Using data from the Area‐Identified National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), we provide a national assessment of the impact of neighborhood immigrant concentration on whether violence is reported to the police. By drawing on multiple theoretical perspectives, we outline how the level of violence reporting could be higher or lower in immigrant neighborhoods, as well as how this may depend on individual race/ethnicity and the history of immigration in the county in which immigrant neighborhoods are located. Controlling for both individual‐ and neighborhood‐level conditions, our findings indicate that within traditional immigrant counties, rates of violence reporting in immigrant neighborhoods are similar to those observed elsewhere. In contrast, within newer immigrant destinations, we observe much lower rates of violence reporting in neighborhoods with a large concentration of immigrants. Our study findings reveal comparable patterns for Whites, Blacks, and Latinos. The results have important implications for theory, policy, and future research.
Using restricted data from 2011 to 2014, this study examines whether neighborhood immigrant concentration and survey interview language are associated with participation in the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The findings show that survey participation in the NCVS during the study period did not differ appreciably among households and persons sampled from neighborhoods with larger shares of immigrants. This suggests that the NCVS can contribute meaningfully to knowledge about the relationship between neighborhood immigrant concentration and levels of crime, providing an important complement to studies based on crime data collected by law enforcement agencies. Interview language had a minimal impact on nonresponse among Hispanic respondents in the NCVS, but the study revealed much higher rates of nonresponse across waves among Asian household respondents who completed the NCVS in a non-English language, especially among those from neighborhoods with relatively low immigrant concentration. This suggests that greater translation support for Asian respondents could increase NCVS response rates. Replicating and extending our research with more recent NCVS data, and incorporating the new item on citizenship status, would be valuable given the continued growth in the immigrant population, increased share of immigrants who routinely speak a language other than English at home, and social and political changes that have corresponded with observed reductions in nonresponse in government-administered surveys. We encourage the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to facilitate such research by routinely making the restricted NCVS data available for researchers to use within the nation’s Federal Statistical Research Data Centers and by adding interview language as a permanent fixture of the data.
more » « less- PAR ID:
- 10557399
- Publisher / Repository:
- SAGE Publications
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice
- Volume:
- 41
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 1043-9862
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 71-95
- Size(s):
- p. 71-95
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
Miller, Jody. (Ed.)Until recently, national-level data on criminal victimization in the United States did not include information on immigrant or citizenship status of respondents. This data-infrastructure limitation has hindered scientific understanding of whether immigrants are more or less likely than native-born Americans to be criminally victimized and how victimization may vary among immigrants of different statuses. We address these issues in the present study by using new data from the 2017–2018 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to explore the association between citizenship status and victimization risk in a nationally representative sample of households and persons aged 12 years and older. The research is guided by a theoretical framing that integrates insights from studies of citizenship with the literature on immigration and crime, as well as with theories of victimization. We find that a person’s foreign-born status (but not their acquired U.S. citizenship) confers protection against victimization. We also find that the protective benefit associated with being foreign born does not extend to those with ambiguous citizenship status, who in our data exhibit attributes similar to the known characteristics of undocumented immigrants. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings and the potential ways to extend the research.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Research on crime and neighborhood racial composition establishes that Black neighborhoods with high levels of violent crime will experience an increase in Black residents and concentrated disadvantage—due to the constrained housing choices Black people face. Some studies on the relationship between gentrification and crime, however, show that high-crime neighborhoods can experience reinvestment as well as displacement of Black residents. In Washington, DC, we have seen both trends—concentration of poverty and segregation as well as racial turnover and reinvestment. We employ a spatial analysis using a merged data set including crime data, Census data, and American Community Survey (ACS) data to analyze the relationship between crime and neighborhood change at the Census tract level. Our findings demonstrate the importance of distinguishing between periods of neighborhood decline and ascent, between the effects of property and violent crime, and between racial change and socioeconomic change.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Adaptive survey designs are increasingly used by survey practitioners to counteract ongoing declines in household survey response rates and manage rising fieldwork costs. This paper reports findings from an evaluation of an early-bird incentive (EBI) experiment targeting high-effort respondents who participate in the 2019 wave of the US Panel Study of Income Dynamics. We identified a subgroup of high-effort respondents at risk of nonresponse based on their prior wave fieldwork effort and randomized them to a treatment offering an extra time-delimited monetary incentive for completing their interview within the first month of data collection (treatment group; N = 800) or the standard study incentive (control group; N = 400). In recent waves, we have found that the costs of the protracted fieldwork needed to complete interviews with high-effort cases in the form of interviewer contact attempts plus an increased incentive near the close of data collection are extremely high. By incentivizing early participation and reducing the number of interviewer contact attempts and fieldwork days to complete the interview, our goal was to manage both nonresponse and survey costs. We found that the EBI treatment increased response rates and reduced fieldwork effort and costs compared to a control group. We review several key findings and limitations, discuss their implications, and identify the next steps for future research.
-
more » « less
Abstract Restrictive US immigration laws and law enforcement undermine immigrant health by generating fear and stress, disrupting families and communities, and eroding social and economic wellbeing. The inequality and stress created by immigration law and law enforcement may also generate disparities in health among immigrants with different legal statuses. However, existing research does not find consistent evidence of immigrant legal status disparities in health, possibly because it does not disaggregate immigrants by generation, defined by age at migration. Immigration and life course theory suggest that the health consequences of non-citizen status may be greater among 1.5-generation immigrants, who grew up in the same society that denies them formal membership, than among the 1st generation, who immigrated as adolescents or adults. In this study, we examine whether there are legal status disparities in health within and between the 1st generation and the 1.5 generation of 23,288 Latinx immigrant adults interviewed in the 2005–2017 waves of the California Health Interview Survey. We find evidence of legal status disparities in heart disease within the 1st generation and for high blood pressure and diabetes within the 1.5 generation. Non-citizens have higher rates of poor self-rated health and distress within both generations. Socioeconomic disadvantage and limited access to care largely account for the worse health of legally disadvantaged 1st- and 1.5-generation Latinx adults in California.
