DOI: 10.3886/icpsr09916.v2
title: Crime Commission Rates Among Incarcerated Felons in Nebraska, 1986-1990
title: Version 2

description: These data focus on rates of criminal offending obtained
 through the use of self-report surveys. Specifically, the study
 investigates whether two different types of self-report surveys
 produce different estimates of lambda, an individual's frequency of
 criminal offending. The surveys, which were administered during
 personal interviews with inmates in Nebraska prisons, differed in how
 respondents were asked about their frequency of criminal offending.
 The more detailed survey asked respondents to indicate their offenses
 on a month-by-month basis for the reporting period. The less detailed
 survey only asked respondents to indicate their offending for the
 entire reporting period. These data also provide information on the
 relationship between race and offending frequencies, the rates of
 offending over time and by crime category, and the individual's
 subjective probability of punishment and offending frequency. The
 specific crimes targeted in this collection include burglary, business
 robbery, personal robbery, assault, theft, forgery, fraud, drug
 dealing, and rape. All respondents were asked questions on criminal
 history, substance abuse, attitudes about crime and the judicial
 system, predictions of future criminal behavior, and demographic
information, including age, race, education, and marital status.
description: In the late 1970s the RAND Corporation conducted
 a survey of inmates, which became known as the RAND Second Inmate
 Survey (SURVEY OF JAIL AND PRISON INMATES, 1978: CALIFORNIA, MICHIGAN,
 TEXAS [ICPSR 8169]), to estimate lambda, an individual's frequency of
 offending. The current study is essentially a replication of the RAND
 study, with certain modifications, and was designed to address
 criticisms of the original work and to provide more detailed
 information on rates of criminal offending. The principal
 investigators gathered data to address a number of issues. First, they
 wanted to determine if lambda, calculated from responses to a modified
 survey, differs from lambda determined by the RAND method. The
 modified survey differs from the RAND survey in that it contains more
 detailed calendars for reporting periods of criminal activity. The
 more detailed calendars are believed to provide better cues for
 recalling past criminal activity. Also, the RAND data were collected
 through self-administered questionnaires. The current data were
 collected through personal interviews with prisoners. Personal
 interviews were conducted to reduce the amount of missing and
 ambiguous responses found in self-administered surveys. A criticism of
 the RAND study is that missing and ambiguous responses may have led to
 inflated values of lambda. Next, the investigators explored whether
 the RAND study's results regarding race and individual offending
 frequencies could be replicated. Whether rates of criminal activity
 vary over time and by crime category were also studied. In addition,
 the investigators gathered data to investigate the relationship
 between an individual's subjective probability of punishment and the
 frequency of offending. The results of the research should be useful
in developing crime intervention strategies.
description: A central purpose of the study was to compare
 lambda determined by the RAND study with lambda determined by the
 investigators' method. Seven hundred male prisoners in Nebraska were
 randomly assigned to either a control group or an experimental group.
 The control group was interviewed using the RAND method. The
 experimental group was interviewed using the investigators' more
 detailed month-by-month reporting method. Each interviewing method
 required determining the respondent's "street months." Under the
 RAND method, respondents were shown a 24-month calendar. Only the time
 period prior to their arrest for their current conviction was
 relevant. The interviewer crossed off any months during which the
 respondent had been incarcerated in that time period. The remaining
 months were the street months, the time available to commit
 crimes. The same procedure was used for the experimental group, except
 that a 36-month calendar was used. This was done so that a longer
 period of time was available to study variability in offending
 rates. For comparison of lambda based on the two methods, lambda of
 the experimental group was based on the 24-month calendar. Under each
 interviewing method, respondents were asked if they had committed any
 of certain target offenses (burglary, business robbery, personal
 robbery, assault, theft, auto theft, forgery, fraud, drug dealing, and
 rape) during their street months. With the RAND method, respondents
 were asked how often they had committed each target crime during the
 total street months. Under the experimental method, respondents
 indicated the specific months during which they committed the target
 offenses and their frequency of offending by month. In order to have a
 larger sample with detailed information, those in the control group
 were also given a supplemental survey after completing their original
 survey. The supplement asked the frequency of offense questions using
 the month-by-month method of the experimental group. The monthly data
are available for 658 of the 700 inmates interviewed.
description: Topics covered in the interviews include criminal
 history, substance abuse, attitudes about crime and the judicial
 system, predictions of future criminal behavior, and demographic
information.
description: Response Rates: Interviews were conducted with 700 inmates
 admitted to the Diagnostic and Evaluation Unit of the Nebraska
 Department of Corrections. This represents 90 percent of the prisoners
 admitted to the unit during a nine-month period. A total of 746
 inmates were asked to be interviewed, and 700 (94 percent) agreed to
participate.
description: Presence of Common Scales: None
description: Cohort sample consisting of 700 inmates
 admitted to the Diagnostic and Evaluation Unit of the Nebraska
Department of Corrections during a nine-month period.
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: Raw Data File
DS2: SPSS Export File
DS3: SAS Data Definition Statements for Logical Record Length Data
DS4: SAS Data Definition Statements for Card Image Data
description: Criminal offenders in Nebraska.
description: The column positions indicated on the data collection
instruments are not the column positions in the raw data file.