01-11-2012, 04:46 PM
Reporting on-Campus Crime Online: User Intention to Use
Reporting on-Campus Crime Online User Intention to Use.pdf (Size: 302.65 KB / Downloads: 26)
Abstract
National surveys demonstrate that millions of crimes go
unreported in the United States. Several reasons may
contribute to this lack of reporting and we are
investigating these potential reasons and how they may be
addressed. We are developing an online system that
provides an anonymous and secure mechanism for both
victims and witnesses to report crimes to police. The
system is being implemented and tested on a university
campus. Potential users (i.e., students, staff) were
surveyed to determine their intent to use the system.
Respondents claimed to report crimes already, which is in
contrast with the findings from the national surveys. Our
respondents found the online system useful, accessible,
and safe to report crime, but the type of crime and the
urgency of response is a determinant in the decision to
use the system versus reporting it to a live person.
.
1. Introduction
With over 250 million searches a day submitted to
Google, the most popular search engine, the Internet is the
most pervasive means of information retrieval [13].
Today, a great percentage of these millions of searches
originate from people interested in, for example, medical
information and world news. However, in recent years,
Internet users have shifted from being information
consumers to being information providers. This is clear in
the explosive growth of blogs or online journals
discussing topics that range from poetry to politics. It is
estimated that there are 9 million different bloggers and
that 40,000 new ones are added every day [1]. Similarly,
websites that welcome user input have experienced an
increase in users signing in.
Background
National statistics on crime show a disparity on the
number of committed crimes versus the number of
reported crimes. According to the Bureau of Justice [2],
only half of all violent crimes are reported to the police.
For less serious crimes, such as household or property
crimes, only one third are reported. For example, LAPD
reports 1073 rapes in 2004 [7], based on national
estimates, it can be estimated that there were twice as
many rapes in the Los Angeles area. The information on
unreported crime is very sparse. Searching Google for
“Los Angeles” and “unreported crime” offers anecdotal
evidence of this lack of information. Instead of millions of
web pages only 129 were found (search performed on
Thursday, January 06, 2005, www.google.com) and most
mentioned unreported crime only briefly or provided
decade old examples. At the national level, the National
Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), based on yearly
interviews obtained from a representative sample of
45,000 households, provides a peek at unreported crimes.
From this sample, those that have been victims of crime
and did not necessarily report it, are interviewed. This
data can be compared with Uniform Crime Reporting
(UCR) data, which provides reported crime data based on
police reports or with the National Incident-Based
Reporting System (NIBRS), which adds more information
about incidents and their victims. None of the surveys
includes witnesses to crimes.
Crimes go unreported for several reasons. People fear
repercussions (e.g., gang related crimes), are ashamed to
report the crime (e.g., crimes by relatives), believe it is a
private issue (e.g., a neighbor who beats his wife), believe
the crime too insignificant to warrant reporting (e.g.,
stolen bike), or believe that reporting the crime will make
no difference (e.g., graffiti). The ability to reach an
authority (i.e., police presence) is another important
determinant in crime reporting according to Soares [12].
Current systems rely on the telephone or in person
reporting. We are developing an Internet-based
submission system that provides anonymity as an option,
the use different data formats (video, pictures, text), and
different access methods (via computer or later cell
phone). The system will automatically inform the on-duty
police officers and provide searchable overviews for the
public at large. We believe people might find such as
system a convenient alternative for reporting crime that
addresses their concerns when having to report a crime.
Little if no research on crime reporting systems is
available in the Information-Systems-literature on
potential impacts of information technology on crime
reporting. However, research on adoption of egovernment
initiatives may shed some light on the
problem at hand. Similar to crime reporting systems, egovernment
initiatives have to be available for the
population in general and their adoption is also voluntary.
Carter and Belanger investigated the adoption of egovernment
initiatives and proposed a model listing the
factors involved in this adoption [3]. They combined
elements of the Technology Adoption Model (TAM), the
Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) model and constructs from
the Web and Institutional Trust Models.
TAM is a well-known model used to study user
acceptance of technology in general [4]. From TAM
Carter and Belanger used three constructs: perceived
usefulness and perceived ease of use as independent
variables and intention to use as dependent variable.
Perceived usefulness is defined as the “degree to which a
person believes that using a particular system would
enhance his or her job performance.” Perceived ease of
use is defined as the “degree to which a person believes
that using a particular system would be free of effort.”
According to TAM, the acceptance of technology is
determined by how useful and easy to use the system is
perceived to be by potential users.
Carter and Belanger proposed that constructs from
the DOI model might be useful to explain the adoption of
e-government initiatives. These constructs are
compatibility, relative advantage, and complexity.
Compatibility is the “degree to which an innovation is
seen to be compatible with existing values, beliefs,
experiences, and needs of adopters.” Relative advantage is
the “degree to which an innovation is seen as being
superior to its predecessor.” Complexity is the “degree to
which an innovation is seen by the potential adopter as
being relatively difficult to use and understand” [14].
Carter and Belanger also include the construct of image,
measured by the prestige that using the technology might
bring to the potential adopter [9].
Finally, the e-government adoption model considers
elements of trust. Carter and Belanger explain that two
types of trust may influence the adoption of e-government
initiatives. These are trust in the agency providing the
service, and trust in the technology through which the
transaction is executed.
3. On-Campus Crime Reporting System.
We are developing a website in collaboration with the
Claremont Graduate University’s Department of Campus
Safety where people (i.e., students, staff) can report crime
and suspicious activities anonymously, (prototype,
currently focused on unreported campus crime,
http://isl.cgu.edu/nathan/index.aspx, all information
shown for testing purposes only). The submitted
information can be facts (text), images, or video.