 1993 to 2013, the lowest percentage of in-person interviews was consistently observed for 

households earning $50,000 or more annually while the highest percentage of in-person interviews was 

generally observed for households earning less than $24,999 annually (figure 10)

Figure 10. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by household income, 1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Unknown income

$50,000 or more

$25,000 to $49,999

Less than $24,999

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. See appendix table 9 for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discounted for the NCVS in July 2007. 

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

14

Observed differences among household income categories were generally stable from 1993 to 

2002, but began converging among some income category groups by 2003. For example, from 1993 to

2002, households earning $24,999 or less annually had a higher percentage of in-person interviews, 

compared to households of other income categories. From 2003 to 2005, similar annual percentages of

in-person interviews were observed for households earning $24,999 or less and households with unknown 

annual income. Beginning in 2006, in-person interviews among households earning $24,999 or less

annually generally increased each year and remained higher than households of other income categories 

through 2013

A similar pattern was observed among households whose income was unknown. From 1993

to 2005, these households had consistently higher percentages of in-person interviews than households 

earning $25,000 or more annually. However from 2006 to 2013, similar annual percentages of in-person

interviews were observed among households with unknown income and households earning $25,000 to 

$49,999 annually

From 1993 to 2013, the greatest percentage increase was observed among households earning 

$50,000 or more annually. Among these households, in-person interviews increased nearly threefold, from

13% in 1993 to 38% in 2013. During the same period, in-person interviews among households earning

$25,000 to $49,999 annually increased more than twofold, from 20% of all interviews conducted with these 

households in 1993 to 47% in 2013

The percentage of NCVS interviews conducted in person also increased among households 

earning less than $24,999 annually (up 54%). Compared to other household income groups, the smallest

increase between 1993 and 2013 was observed among households whose income level was unknown 

(up 48%)

3

3Although more than half of NCVS interviews were conducted by telephone from 2009 to 2013, the type of interview varied 

by the survey respondent’s characteristics. Some persons were interviewed more frequently in person than by telephone. Se

appendix table 10 for more detailed information about demographic subgroups for 2009 to 2013
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

15

Proxy Interviews in the NCVS

The NCVS is a self-report survey in which respondents are asked directly about their experiences with 

criminal victimization. In some instances, a person in the household is allowed to answer questions for 

another household member in what is called a proxy interview. During data collection, a decision can be 

made to use proxy interviewing instead of direct interviewing for the following reasons:

•	 A parent or guardian refuses to allow a child age 12 or 13 to be interviewed. In this case, any 

knowledgeable household member who is at least age 18 can be a proxy respondent for the child.

•	 A household member is temporarily absent and will not return to the address until after the data 

collection period for the household has ended.

•	 A household member is considered physically or mentally incapacitated. To qualify as physically 

or mentally incapacitated, the household member must have health or mental illness problems 

that are continuous throughout the interview period and make it impossible for the person to be 

interviewed.

In a proxy interview, the interviewer asks a proxy respondent questions and the proxy respondent answers 

the questions in the place of the person for whom the interview is being conducted. The quality of data 

gathered from a proxy respondent is associated with the proxy’s knowledge of the event, the proxy’s 

relationship to the respondent, and the saliency of the event being reported. 

The percentage of proxy interviews conducted in the NCVS has remained generally stable over time, 

comprising 3% to 5% of all completed interviews from 1993 to 2013 (figure 11). Similar to self-report 

interviews, proxy interviews in the NCVS can be conducted in person or by telephone. For the period 2009 

to 2013, 2% of all interviews conducted that were by proxy were in person and 3% were by telephone 

(appendix table 1). Proxy interviews are most common in larger households and among persons ages 12 to 

17 and those age 65 or older (not shown). Proxy interviews are not allowed for non-English interviews in the 

absence of a suitable interpreter.

Figure 11. Proxy interviews conducted in the NCVS, 1993–2013

Percent

0

2

4

6

8

10

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Proxy interviews may be conducted in person or by telephone. Data 

include all NCVS interviews, including 95% to 97% of self-report interviews conducted with respondents. See appendix 

table 11 for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and 

a new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 

2007. 

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of 

FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

16

Non-English Interviews in the NCVS, 2011–13

NCVS questionnaires are available in English and Spanish but interviews can be conducted in other 

languages if an interpreter is available. For all non-English interviews, field representatives (FRs) may use 

an interpreter if it is acceptable to the person being interviewed. An interpreter may be a family member, 

a neighbor of the person being interviewed, an official interpreter, or the FR if he or she is fluent in the 

language of the person being interviewed. If it is difficult to find a suitable interpreter, field supervisors may 

help FRs obtain assistance in completing a non-English interview. Information on interview language was 

added to the NCVS in 2011 but is not available in the public-use files collected before 2011.

For the period 2011 to 2013, an average of about 6,700 non-English interviews (4.3% of all NCVS 

interviews) were conducted annually (table 1). About 85% of non-English NCVS interviews were conducted 

in Spanish and 5% were conducted in Chinese, while Vietnamese (2%), Russian (1%), and Korean (1%) 

accounted for smaller percentages of non-English interviews. Six percent of non-English interviews were 

conducted in other languages.

Table 1. NCVS interviews conducted in non-English language, 2011–2013

Non-English language Percent

Total non-English 100%

Spanish 85.1

Chinese 4.6

Vietnamese 1.6

Russian 1.2

Korean 1.2

Other language 6.3

Average annual number of non-English language interviews 6,670

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2011–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

17

3. Interview Privacy in the NCVS, 1993–2013

NCVS interviewing protocols require FRs to interview respondents privately when possible 

to ensure that respondents are able to provide what is often personal and sensitive information about 

their experiences. However, a private interview is not always feasible, such as when a person refuses to

be interviewed privately, when multiple persons reside in a small space such as a studio apartment, or 

when others (such as the parent of a 12-year-old child) refuse to allow the respondent to be interviewed 

privately. In other cases, a parent or another person may be caring for a young child or an older relative, or

may have other caregiver responsibilities

From 1993 to 2011, 41% to 45% of in-person interviews were conducted privately (figure 12)

The percentage increased in 2011, and in 2012 and 2013 the percentages conducted under private and 

nonprivate interviewing conditions were about equal. The increase in interviews conducted in private may

be attributed to NCVS refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced field supervision of 

FRs implemented in the NCVS beginning in 2011. In 2013, 51% of in-person interviews were conducted

privately with the respondent and 49% were conducted under nonprivate interviewing conditions, with the 

person being interviewed in the presence of others

Figure 12. Percent of NCVS in-person interviews, by private or nonprivate interviewing 

conditions, 1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Nonprivate (respondent and others)a

Private (respondent only)b

'11 '12 '13 d '10e '07 '08 '09 d '06c '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 1.5% of cases from 1993 to 2006 for which the presence of 

others during the interview was missing. See appendix table 12 for estimates.

aOthers present during an interview may include the respondent’s spouse, other household members, and nonhousehold 

members.

bOnly the interviewer is present with the respondent. 

cIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

dComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

eBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

f

Between August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

18

3.1 Respondent characteristics and interview privacy, 1993–2013

Overall interview privacy was generally stable from 1993 until 2006. Beginning in 2007, the

percentage of in-person interviews conducted privately generally increased each year until 2013. In

addition, privacy during NCVS interviews varied over time according to the characteristics of the survey 

respondent

Sex

From 1993 to 2010, 41% to 44% of NCVS interviews with males and females were conducted 

privately (figure 13). Private interviews increased for males and females between 2010 and 2013. Amon

males, 43% of interviews were conducted private in 2010, compared to 52% in 2013. Similarly among

females, private interviews increased 18% during the same period (from 42% in 2010 to 50% in 2013)

Figure 13. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s sex, 1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Female

Male

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent. See appendix table 13 

for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

19

Age

From 1993 to 2013, the highest percentage of private interviews was observed for persons age 

35 or older, followed by persons ages 18 to 24 and those ages 25 to 34 (figure 14). Private interviews

accounted for similar percentages of in-person interviews conducted with persons ages 18 to 24 and those 

ages 25 to 34. In comparison, the lowest percentage of private interviews was consistently observed for

persons ages 12 to 17

Figure 14. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s age, 1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

35 or older

25–34

18–24

12–17

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent. See appendix table 14 

for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

eSource: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

Among all age groups examined, the percentage of in-person NCVS interviews conducted 

privately was generally stable from 1993 to 2009, and generally increased each year among all age groups 

from 2010 to 2013. The largest increase in private interviews was observed among persons ages 12 to 17,

from 16% of all interviews in 2008 to 26% in 2013. Private in-person interviews also increased among

persons ages 18 to 24 (from 39% in 2008 to 49% in 2013) and among those ages 25 to 34 (from 42% in 

2008 to 51% in 2013)
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

20

Private interviews also increased among persons age 35 or older. Between 2008 and 2010, the

percentage of NCVS interviews conducted privately with this group increased, from 46% of all interviews 

in 2008 to 54% in 2013

Race and Hispanic origin

From 1993 to 2013, black and white survey respondents had the highest percentage of private 

interviews (figure 15). During the same period, persons of other races had a lower percentage of private

interviews than whites or blacks but a higher percentage than Hispanics. From 1993 to 2013, the lowest

percentage of in-person interviews was consistently observed for Hispanic survey respondents

From 1993 to 2011, the percentage of private interviews among whites was generally stable, 

fluctuating from 42% to 47% of all in-person interviews conducted with this group. However, private

interviews increased among whites, from 47% in 2010 to 53% in 2013

The percentage of privately conducted interviews among blacks increased in 1997 to be similar 

to whites. From 1997 to 2001, blacks and whites generally had similar percentages of privately conducted

interviews annually. The percentage of private interviews among blacks increased from 43% in 1993 to

49% in 2002. From 2002 to 2010, private interviews among blacks fluctuated, accounting for 46% to 49%

of all in-person interviews conducted with this group. From 2011 to 2013, private interviews among blacks

increased from 52% of all in-person interviews in 2011 to 58% in 2013

Private interviews also increased among persons of other races and Hispanics. For persons of

other races, the percentage of private interviews increased from 31% in 1993 to 35% in 1994. From 1994 to

2001, private interviews among persons of other races accounted for about 33% of all in-person interviews 

conducted with this group. Between 2001 and 2013, private interviews among persons of other races

increased from 33% in 2001 to 49% in 2013

For Hispanics, private interviews increased from 24% in 1993 to 29% in 1995. From 1996 to 2000,

private interviews among Hispanics ranged from 25% to 27% of in-person interviews conducted with this 

group. However, between 2000 and 2005, private interviews among Hispanics generally increased each

year, with private interviews accounting for 29% of all interviews in 2001 and 32% in 2005. From 2005 to

2011, 29% to 34% of all in-person interviews with Hispanics were conducted privately, increasing to 39% 

in 2012 and 42% in 2013
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

21

Figure 15. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s race and Hispanic 

origin, 1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Hispanic/Latino

Other racea,b

Black/African Americana

Whitea

'11 '12 '13 d '10e '07 '08 '09 d '06c '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent. See appendix table 15 

for estimates.

aExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

bIncludes American Indians and Alaska Natives; Asians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or 

more races. 

cIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

dComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

eBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

f

Between August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

22

Marital status

From 1993 to 2013, the highest percentage of private interviews was observed for survey 

respondents who were divorced or widowed, followed by persons who were separated and those who 

never married. The lowest percentage of private interviews was consistently observed for persons who

were married (figure 16)

Figure 16. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s marital status, 

1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Divorced/widowed

Separated

Married

Never married

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 1% missing data on marital status. Only the interviewer is 

present with the respondent. See appendix table 16 for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

23

From 1993 to 2011, the percentage of private interviews was generally stable among persons 

who never married and those who were married. During the same period, 41% to 44% of all interviews

for persons who never married were conducted privately, which increased to 51% in 2013. For married

persons, 30% to 37% of all interviews were private from 1993 to 2011. This increased to 43% in 201

Among persons who were separated, the percentage of in-person interviews conducted privately 

increased steadily from 1993 to 2013, from 50% in 1993 to 55% in 2001 and 59% in 2009. In 2013, 62% of

in-person interviews with separated persons were conducted under private interviewing conditions

From 1993 to 2011, 63% to 68% of NCVS interviews were conducted privately among persons 

who were divorced or widowed. The percentage of private interviews among this group increased to about

71% in 2012 and 2013

Household composition

From 1993 to 2013, the lowest percentage of private interviewing was consistently observed for 

households composed of two or more adults with children (figure 17). Among households composed of

two or more adults with children, private interviews accounted for 23% to 27% of in-person interviews 

from 1993 to 2005, before increasing to 30% in 2009. By 2013, private interviews accounted for 38% of

in-person interviews conducted among these households

Lower percentages of private interviewing were also observed for households composed of a single 

adult with children. From 1993 to 1998, the percentage of privately conducted interviews observed for

this group was generally stable, ranging from 29-31%. Between 1999 and 2010, the percentage of privately

conducted interviews conducted with households composed of a single adult with children ranged from 

35% to 42%. Beginning in 2010, private interviewing generally increased each year until 2013 when the

percentage of privately conducted interviews among these households increased to 48%

From 1993 to 2013, the highest percentage of private interviews was observed for survey 

respondents who resided in households composed of a single adult without children. During this period,

about 90% of in-person interviews among these households were conducted under private interviewing 

conditions, a substantially higher percentage than observed for any other household group

From 1993 to 2010, among households composed of two or more adults, 33% to 39% of in-person 

interviews were conducted privately, increasing to 46% in 2012 and 2013

From 1993 to 1998, among households composed of a single adult with children, 29% to 31% 

of in-person interviews were conducted privately, which increased to 38% in 1999. From 1999 to 2006,

private interviews accounted for 35% to 38% of in-person interviews among these households, and 

increased to 42% in 2009 and 48% in 2013
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

24

Figure 17. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by household composition, 

1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Single adult with children

Single adult without children

2 or more adults with children

Two or more adults without children

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 0.5% missing data on household composition. Only the 

interviewer is present with the respondent. See appendix table 17 for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

25

Household income 

From 1993 to 2004, the highest percentage of private interviews was observed for households with 

an unknown income level (figure 18). Beginning in 2005, the percentage of private interviews among

households earning less than $24,999 annually was about equal to that observed for households with an 

unknown income. From 2005 to 2013, households in both of these income categories had the highest

percentages of in-person private interviews

Figure 18. Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by household income, 1993–2013

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Unknown income

$50,000 or more

$25,000 to $49,999

Less than $24,999

'11 '12 '13 d '10c '07 '08 '09 b '06a '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent. See appendix table 18 

for estimates.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013. 
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

26

From 1993 to 1999, households with incomes of less than $24,999, $25,000 to $49,999, and 

$50,000 or more had similar percentages of private interviews. From 2000 to 2013, the percentage of

private interviews was lowest among households earning $25,000 to $49,999 and $50,000 or more, 

while the percentage of private interviews during this period either increased or remained stable among 

households in other income categories

Among households earning less than $24,999 annually, 40% to 42% of in-person interviews were 

conducted privately from 1993 to 1999. From 1999 to 2007, privately conducted interviews generally

increased each year in this income category, accounting for 48% of in-person interviews conducted in 

2007. Between 2007 and 2010, 46% to 49% of interviews were conducted privately, increasing to 54%

in 2013

From 1993 to 2011, among households earning $25,000 to $49,999, 37% to 42% of interviews were 

conducted privately. In 2012 and 2013, private interviews accounted for 48% of in-person interviews in

this income category

Among households earning $50,000 or more annually, the percentage of privately conducted 

interviews declined from 44% in 1993 to 36% in 2007. From 2007 to 2013, the percentage of private

interviews generally increased each year in this income category (40% in 2009, 42% in 2011, and 49% 

in 2013)

Between 1993 and 2011, among households with an unknown income, 44% to 49% of in-person 

interviews were conducted privately, increasing to 53% in 2013

4

4Although 53% of NCVS interviews were conducted nonprivately from 2009 to 2013, the mix of private and nonprivate interviews 

varied according to the characteristics of the survey respondent. When examined by respondent characteristics, privately

conducted interviews accounted for the majority of interviews among certain subgroups. In addition, among some subgroups,

private and nonprivate interviews were conducted at about similar percentages. See appendix table 19 for more detailed

information about demographic subgroups for 2009 to 2013
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

27

4. Future Research

The variables examined in these analyses may be associated with each other and with other 

variables not included in the analyses. Additional research could investigate how these complex

relationships are associated with survey estimates of criminal victimization. For example, from 2009 to

2013, differential rates of criminal victimization were associated with the data collection mode. From 2009

to 2013, the rate of serious violent crime associated with in-person interviews (11 victimizations per 1,000 

persons 12 or older) was more than two times higher than the rate of serious violent crime associated with 

telephone interviews (5 per 1,000) (table 2). These observed differences may be due to the interviewing

conditions or the composition of respondents in each of the mode groups

Table 2. Rate of violent victimization per 1,000 persons age 12 or older, by in-person or 

telephone interviewing conditions, 2009–13

Ratio of in-person 

to telephone 

interviews

Data collection mode

Type of crime Overall In person Telephone

Total violent crime 22.7 30.1 17.4† 1.7

Serious violent crime 7.4 10.5 5.2† 2.0

Rape/sexual assault 1.1 1.6 0.8† 2.0

Robbery 2.4 3.5 1.7† 2.1

Aggravated assault 3.8 5.3 2.7† 2.0

Simple assault 15.3 19.6 12.2† 1.6

Average annual population 

 interviewed under each 

 condition 258,803,560 110,055,930 136,779,490

Note: Estimates are based on weighted data. Overall estimate includes 4% of interviews conducted with a proxy respondent. 

See appendix table 20 for standard errors.

†Significant difference between in-person and telephone interviewing conditions at the 95% confidence level.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

28

Similar associations were found when persons were interviewed alone versus with others. During

the period 2009 to 2013, the rate of serious violent crime associated with private interviews (12 per 1,000) 

was 1.4 times higher than the rate associated with nonprivate interviews (9 per 1,000) (table 3). Highe

rates of violent victimization associated with private interviews may occur because respondents choose not 

to reveal victimizations when others are present, particularly if the offender is another household member 

or if the victimization reveals sensitive information about the respondent or causes embarrassment

Table 3. Rate of violent victimization, for in-person interview, by private or nonprivate 

interviewing conditions, 2009–13

To examine this in more detail, comparisons between victimization rates are made by whether 

a person lives alone or in a multiperson household with others and whether the interview took place 

privately or in the presence of others. If interview privacy and household composition are jointly

associated with a reduction in the level of reported victimizations on the survey, there should be a 

difference between victimizations among persons living with others when they are interviewed alone 

compared to when others are present, but this difference should not be observed between private and 

nonprivate interviews conducted among persons who live alone

Among persons living in multiperson households, the overall rate of serious violent victimization 

was 10 victimizations per 1,000 persons age 12 or older (figure 19). However when examined by interview

privacy, rates of serious violence were significantly higher among persons who were interviewed privately 

and significantly lower among persons who were interviewed non-privately

Interview privacy

Type of crime

All in 

person

Private 

(respondent 

only)a

Nonprivate 

(respondent and 

others)b

Ratio of private 

to nonprivate 

interviews

Total violent crime 30.1 36.6 24.6 † 1.5

Serious violent crime 10.5 12.4 8.8 † 1.4

Rape/sexual assault 1.6 2.0 1.3 † 1.5

Robbery 3.5 3.9 3.3 1.2

Aggravated assault 5.3 6.5 4.3 † 1.5

Simple assault 19.6 24.2 15.8 † 1.5

Average annual population 

interviewed under each 

condition 110,055,930 50,284,560 59,771,370

Note: Estimates are based on weighted data. All in person estimate includes 4% of interviews conducted with a proxy 

respondent. See appendix table 21 for standard errors.Note: Excludes 4% of interviews conducted with proxy respondent. 

Estimates are based on weighted data. See appendix table 21 for standard errors.

†Significant difference between private and nonprivate interviewing conditions at the 95% confidence level.

aOnly the interviewer is present with the respondent.

bOthers present during an interview is anyone else other than the interviewer and respondent. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

29

Among persons residing in multiperson households who were interviewed privately, the rate 

of violent victimization was 12 per 1,000, or 1.4 times higher than the observed rate of serious violent

victimization among persons residing in multiperson households who were interview non-privately (9 per 

1,000) (appendix table 22)

In contrast, among respondents who lived alone, no significant differences were observed between 

in-person private interviews (35 per 1,000) and in-person nonprivate interviews (34 per 1,000). The

absence of observed differences in victimization rates for private and nonprivate interviews conducted 

with persons who live alone can be important because it suggests that household composition accounts 

for some portion of the association between victimization rates and privacy. These findings suggest that

privacy in multi-person households is important and that additional compositional variables, such as the 

demographic variables examined in these analyses, could also be associated with interviewing conditions 

and survey response

Figure 19. Rate of violent victimizations for single-person and multiperson households, by 

whether in-person interview was administered under private or nonprivate interviewing 

conditions, 2009–13

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Nonprivate (respondent and others)b

Private (respondent only)a

Simple assault

Aggravated assault

Robbery 

Rape/sexual assault

Serious violent crime

Respondent lives with others

Simple assault

Aggravated assault

Robbery 

Rape/sexual assault

Serious violent crime

Respondent lives alone

Rate per 1,000 persons age 12 or older

Note: Estimates are based on weighted data. See appendix table 22 for estimates and appendix table 23 for standard errors.

aOnly the interviewer is present with the respondent.

bOthers present during an interview is anyone else aside from the interviewer and respondent.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

30

To examine the association between privacy and single person and multiperson households in 

more detail, comparisons between victimization rates among respondent who lived with others but were 

interviewed privately are compared to overall in-person rates of victimization among respondents who 

lived alone. The overall in-person rate for live alone households was examined because the focus of the

comparison is on ascertaining whether victimization rates observed in private interviews with respondents 

in multiperson households approximate rates observed among respondents in single-person households, 

regardless of whether the single person household interview was conducted privately

Among respondents who lived with others, the rate of rape and sexual assault (2 per 1,000 persons 

age 12 or older) was identical to the observed rate of rape and sexual assault among in-person interviews 

conducted with respondents who live alone (appendix table 22). Further, no significant differences were

observed when comparing rates of robbery, aggravated assault, or simple assault for respondents from 

multiperson households who were interviewed privately and respondents residing in single-person 

households. This finding suggests that additional factors, such as household composition, can affect the

association between interviewing conditions and rates of victimization. Additional research is needed to

better understand the effect of interview privacy on victimization rates in these different contexts

Further investigations could also examine whether the type of person who is present during 

a nonprivate interview is associated with differential survey estimates under private and nonprivate 

interviewing conditions. This report focused on whether someone other than the FR and survey

respondent was present during the interview, but the NCVS collects far more detailed information on the 

exact nature of the other persons who are present, including whether it was the respondent’s spouse, other 

household members, or nonhousehold members. For example, the presence of a parent may influence the

responses provided during a teenager’s interview, and the presence of a spouse may influence the responses 

provided by a male or female survey respondent

In addition, the association between interviewing conditions and NCVS-specific design features 

deserves further investigation. Survey respondents in the NCVS are interviewed seven times over the

course of 3 years, and interviewing conditions (such as mode and privacy) are associated with the 

interview number in which a person is responding. This report did not examine these types of complex

relationships between interviewing conditions, respondent characteristics, survey rates, estimates of crime, 

and survey design aspects of the NCVS

A final avenue of research should investigate the quality profile of NCVS data collected under 

different interviewing conditions. Survey questionnaires can be administered in a number of ways,

including face to face, telephone, mail, and internet. Each mode has unique advantages and disadvantages

related to cost, data quality, nonresponse, flexibility, and timeliness. An analysis of the data derived from

different interviewing conditions can shed light on whether NCVS data quality varies across different 

interviewing conditions
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

31

Methodology

Survey coverage

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is an annual data collection conducted by the 

U.S. Census Bureau for the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The NCVS is a self-report survey in whi

interviewed persons are asked about the number and characteristics of victimizations experienced during 

the previous 6 months. The NCVS collects information on nonfatal personal crimes (rape or sexual

assault, robbery, aggravated assault, simple assault, and personal larceny) and household property crimes 

(burglary, motor vehicle theft, and other theft) both reported and not reported to police. In addition to

providing annual level and change estimates on criminal victimization, the NCVS is the primary source of 

information on the nature of these incidents

Persons provide information about themselves (e.g., age, sex, race and Hispanic origin, marita

status, education level, and income) and whether they experienced a victimization. For each victimization

incident, the NCVS collects information about the offender (e.g., age, sex, race and Hispanic origin, an

victim–offender relationship), characteristics of the crime (e.g., time and place of occurrence, use o

weapons, nature of injury, and economic consequences), whether the crime was reported to police, reasons 

the crime was or was not reported, and victim experiences with the criminal justice system

The NCVS is administered to persons age 12 or older from a nationally representative sample of 

households in the United States. The NCVS defines a household as a group of persons who all reside at

a sampled address. Persons are considered household members when the sampled address is their usual

place of residence at the time of the interview and when they have no usual place of residence elsewhere

Once selected, households remain in the sample for 3 years, and eligible persons in these households are 

interviewed every 6 months either in person or over the phone, for a total of seven interviews

All first interviews are conducted in person, and subsequent interviews are conducted either 

in person or by phone. New households rotate into the sample on an ongoing basis to replace outgoing

households that have been in the sample for the 3-year period. The sample includes persons living in group

quarters (such as dormitories, rooming houses, and religious group dwellings) and excludes persons living 

in military barracks and institutional settings (such as correctional or hospital facilities) and persons who 

are homeless

Describing the NCVS sample

The data presented in Sections 1–3 of this BJS Working Paper describe the unweighted 

distribution of interviewing conditions in the NCVS and the demographic characteristics of sample 

respondents who responded to NCVS interviews. Because these descriptive analyses are limited to the

NCVS sample, they do not represent a national estimate. As a result, tables describing the NCVS sample

are based on unweighted data and all differences are actual
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

32

Nonresponse and weighting adjustments

Estimates in Section 4 of this BJS Working Paper use data from the 1993 to 2013 

NCVS data files that were weighted to produce annual estimates of victimization for persons 

age 12 or older living in U.S. households. Because the NCVS relies on a sample rather than

census of the entire U.S. population, weights are designed to inflate sample point estimates t

known population totals and to compensate for survey nonresponse and other aspects of the 

sample design

The NCVS data files include both person and household weights. Person weights provide

an estimate of the population represented by each person in the sample. Household weights

provide an estimate of the U.S. household population represented by each household in th

sample

In 2013, a weighted total of 90,630 households and 160,040 persons age 12 or older were 

interviewed for the NCVS. Each household was interviewed twice during the year. The respons

rate was 84% for households and 88% for eligible persons. Victimizations that occurred outside

of the United States were excluded from this report. In 2013, less than 1% of the unweighted

victimizations occurred outside of the United States and were excluded from the analyses

Victimization weights used in this analysis account for the number of persons present 

during an incident and for high-frequency repeat victimizations (i.e., series victimization

Series victimizations are similar in type but occur with such frequency that a victim is unable 

to recall each individual event or describe each event in detail. Survey procedures allow NCVS

interviewers to identify and classify these similar victimizations as series victimizations and to 

collect detailed information on only the most recent incident in the series

The weight includes series incidents as the actual number of incidents reported by the 

victim, up to a maximum of 10 incidents. Including series victimizations in national rates results

in large increases in the level of violent victimization. However, trends in violence are generally

similar, regardless of whether series victimizations are included. In 2013, series incidents

accounted for about 1% of all victimizations and 4% of all violent victimizations. Weighting

series incidents as the number of incidents up to a maximum of 10 produces more reliable 

estimates of crime levels, while the cap at 10 minimizes the effect of extreme outliers on rates

Additional information on the series enumeration is detailed in the report Methods for Counting 

High-Frequency Repeat Victimizations in the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCJ 237308, 

BJS web, April 2012)

Standard error computations

When national estimates are derived from a sample, as with the NCVS, it is important 

to use caution when comparing one estimate to another estimate or when comparing estimates 

over time. Although one estimate may be larger than another, estimates based on a sample have
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

33

some degree of sampling error. The sampling error of an estimate depends on several factors,

including the amount of variation in the responses and the size of the sample. When the sampling

error around an estimate is taken into account, the estimates that appear different may not 

be statistically different. One measure of the sampling error associated with an estimate is the

standard error. The standard error can vary from one estimate to the next. Generally, an estimat

with a small standard error provides a more reliable approximation of the true value than an 

estimate with a large standard error. Estimates with relatively large standard errors are associated

with less precision and reliability and should be interpreted with caution

To generate standard errors around numbers and estimates from the NCVS, the Census 

Bureau produced generalized variance function (GVF) parameters for BJS. The GVFs take

into account aspects of the NCVS’s complex sample design and represent the curve fitted to a 

selection of individual standard errors based on the Jackknife Repeated Replication technique

The GVF parameters were used to generate standard errors for each point estimate (e.g., counts

percentages, and rates) in this report

For data presented in Section 4, BJS conducted tests to determine whether differences in 

estimated numbers, percentages, and rates in this report were statistically significant once the 

sampling error was taken into account. Using statistical programs developed specifically for the

NCVS, all comparisons in the text were tested for significance. The primary test procedure was

the Student’s t-statistic, which tests the difference between two sample estimates. Differences

described as higher, lower, or different passed a test at the 0.05 level of statistical significance

(95% confidence level). Differences described as somewhat, slightly, or marginally different, or

with some indication of difference, passed a test at the 0.10 level of statistical significance (90%

confidence level). Caution must be taken when comparing estimates not explicitly discussed in

this report

Data users can work with the estimates and the standard errors of the estimates 

provided in this report to generate a confidence interval around the estimate as a measure of the 

margin of error. The following example illustrates how standard errors can be used to generate

confidence intervals:

According to the NCVS, for the period 2009 to 2013, the rate of violent crime for 

in-person self-interviews was 30.1 per 1,000 persons (see table 2). Using the GVFs, it wa

determined that the estimated victimization rate has a standard error of 1.5 (see appendix

table 20). A confidence interval around the estimate was generated by multiplying the standard

errors by ±1.96 (the t-score of a normal, two-tailed distribution that excludes 2.5% at either end o

the distribution). Therefore, the 95% confidence interval around the 30.1 estimate is 30.1 ± (1

1.96) or (27.1 to 33.0). In other words, if different samples using the same procedures were ta

from the U.S. population, 95% of the time the violent crime rate for in-person interviews woul

fall between 27.1 and 33.0 per 1,000 perso
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

34

In this report, BJS also calculated a coefficient of variation (CV) for all estimates, 

representing the ratio of the standard error to the estimate. CVs provide a measure of reliability

and a means to compare the precision of estimates across measures with differing levels or 

metrics. In cases in which the CV was greater than 50%, or the unweighted sample had 10 or

fewer cases, the estimate was noted with a “!” symbol (interpret data with caution; estimate based 

on 10 or fewer sample cases, or the coefficient of variation is greater than 50%)

Methodological changes to the NCVS in 2006

It was originally thought that methodological changes implemented in 2006 might have 

affected the crime estimates for that year to such an extent that they are not comparable to 

estimates from other years. BJS and the Census Bureau conducted an evaluation of 2007 and later

data from the NCVS and found a high degree of confidence that estimates for 2007 through 2013 

are consistent with and comparable to estimates for 2005 and previous years. See the Criminal

Victimization series of reports for 2006 to 2014 on the BJS website
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

35

Appendix table 1. Estimates for figure 2: NCVS 

interviews, by type of interview and whether 

interview was conducted in person or by 

telephone, 2009–13

Data collection mode 

and type of interview Percent

Total interviews 100%

In person

Self-interview 42.1%

Proxy interview 1.7

Telephone

Self-interview 53.6%

Proxy interview 2.6

Average annual number of 

 NCVS interviews 150,000

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime 

Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.

Appendix table 2. Estimates for figure 3: 

In-person interviews conducted with NCVS 

sample respondents, by whether interview 

was conducted under private or nonprivate 

interviewing conditions, 2009–13

Interview privacy Percent

Total in-person interviews 100 %

Respondent only 46.8

Respondent and others 53.2

Average annual number of 

 in-person NCVS interviews 63,080

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Only the 

interviewer is present with respondent. Others present 

during an interview may include the respondent’s spouse, 

other household members, and nonhousehold members. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime 

Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

36

Appendix table 3. Estimates for figure 4: Percent of NCVS interviews, by in-person or telephone 

interviewing conditions, 1993–2013

Year

Total number of 

NCVS interviews

Data collection mode

In-person Telephone 

1993 136,630 24.5 % 71.2 %

1994 181,210 24.0 71.8

1995 179,820 23.3 72.8

1996 170,660 21.8 73.9

1997 158,940 20.8 74.9

1998 157,800 21.7 74.0

1999 155,500 22.5 73.3

2000 159,420 22.2 73.5

2001 159,900 23.4 72.8

2002 152,110 25.7 70.1

2003 149,040 25.3 70.9

2004 148,580 27.1 69.3

2005 134,040 29.9 67.1

2006a 135,260 39.4 57.6

2007b 147,300 37.3 60.1

2008 134,180 37.6 59.3

2009 137,330 39.8 56.3

2010c 146,570 41.3 54.5

2011d 143,120 43.0 52.9

2012 162,940 43.0 52.6

2013 160,040 42.9 52.3

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Data include all NCVS interviews, including 3% to 5% of interviews conducted 

with a proxy respondent.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

37

Appendix table 4. Estimates for figure 5: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by 

respondent’s sex, 1993–2013

Male Female

Year

Number of NCVS 

interviews

Percent in-person 

interviews

Number of NCVS 

interviews

Percent in-person 

interviews

1993 60,000 24.9 % 70,760 26.3 %

1994 79,190 24.5 94,510 25.6

1995 78,640 23.7 94,220 24.8

1996 74,390 22.6 88,880 22.9

1997 68,880 21.6 83,180 21.9

1998 68,540 22.4 82,350 22.8

1999 67,790 23.4 81,150 23.6

2000 69,620 23.4 83,010 23.1

2001 70,630 24.6 83,220 24.1

2002 66,500 27.2 79,200 26.6

2003 65,440 26.8 78,050 25.9

2004 65,360 28.4 77,780 27.9

2005 59,540 31.5 70,570 30.3

2006a 60,850 41.3 70,390 40.1

2007b 66,780 39.2 76,710 37.5

2008 60,700 39.6 69,310 38.1

2009 61,820 42.1 70,140 40.8

2010c 65,740 43.7 74,740 42.6

2011d 63,880 45.3 73,310 44.4

2012 72,710 45.7 83,030 44.3

2013 71,210 45.7 81,160 44.5

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. 

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 5. Estimates for figure 6: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s age, 1993–2013

12–17 18–24 25–34 35 or older

Year

Number of 

NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number of 

NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number of 

NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number of 

NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

1993 12,490 22.2 % 13,790 35.7 % 26,070 30.0 % 78,420 23.0 %

1994 16,570 21.6 17,940 34.5 33,330 29.8 105,870 22.6

1995 16,340 20.4 16,830 32.9 32,610 29.1 107,070 22.0

1996 15,580 19.9 15,480 32.3 30,180 28.0 102,020 20.2

1997 14,140 19.5 14,400 32.2 27,310 27.6 96,210 18.8

1998 13,450 20.4 14,380 32.8 26,430 28.6 96,620 19.8

1999 12,980 21.3 13,820 34.6 25,550 29.6 96,590 20.5

2000 13,250 20.4 14,460 33.6 26,090 29.2 98,830 20.5

2001 13,710 21.4 14,410 34.7 25,850 30.5 99,870 21.7

2002 12,490 24.6 13,670 37.9 23,820 34.0 95,720 23.8

2003 12,300 25.0 13,370 38.9 23,300 34.1 94,520 22.8

2004 11,930 26.8 13,350 41.6 22,920 37.2 94,960 24.2

2005 10,590 30.7 11,720 45.0 20,620 40.6 87,180 26.7

2006a 10,940 39.1 11,600 51.8 19,840 48.2 88,860 37.7

2007b 11,610 36.3 12,500 48.5 21,690 46.0 97,690 35.5

2008 9,790 38.0 11,220 48.1 19,570 46.4 89,440 36.0

2009 9,270 42.3 11,360 53.7 20,250 49.2 91,090 38.0

2010c 9,870 45.1 12,390 54.3 21,930 50.8 96,300 39.8

2011d 9,670 49.2 11,860 55.8 21,000 50.4 94,660 41.8

2012 10,610 48.6 13,400 55.9 23,870 52.0 107,860 41.7

2013 9,950 49.3 12,860 56.6 23,410 51.2 106,150 41.9

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. 

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

38
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 6. Estimates for figure 7: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s race and Hispanic origin, 

1993–2013

Whitea Black/African Americana Hispanic/Latino Other racea,b

Year

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

1993 102,810 22.1 % 13,290 35.7 % 10,310 44.7 % 4,350 33.8 %

1994 135,940 21.9 17,100 34.9 14,790 40.0 5,870 33.0

1995 134,760 21.2 17,020 33.0 15,140 38.0 5,940 33.7

1996 125,420 19.2 16,480 32.7 15,460 38.5 5,900 30.6

1997 114,650 17.8 15,790 32.6 15,560 37.3 6,060 28.5

1998 113,010 18.8 16,020 32.8 15,560 37.9 6,290 28.5

1999 110,880 19.4 15,520 32.8 16,030 39.8 6,500 30.8

2000 112,440 19.2 16,270 32.7 17,280 38.5 6,640 29.0

2001 112,880 20.6 16,510 33.3 17,900 37.6 6,560 29.5

2002 106,190 22.6 15,630 37.3 17,710 41.5 6,170 32.4

2003 101,950 21.3 15,730 36.6 18,490 43.0 7,320 31.7

2004 101,290 23.2 15,550 39.0 18,670 42.7 7,630 35.3

2005 91,860 25.7 14,020 42.2 17,020 45.7 7,210 39.1

2006c 95,810 37.8 12,620 47.5 15,520 51.7 7,290 43.0

2007d 102,640 34.2 14,440 47.5 18,480 51.7 7,930 42.7

2008 93,200 34.6 13,050 49.6 16,630 51.0 7,130 44.9

2009 93,570 36.8 13,670 51.9 17,350 55.9 7,370 46.1

2010e 98,800 38.8 14,600 52.1 18,870 57.4 8,210 45.9

2011f 95,370 40.7 14,190 52.6 19,130 58.0 8,500 49.4

2012 106,740 40.6 16,610 53.5 22,450 57.5 9,940 49.2

2013 103,590 40.6 16,490 53.2 22,280 58.1 10,010 48.1

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. 

aExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

bIncludes American Indians and Alaska Natives; Asians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or more races. 

cIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

dComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

eBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

f

Between August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

39
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 7. Estimates for figure 8: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by respondent’s marital status, 1993–2013

Never married Married Separated Divorced/widowed

Year

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

1993 35,930 28.5 % 71,840 22.4 % 3,100 40.9 % 19,620 29.6 %

1994 47,430 27.7 95,320 22.0 3,930 40.2 26,530 28.7

1995 46,790 26.6 94,760 21.3 3,950 38.0 26,830 27.9

1996 44,350 26.0 88,990 19.6 3,670 36.4 25,610 25.5

1997 41,590 25.5 82,270 18.3 3,470 35.5 23,930 24.2

1998 41,140 26.6 81,620 19.2 3,480 36.8 23,770 24.9

1999 40,290 27.8 80,570 20.0 3,280 35.5 23,830 25.4

2000 41,870 27.3 82,360 19.8 3,290 34.2 24,210 25.6

2001 42,570 28.6 82,760 20.7 3,300 35.9 24,210 26.9

2002 40,060 31.7 78,560 23.1 2,960 39.5 23,030 28.4

2003 39,670 32.2 76,830 22.2 2,920 38.8 22,980 26.9

2004 39,540 34.8 76,700 23.7 2,890 40.4 22,840 28.2

2005 35,790 37.9 69,860 26.4 2,480 44.3 20,750 30.4

2006a 35,290 45.0 71,310 37.4 2,460 52.0 21,120 41.9

2007b 38,610 43.4 77,640 34.6 2,750 48.8 23,390 39.5

2008 34,400 43.7 70,770 35.4 2,530 49.4 21,270 39.2

2009 34,840 47.5 71,760 38.0 2,670 50.8 21,530 40.3

2010c 38,280 48.8 75,020 39.9 2,860 52.0 22,980 41.9

2011d 37,850 50.3 72,870 41.7 2,770 53.9 22,600 43.7

2012 43,220 50.6 82,140 41.9 3,150 54.3 26,320 43.3

2013 42,360 50.6 79,850 42.0 3,180 54.7 25,950 43.3

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 1% missing data on marital status. 

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

40
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 8. Estimates for figure 9: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by household composition, 1993–2013

Two or more adults 

without children

Two or more adults 

with children Single adult without children Single adult with children

Year

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

1993 53,490 23.3 % 47,670 22.2 % 17,760 33.1 % 11,450 39.6 %

1994 70,940 23.0 62,800 21.9 24,240 32.0 15,290 36.9

1995 70,710 22.3 61,820 21.2 24,560 30.8 15,270 35.5

1996 66,040 20.4 58,690 20.1 23,290 28.4 14,830 34.7

1997 61,060 19.4 54,290 18.6 22,230 27.0 14,040 35.4

1998 61,110 20.1 52,820 19.9 22,550 28.4 13,900 34.5

1999 61,120 21.2 56,890 22.5 22,660 28.3 7,820 34.4

2000 62,450 21.2 58,590 22.1 23,170 28.7 7,850 32.4

2001 63,290 22.7 58,630 22.6 23,440 30.1 7,870 33.2

2002 60,580 24.8 54,710 25.8 22,420 32.0 7,560 36.2

2003 59,350 23.9 53,480 25.4 22,290 31.7 7,750 36.1

2004 59,140 26.2 52,940 26.6 22,810 33.0 7,640 39.3

2005 54,080 28.4 47,610 30.5 21,140 34.7 6,680 42.0

2006a 55,910 39.4 47,850 39.1 20,650 45.0 6,380 50.6

2007b 62,060 36.0 51,240 37.5 23,160 44.1 6,580 45.8

2008 56,750 36.5 45,310 38.1 21,700 43.7 5,850 47.9

2009 58,620 38.8 44,720 42.7 22,310 43.1 5,840 51.3

2010c 62,580 41.2 47,510 44.8 23,660 43.0 6,210 50.8

2011d 61,890 42.3 45,610 47.8 22,980 43.7 6,170 53.1

2012 69,680 42.0 51,370 48.5 27,090 44.0 7,000 51.7

2013 69,170 42.4 48,750 48.4 27,110 44.0 6,720 51.6

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 0.5% missing data on household composition. 

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

41
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 9. Estimates for figure 10: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted in person, by household income, 1993–2013

Less than $24,999 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 or more Unknown income

Year

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent 

in-person 

interviews

1993 48,220 35.9 % 40,410 19.7 % 27,740 13.4 % 14,390 31.5 %

1994 62,670 34.7 52,590 19.2 38,280 14.0 20,160 31.5

1995 58,660 33.7 52,460 19.1 40,970 14.1 20,770 30.8

1996 52,400 32.9 48,140 17.8 42,090 12.2 20,640 30.0

1997 45,170 33.2 43,350 17.3 42,560 10.6 20,970 29.1

1998 41,410 33.7 41,930 18.9 44,230 11.7 23,310 30.6

1999 37,740 34.5 40,060 20.3 45,690 12.7 25,450 31.5

2000 34,860 34.5 39,060 20.1 50,700 13.0 28,020 32.1

2001 32,750 35.3 38,030 22.3 52,780 14.6 30,280 32.1

2002 29,280 37.4 34,220 26.1 50,020 17.3 32,170 32.8

2003 28,490 36.5 33,090 24.9 51,140 16.0 30,780 35.6

2004 27,460 37.9 31,360 27.7 52,200 16.7 32,120 38.7

2005 23,390 41.4 27,800 31.3 48,390 19.5 30,530 40.3

2006a 22,800 54.6 28,000 43.4 49,560 30.7 30,880 43.9

2007b 21,190 49.8 28,430 39.1 52,370 30.7 41,500 41.5

2008 17,960 50.6 25,230 40.6 48,280 31.1 38,530 41.6

2009 19,290 53.9 26,320 43.0 48,390 33.5 37,970 44.0

2010c 21,170 54.7 27,730 45.3 49,710 36.2 41,870 44.1

2011d 20,740 55.6 26,890 46.6 49,640 39.2 39,930 45.2

2012 24,540 55.1 31,890 46.9 57,790 39.0 41,510 45.8

2013 23,100 55.4 31,210 47.0 56,060 38.4 42,000 46.7

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. 

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

42
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

43

Appendix table 10. Respondent and household characteristics of NCVS sample members, by inperson or telephone interviewing conditions, 2009–13 

Characteristic

Average annual 

number of 

interviews

Data collection mode

Overall In-person Telephone

Overall 143,550 100 % 43.9 % 56.1 %

Sex

Male 67,070 100 % 44.6 % 55.4 %

Female 76,480 100 % 43.4 56.6

Age

12–17 9,870 100 % 47.0 % 53.0 %

18–24 12,370 100 % 55.3 44.7

25–34 22,090 100 % 50.8 49.2

35–49 36,180 100 % 45.1 54.9

50–64 36,960 100 % 38.8 61.2

65 or older 26,070 100 % 37.3 62.7

Race/Hispanic origin

Whitea 99,610 100 % 39.6 % 60.4 %

Black/African Americana 15,110 100 % 52.7 47.3

Hispanic/Latino 20,020 100 % 57.4 42.6

American Indian/Alaska Nativea 760 100 % 49.9 50.1

Asian, Native Hawaiian, or 

 Other Pacific Islandera 6,560 100 % 48.3 51.7

More than one racea 1,480 100 % 44.8 55.2

Marital statusb

Never married 39,310 100 % 49.6 % 50.4 %

Married 76,330 100 % 40.7 59.3

Widowed 8,950 100 % 40.3 59.7

Divorced 14,920 100 % 43.9 56.1

Separated 2,930 100 % 53.2 46.8

Household compositionc

Two or more adults 111,980 100 % 43.6 % 56.4 %

Without children 64,390 100 % 41.4 58.6

With children 47,590 100 % 46.5 53.5

Single adult 31,020 100 % 45.3 54.7

Without children 24,630 100 % 43.6 56.4

With children 6,390 100% 51.7 48.3

Household income

Less than $7,500 4,020 100 % 63.2 % 36.8 %

$7,500–$14,999 6,850 100 % 55.9 44.1

$15,000–$24,999 10,910 100 % 51.3 48.7

$25,000–$34,999 12,250 100 % 48.2 51.8

$35,000–$49,999 16,550 100 % 44.1 55.9

$50,000–$74,999 18,890 100 % 40.2 59.8

$75,000 or more 33,420 100 % 35.7 64.3

Unknown 40,660 100 % 45.2 54.8

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes 4% of interviews conducted with a proxy respondent.

aExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

bExcludes 1% missing data on marital status. 

cExcludes less than 0.5% missing data on household composition.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

44

Appendix table 11. Estimates for figure 11: 

Proxy interviews conducted in the NCVS, 

1993–2013 

Year

Total number of 

NCVS interviews

Proxy 

interview

1993 136,630 4.3%

1994 181,210 4.1

1995 179,820 3.9

1996 170,660 4.3

1997 158,940 4.3

1998 157,800 4.4

1999 155,500 4.2

2000 159,420 4.3

2001 159,900 3.8

2002 152,110 4.2

2003 149,040 3.7

2004 148,580 3.7

2005 134,040 2.9

2006

a 135,260 3.0

2007

b 147,300 2.6

2008 134,180 3.1

2009 137,330 3.9

2010

c 146,570 4.2

2011

d 143,120 4.1

2012 162,940 4.4

2013 160,040 4.8

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Proxy 

interviews may be conducted in person or by telephone. 

Data include all NCVS interviews, including 95% to 97% of 

self-report interviews conducted with respondents. aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated 

computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) 

environment, and a new sample design was introduced. bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from 

centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 

2007. cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the 

NCVS sample increased by 24%. dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, 

new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of 

FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime 

Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

45

Appendix table 12. Estimates for figure 12: Percent of NCVS in-person interviews, by private or 

nonprivate interviewing conditions, 1993–2013

Interview privacy

Year

Number of NCVS 

in-person interviews

Private 

(respondent only)a

Nonprivate (respondent 

and others)b

1993 32,890 41.9 % 58.1 %

1994 42,595 41.9 58.1

1995 41,138 42.8 57.2

1996 36,190 41.7 58.3

1997 31,791 41.5 58.5

1998 32,640 41.0 59.0

1999 33,530 40.9 59.1

2000 34,111 41.8 58.2

2001 36,138 42.2 57.8

2002 37,870 42.8 57.2

2003 36,220 42.0 58.0

2004 38,718 42.1 57.9

2005 38,615 42.6 57.4

2006c 51,660 40.7 59.3

2007d 54,798 41.6 58.4

2008 50,396 42.5 57.5

2009 54,631 43.7 56.3

2010 60,594 42.6 57.4

2011 61,541 45.0 55.0

2012 69,999 50.2 49.8

2013 68,615 51.0 49.0

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 1.5% of cases from 1993 to 2006 for which the presence of 

others during the interview was not ascertained. 

aOnly the interviewer is present with the respondent.

bOthers present during an interview may include the respondent’s spouse, other household members, and nonhousehold 

members. 

cComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

dBeginning in 2010, two large-scale interventions were implemented in the NCVS. Beginning in October 2010 and ending in 

June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

eBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

46

Appendix table 13. Estimates for figure 13: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by 

respondent’s sex, 1993–2013

Male Female

Year

Number of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent only)

Number of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent only)

1993 14,640 42.3 % 18,250 41.7 %

1994 18,930 41.9 23,660 41.8

1995 18,250 42.5 22,890 43.1

1996 16,350 42.0 19,840 41.4

1997 14,310 42.1 17,480 40.9

1998 14,680 41.3 17,960 40.7

1999 15,210 41.2 18,320 40.6

2000 15,710 42.0 18,410 41.6

2001 16,760 42.7 19,380 41.8

2002 17,530 43.6 20,340 42.0

2003 16,830 43.3 19,390 41.0

2004 17,870 42.8 20,850 41.5

2005 18,070 43.8 20,550 41.5

2006a 24,400 40.9 27,260 40.5

2007b 26,090 41.5 28,710 41.6

2008 24,020 42.8 26,380 42.2

2009 26,040 44.0 28,590 43.5

2010c 28,760 42.9 31,830 42.3

2011d 28,970 45.8 32,580 44.3

2012 33,220 51.1 36,780 49.4

2013 32,540 52.1 36,080 50.1

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a 

new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs 

were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 14. Estimates for figure 14: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s age, 1993–2013

12–17 18–24 25–34 35 or older

Year

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

1993 2,720 16.7 % 4,850 38.1 % 7,690 39.2 % 17,630 48.1 %

1994 3,500 15.0 6,090 39.2 9,740 38.3 23,270 48.1

1995 3,280 16.7 5,450 38.3 9,320 40.1 23,090 48.7

1996 3,020 15.4 4,890 36.6 8,260 39.6 20,020 47.7

1997 2,640 14.7 4,480 36.9 7,300 39.3 17,370 47.6

1998 2,580 13.7 4,550 36.9 7,280 38.4 18,230 46.9

1999 2,650 15.0 4,620 36.6 7,340 39.0 18,930 46.2

2000 2,600 14.1 4,690 36.6 7,360 39.8 19,460 47.5

2001 2,810 16.7 4,850 38.4 7,640 39.8 20,840 47.5

2002 2,990 15.1 5,060 38.7 7,880 41.2 21,950 48.0

2003 2,960 15.6 5,030 40.1 7,670 39.9 20,570 47.1

2004 3,090 13.7 5,390 39.7 8,200 40.9 22,040 47.1

2005 3,160 15.3 5,120 39.8 8,100 41.3 22,240 47.6

2006a 4,150 14.2 5,840 37.3 9,270 38.3 32,410 45.4

2007b 4,200 16.5 6,030 37.4 9,960 39.9 34,610 45.8

2008 3,720 16.4 5,390 38.8 9,070 42.0 32,220 46.3

2009 3,920 17.0 6,100 40.6 9,970 42.1 34,650 47.7

2010c 4,450 13.9 6,730 39.0 11,130 42.2 38,290 46.7

2011d 4,760 19.4 6,620 41.5 10,600 45.1 39,570 48.6

2012 5,160 24.8 7,490 46.9 12,420 49.9 44,940 53.7

2013 4,910 26.1 7,280 49.0 11,990 50.6 44,450 54.2

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent. 

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

47
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 15. Estimates for figure 15: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s race and Hispanic 

origin, 1993–2013

Whitea Black/African Americana Hispanic/Latino Other racea,b

Year

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

1993 22,230 45.9 % 4,670 43.4 % 4,530 24.1 % 1,460 31.3 %

1994 29,000 45.4 5,870 41.8 5,830 26.4 1,900 34.9

1995 27,980 46.2 5,510 43.7 5,690 28.5 1,970 33.4

1996 23,300 46.3 5,260 42.6 5,860 25.2 1,770 32.6

1997 19,510 45.4 4,940 45.6 5,670 26.7 1,670 33.0

1998 20,120 45.2 5,050 44.7 5,740 25.5 1,740 32.9

1999 20,510 44.6 4,900 45.0 6,180 27.4 1,940 33.2

2000 20,640 46.1 5,160 47.6 6,460 25.9 1,860 33.0

2001 22,430 46.1 5,330 46.1 6,530 28.6 1,860 32.6

2002 23,130 45.7 5,660 48.8 7,150 30.2 1,940 36.4

2003 20,790 45.9 5,560 48.0 7,640 28.7 2,240 37.1

2004 22,570 45.8 5,860 46.2 7,710 30.1 2,580 36.2

2005 22,640 45.8 5,670 47.2 7,590 32.0 2,720 36.2

2006c 35,030 42.4 5,780 47.9 7,800 29.1 3,050 37.8

2007d 35,070 43.8 6,830 45.5 9,520 31.8 3,380 37.7

2008 32,240 44.3 6,470 49.3 8,490 31.9 3,200 38.4

2009 34,430 46.3 7,100 49.2 9,700 31.7 3,400 39.6

2010e 38,390 44.9 7,610 49.2 10,830 31.0 3,770 39.4

2011f 38,780 46.9 7,470 52.3 11,100 34.3 4,200 42.1

2012 43,320 52.6 8,880 55.8 12,900 39.0 4,890 48.0

2013 42,080 52.6 8,780 57.9 12,950 41.7 4,810 49.1

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent. 

aExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin. 

bIncludes American Indians and Alaska Natives; Asians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or more races. 

cIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

dComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

eBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%. 

f

Between August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

48
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 16. Estimates for figure 16: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by respondent’s marital status, 1993–

2013

Never married Married Separated Divorced/widowed

Year

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent

 only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

1993 10,060 42.2 % 15,780 32.4 % 1,250 50.1 % 5,670 65.2 %

1994 12,890 41.6 20,510 32.3 1,550 49.5 7,400 66.3

1995 12,250 43.1 19,830 33.1 1,470 52.3 7,330 65.9

1996 11,220 40.7 17,030 32.4 1,310 50.8 6,320 65.4

1997 10,240 40.9 14,450 31.6 1,210 52.1 5,550 64.2

1998 10,490 41.9 14,920 30.5 1,240 51.3 5,650 63.2

1999 10,780 40.7 15,410 30.7 1,120 52.9 5,810 64.3

2000 11,030 41.8 15,640 31.6 1,080 52.7 5,970 65.0

2001 11,780 42.9 16,480 31.5 1,140 54.6 6,280 64.8

2002 12,340 43.1 17,540 32.5 1,130 55.8 6,320 66.1

2003 12,330 43.0 16,300 31.1 1,100 54.6 5,920 65.1

2004 13,240 42.2 17,510 32.6 1,130 53.0 6,170 64.2

2005 13,040 43.2 17,810 32.5 1,050 56.1 6,030 66.1

2006a 15,380 40.8 25,820 30.4 1,230 58.5 8,570 66.7

2007b 16,680 42.2 26,820 30.9 1,340 56.9 9,210 66.4

2008 15,020 42.8 25,080 32.4 1,250 57.9 8,350 67.3

2009 16,550 43.4 27,250 34.5 1,360 59.0 8,680 67.8

2010c 18,690 42.0 29,900 33.7 1,490 57.0 9,640 66.4

2011d 19,060 44.4 30,410 36.8 1,490 58.0 9,880 67.3

2012 21,860 50.2 34,430 42.4 1,710 59.1 11,390 71.1

2013 21,420 51.2 33,530 43.0 1,740 62.3 11,240 71.2

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 1% missing data on marital status. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent.

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007. 

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.

49
50

Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 17. Estimates for figure 17: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by household composition, 1993–2013

Two or more adults

without children

Two or more adults 

with children

Single adult 

without children

Single adult 

with children

Year

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent

 only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

1993 12,220 38.8 % 10,370 25.3 % 5,750 88.0 % 4,460 30.0 %

1994 15,950 38.7 13,470 25.0 7,550 88.3 5,530 29.1

1995 15,450 39.2 12,850 26.1 7,380 88.4 5,340 30.6

1996 13,110 39.0 11,510 25.5 6,390 86.5 5,060 28.7

1997 11,380 38.3 9,710 24.4 5,760 86.5 4,830 29.6

1998 11,730 37.6 10,050 23.1 6,090 86.4 4,630 29.3

1999 12,430 35.5 12,260 24.1 6,150 86.7 2,600 37.7

2000 12,750 37.4 12,450 24.2 6,350 87.4 2,450 36.6

2001 13,920 36.6 12,770 25.6 6,780 87.6 2,530 36.6

2002 14,520 38.0 13,680 26.0 6,920 88.5 2,660 36.4

2003 13,540 37.2 13,040 25.2 6,760 87.3 2,720 35.0

2004 14,900 37.2 13,630 25.0 7,150 87.8 2,910 34.5

2005 14,800 37.1 14,050 26.7 6,970 89.3 2,680 35.9

2006a 21,280 34.0 18,060 25.4 9,030 89.1 3,150 36.0

2007b 22,290 32.9 19,140 26.3 10,220 89.7 3,000 39.8

2008 20,710 33.3 17,260 27.8 9,480 90.1 2,800 40.3

2009 22,740 36.6 19,120 29.5 9,610 89.6 3,000 41.5

2010c 25,790 36.6 21,270 28.0 10,180 89.5 3,150 38.8

2011d 26,190 39.1 21,800 32.0 10,040 89.7 3,270 41.9

2012 29,280 45.7 24,910 37.4 11,910 89.5 3,620 45.9

2013 29,350 45.8 23,580 38.1 11,940 90.3 3,470 48.2

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Excludes less than 0.5% missing data on household composition. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent. 

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007. 

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
51

Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 18. Estimates for figure 18: Percent of NCVS interviews conducted privately, by household income, 1993–2013

Less than $24,999 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 or more Unknown income

Year

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent

 only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

Number 

of NCVS 

interviews

Percent private 

interviews 

(respondent 

only)

1993 17,070 41.6 % 7,750 41.0 % 3,620 43.6 % 4,440 43.5 %

1994 21,370 41.4 9,790 39.6 5,230 42.2 6,210 46.8

1995 19,430 42.0 9,800 40.8 5,640 43.2 6,270 48.3

1996 16,870 39.6 8,310 40.1 4,960 42.2 6,050 49.1

1997 14,540 40.0 7,170 38.5 4,230 40.4 5,850 49.4

1998 13,440 39.8 7,550 37.2 4,820 40.1 6,830 48.1

1999 12,610 41.0 7,760 37.0 5,470 38.9 7,690 45.9

2000 11,660 41.3 7,550 38.5 6,270 39.2 8,630 47.2

2001 11,230 42.4 8,190 38.0 7,350 39.8 9,370 47.6

2002 10,650 44.2 8,660 38.9 8,350 38.3 10,220 48.1

2003 10,070 43.0 7,890 39.2 7,740 38.4 10,520 45.9

2004 10,060 43.8 8,390 40.1 8,330 37.7 11,940 45.1

2005 9,350 45.3 8,380 38.7 9,050 39.5 11,830 45.6

2006a 12,150 44.7 11,840 38.1 14,690 35.8 12,980 45.0

2007b 10,530 48.1 11,070 37.6 16,020 35.5 17,170 45.8

2008 9,090 48.1 10,260 37.9 15,020 36.9 16,030 47.5

2009 10,410 48.0 11,310 39.0 16,220 39.5 16,700 48.2

2010c 11,590 45.9 12,570 39.2 17,980 38.6 18,460 46.7

2011d 11,530 48.7 12,530 42.1 19,450 41.8 18,030 48.0

2012 13,510 52.8 14,950 48.0 22,520 49.0 19,020 51.5

2013 12,800 54.0 14,660 48.4 21,540 49.2 19,620 53.0

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data. Only the interviewer is present with the respondent. 

aIn July 2006, the NCVS converted to a fully automated computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) environment, and a new sample design was introduced.

bComputer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) from centralized call centers was discontinued for the NCVS in July 2007.

cBeginning in October 2010 and ending in June 2011, the NCVS sample increased by 24%.

dBetween August 2011 and February 2012, refresher training, new FR performance metrics, and enhanced supervision of FRs were implemented.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 1993–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

52

Appendix table 19. Respondent and household characteristics of NCVS sample, by whether inperson interview was conducted under private or nonprivate interviewing conditions, 2009–13 

Characteristic

Average annual 

number of 

in-person 

interviews

Overall 

in-person

Interview privacy

Private 

(respondent 

only)a

Nonprivate 

(respondent 

and others)b

Overall 63,080 100 % 46.8 % 53.2 %

Sex

Male 29,900 100 % 47.5 52.5 %

Female 33,170 100 % 46.2 53.8

Age

12–17 4,640 100 % 20.6 % 79.4 %

18–24 6,840 100 % 43.6 56.4

25–34 11,220 100 % 46.2 53.8

35–49 16,300 100 % 47.1 52.9

50–64 14,350 100 % 52.6 47.4

65 or older 9,730 100 % 53.0 47.0

Race/Hispanic origin

Whitec 39,400 100 % 48.9 % 51.1 %

Black/African Americanc 7,970 100 % 53.2 46.8

Hispanic/Latino 11,500 100 % 36.0 64.0

American Indian/Alaska Nativec 380 100 % 49.9 50.1

Asian, Native Hawaiian, or 

 Other Pacific Islanderc 3,170 100 % 42.2 57.8

More than one racec 660 100 % 50.4 49.6

Marital statusd

Never married 19,510 100 % 46.6 % 53.4 %

Married 31,100 100 % 38.4 61.6

Widowed 3,610 100 % 72.0 28.0

Divorced 6,550 100 % 67.2 32.8

Separated 1,560 100 % 59.2 40.8

Household compositione

Two or more adults 111,980 100 % 37.6 % 62.4 %

Without children 26,670 100 % 41.1 58.9

With children 22,140 100 % 33.3 66.7

Single adult 14,040 100 % 78.9 21.1

Without children 10,740 100 % 89.7 10.3

With children 3,300 100 % 43.4 56.6

Household income

Less than $7,500 2,540 100 % 54.9 % 45.1 %

$7,500–$14,999 3,830 100 % 53.5 46.5

$15,000–$24,999 5,600 100 % 45.6 54.4

$25,000–$34,999 5,910 100 % 44.4 55.6

$35,000–$49,999 7,290 100 % 43.2 56.8

$50,000–$74,999 7,600 100 % 43.1 56.9

$75,000 or more 11,940 100 % 44.8 55.2

Unknown 18,360 100 % 49.6 50.4

Note: Estimates are based on unweighted data.

aOnly the interviewer is present with the respondent. 

bOthers present during an interview may include the respondent’s spouse, other household members, and nonhousehold 

members. 

cExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

dExcludes 1% missing data on marital status. 

eExcludes less than 0.5% missing data on household composition.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.
Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

53

Appendix table 20. Standard errors for table 2: Rate of violent victimization, by in-person or 

telephone interviewing conditions, 2009–13

Data collection mode

Type of crime Overall In-person Telephone 

Total violent crime 0.8 1.5 1.0

Serious violent crime 0.3 0.6 0.3

Rape/sexual assault 0.1 0.2 0.1

Robbery 0.2 0.3 0.2

Aggravated assault 0.2 0.4 0.2

Simple assault 0.6 1.1 0.8

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.

Appendix table 21. Standard errors for table 3: Rate of violent victimization for in-person 

interview, by private or nonprivate interviewing conditions, 2009–13

Interview privacy

Type of crime

Overall 

in-person

Private

(respondent only)a

Nonprivate 

(respondent and others)

Total violent crime 1.5 2.2 1.6

Serious violent crime 0.6 0.8 0.6

Rape/sexual assault 0.2 0.3 0.2

Robbery 0.3 0.4 0.4

Aggravated assault 0.4 0.5 0.4

Simple assault 1.1 1.6 1.1

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.
54

Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 22. Rate of violent victimization for single-person and multiperson households, by whether in-person interview was 

administered under private or nonprivate interviewing conditions, 2009–13

Respondent lives with others Respondent lives alone

Interview privacy Ratio of 

private to 

nonprivate 

interviews

Interview privacy Ratio of 

private to 

nonprivate 

Type of crime interviews

Overall in 

person

Private 

(respondent 

only)a

Nonprivate 

(respondent 

and others)b

Overall 

in person

Private 

(respondent 

only)a

Nonprivate 

(respondent 

and others)b

Total violent crime 29.2 37.3 24.4 † 1.5 35.0 35.1 34.4 1.0

Serious violent crime 10.0 12.1 8.7 † 1.4 13.2 13.1 14.4 0.9

Rape/sexual assault 1.5 2.0 1.2 † 1.6 2.0 2.0 2.2 ! 0.9

Robbery 3.4 3.7 3.2 1.2 4.3 4.2 4.9 0.9

Aggravated assault 5.0 6.4 4.2 † 1.5 6.9 6.9 7.2 0.9

Simple assault 19.3 25.2 15.7 † 1.6 21.8 22.0 20.0 1.1

Average annual 

 population interviewed 

 under each condition 92,429,090 34,669,600 57,759,490 17,232,780 15,466,520 1,766,260

Note: Estimates based on weighted data. See appendix table 23 for standard errors.

†Significant difference between private and nonprivate interviewing conditions at the 95% confidence level.

! Interpret data with caution; estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

aOnly the interviewer is present with the respondent. 

bOthers present during an interview is anyone else aside from the interviewer and respondent. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.
55

Interviewing Conditions in the National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013

Appendix table 23. Standard errors for appendix table 22: Rate of violent victimization for single-person and multiperson 

households, by whether in-person interview was administered under private or nonprivate interviewing conditions, 2009–13

Respondent lives with others Respondent lives alone

Interview privacy Interview privacy

Type of crime

Overall 

in person

Private 

(respondent 

only)a

Nonprivate 

(respondent 

and others)b

Overall 

in person

Private 

(respondent 

only)a

Nonprivate 

(respondent 

and others)b

Total violent crime 1.6 2.4 1.6 2.9 3.0 6.1

Serious violent crime 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.2 1.2 2.8

Rape/sexual assault 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.4 1.0

Robbery 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.7 0.7 1.8

Aggravated assault 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.8 1.9

Simple assault 1.1 1.8 1.1 2.1 2.1 4.3

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2009–2013.
Office of Justice Programs

Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods

www.ojp.usdoj.gov

The Bureau of Justice Statistics of the U.S. Department of Justice is the principa

federal agency responsible for measuring crime, criminal victimization, criminal 

offenders, victims of crime, correlates of crime, and the operation of criminal 

and civil justice systems at the federal, state, tribal, and local levels. BJS collects,

analyzes, and disseminates reliable and valid statistics on crime and justice 

systems in the United States, supports improvements to state and local criminal 

justice information systems, and participates with national and international 

organizations to develop and recommend national standards for justice statistics

Jeri M. Mulrow is acting directo

This report was written by Shannan Catalano, BJS Statistician. Erika Harrell, BJS 

Statistician verified the report.

Irene Cooperman and Brigitte A. Coulton edited the report. Barbara Quinn and 

Tina Dorsey produced the report.

August 2016, NCJ 249682

NCJ249682