Report: Quantitative Analysis of Crime Survey Data and Findings

This report presents a quantitative analysis of the England and Wales crime survey data from 2018-19, employing statistical methods to explore relationships between various factors. The analysis utilizes SPSS to examine several key questions, including the public's concern about fraud, the impact of crime on residents of London versus other areas, differences in trust in the police among various ethnic groups, the correlation between the impact of crime on respondents' lives and their worry about mugging and robbery, and the association between urban/rural residence and worry about car theft. The report includes descriptive statistics, regression analysis, and ANOVA tables to support the findings, concluding with insights derived from the statistical evaluations and referencing relevant literature.

Quantitative analysis task

Contents
Contents...........................................................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
TASK...............................................................................................................................................1
1. How worried are respondents from England and Wales that they might be victim of fraud.. 1
2. Do people who live in London and those who do not differ (indlon) in their assessment of
how much their lives are affected by crime.................................................................................2
3. Do respondents of different ethnic groups (ethgrp4a) differ in how much they trust the
police (polatt6b)?........................................................................................................................4
4. Is there a relationship between how much respondents’ life is affected by crime (qualif2)
and how worried about being mugged and robbed (wmugged)?................................................7
5. Is there an association between whether respondents live in urban or rural area (rural3) and
how worried they are about getting their car stolen (wcarstol)?.................................................9
CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................11
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................12

INTRODUCTION
The technique which is uses statistical and maths modelling, depth research and measurement
which help to understand the behavioural patter of the observations in terms of numeric values is
knows as Quantitative analysis (Banerjee and Mishra, 2017). It is mainly used in evaluating the
financial documents in order to predict the events of real world like movements in GDP. In this
report, quantitative analysis is performed with the help of different SPSS methods in order to
determine the relationship between different variables takes from the crime survey England’s and
wales 2018-19.
TASK
1. How worried are respondents from England and Wales that they might be victim of fraud.
Statistics
How worried are you
being a victim of fraud
N Valid 8195
Missing 25968
Mean 2.30
Median 2.00
Mode 2
Std. Deviation .916
Range 4
How worried are you being a victim of fraud
Frequency Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid
Very worried 1690 4.9 20.6 20.6
Fairly worried 3275 9.6 40.0 60.6
Not very
worried 2352 6.9 28.7 89.3
Not at all
worried 870 2.5 10.6 99.9
(Not
applicable) 8 .0 .1 100.0
Total 8195 24.0 100.0
1

Missing
Refused 7 .0
Don't know 15 .0
System 25946 75.9
Total 25968 76.0
Total 34163 100.0
Interpretation: From the table and graph above it has been determined that most of the
respondent are fairly worried of being a victim of fraud as it can impact their life in a bad manner
(Batra, 2018). The average mean value is 2.30 and STD.V is 0.913 which states that people do
not want to be part of activities which can be harmful for them or they can become a victim of
any mis-happening.
2. Do people who live in London and those who do not differ (indlon) in their assessment of how
much their lives are affected by crime.
Case Processing Summary
London or
outside London
(pfa)
Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
2

How much is YOUR OWN
quality of life affected by
crime
London 538 13.0% 3590 87.0% 4128 100.0%
Outside London 3762 12.5% 26273 87.5% 30035 100.0%
Descriptives
London or outside London (pfa) Statistic Std.
Error
How much is YOUR
OWN quality of life
affected by crime
London
Mean 3.23 .102
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 3.03
Upper
Bound 3.43
5% Trimmed Mean 3.03
Median 2.00
Variance 5.647
Std. Deviation 2.376
Minimum 1
Maximum 10
Range 9
Interquartile Range 4
Skewness .987 .105
Kurtosis .086 .210
Outside
London
Mean 2.48 .035
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 2.41
Upper
Bound 2.55
5% Trimmed Mean 2.22
Median 2.00
Variance 4.483
Std. Deviation 2.117
Minimum 1
Maximum 10
Range 9
Interquartile Range 2
Skewness 1.657 .040
Kurtosis 2.091 .080
3

Interpretation: The above table and graph result define that people living in London and outside
London are very much affected by the crime as it has disturb their entire life and they can be in
problem for a long period. It is also determined that more people living in London are affected
by crime as law and punishment of different places are different in the present time (Chaturvedi,
Mishra and Mishra, 2017).
3. Do respondents of different ethnic groups (ethgrp4a) differ in how much they trust the police
(polatt6b)?
Case Processing Summary
Ethnic Group (4
categories)
Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
The police in this area White 29768 97.8% 656 2.2% 30424 100.0%
4

can be trusted
Asian or Asian British 1860 98.3% 33 1.7% 1893 100.0%
Black or Black British 897 96.5% 33 3.5% 930 100.0%
Other (incl Chinese
and Mixed) 819 97.3% 23 2.7% 842 100.0%
Descriptives
Ethnic Group (4 categories) Statistic Std.
Error
The police in this
area can be trusted
White
Mean 2.00 .005
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 1.99
Upper
Bound 2.01
5% Trimmed Mean 1.92
Median 2.00
Variance .691
Std. Deviation .831
Minimum 1
Maximum 5
Range 4
Interquartile Range 1
Skewness 1.032 .014
Kurtosis 1.772 .028
Asian or Asian
British
Mean 1.97 .021
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 1.93
Upper
Bound 2.01
5% Trimmed Mean 1.89
Median 2.00
Variance .787
Std. Deviation .887
Minimum 1
Maximum 5
Range 4
Interquartile Range 1
Skewness 1.103 .057
Kurtosis 1.548 .113
5

Black or Black
British
Mean 2.24 .034
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 2.18
Upper
Bound 2.31
5% Trimmed Mean 2.17
Median 2.00
Variance 1.015
Std. Deviation 1.008
Minimum 1
Maximum 5
Range 4
Interquartile Range 1
Skewness .881 .082
Kurtosis .605 .163
Other (incl
Chinese and
Mixed)
Mean 2.04 .030
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 1.98
Upper
Bound 2.10
5% Trimmed Mean 1.97
Median 2.00
Variance .746
Std. Deviation .864
Minimum 1
Maximum 5
Range 4
Interquartile Range 1
Skewness .980 .085
Kurtosis 1.454 .171
6

Interpretation: The results above are helpful in defining the facts that each ethnic group white,
Asian or Asian British, Black or Black British and other people trust the police because the
STD.V of all group is above the significance value of 0.5.
4. Is there a relationship between how much respondents’ life is affected by crime (qualif2) and
how worried about being mugged and robbed (wmugged)?
Model Summaryb
Model R R Square Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of
the Estimate
1 .420a .177 .176 1.964
a. Predictors: (Constant), How worried about being
mugged and robbed
b. Dependent Variable: How much is YOUR OWN
quality of life affected by crime
ANOVAa
7

Model Sum of
Squares
df Mean
Square
F Sig.
1
Regression 3552.006 1 3552.006 920.555 .000b
Residual 16568.602 4294 3.859
Total 20120.609 4295
a. Dependent Variable: How much is YOUR OWN quality of life affected by
crime
b. Predictors: (Constant), How worried about being mugged and robbed
Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) 5.804 .111 52.477 .000
How worried about
being mugged and
robbed
-1.093 .036 -.420 -30.341 .000
a. Dependent Variable: How much is YOUR OWN quality of life affected by crime
Residuals Statisticsa
Minimu
m
Maximu
m
Mean Std.
Deviation
N
Predicted Value .34 4.71 2.57 .909 4296
Std. Predicted Value -2.456 2.350 .000 1.000 4296
Standard Error of
Predicted Value .030 .079 .041 .012 4296
Adjusted Predicted
Value .33 4.72 2.57 .909 4296
Residual -3.711 8.660 .000 1.964 4296
Std. Residual -1.889 4.409 .000 1.000 4296
Stud. Residual -1.891 4.412 .000 1.000 4296
Deleted Residual -3.717 8.674 .000 1.965 4296
Stud. Deleted Residual -1.891 4.422 .000 1.001 4296
Mahal. Distance .003 6.032 1.000 1.350 4296
Cook's Distance .000 .016 .000 .001 4296
Centered Leverage
Value .000 .001 .000 .000 4296
a. Dependent Variable: How much is YOUR OWN quality of life affected by
crime
8

Interpretation: The regression analysis clearly defines that respondent life is affected by crime
as they have a fear of mobbed and robbed (Vallurupalli and Bose, 2018). Value of r= 0.472
which states that there is a positive relationship between the quality life and the fear of being
robbed by the attackers.
5. Is there an association between whether respondents live in urban or rural area (rural3) and
how worried they are about getting their car stolen (wcarstol)?
Model Summaryb
Model R R Square Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of
the Estimate
1 .093a .009 .008 .432
a. Predictors: (Constant), How worried about having car
stolen
b. Dependent Variable: Rural or Urban Area
ANOVAa
9

Model Sum of
Squares
df Mean
Square
F Sig.
1
Regression 10.934 1 10.934 58.513 .000b
Residual 1257.918 6732 .187
Total 1268.852 6733
a. Dependent Variable: Rural or Urban Area
b. Predictors: (Constant), How worried about having car stolen
Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) 1.892 .019 97.082 .000
How worried about
having car stolen -.048 .006 -.093 -7.649 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Rural or Urban Area
Residuals Statisticsa
Minimu
m
Maximu
m
Mean Std.
Deviation
N
Predicted Value 1.65 1.84 1.75 .040 6734
Std. Predicted Value -2.381 2.373 .000 1.000 6734
Standard Error of
Predicted Value .005 .014 .007 .002 6734
Adjusted Predicted
Value 1.65 1.84 1.75 .040 6734
Residual -.844 .348 .000 .432 6734
Std. Residual -1.952 .805 .000 1.000 6734
Stud. Residual -1.953 .805 .000 1.000 6734
Deleted Residual -.845 .348 .000 .432 6734
Stud. Deleted Residual -1.953 .805 .000 1.000 6734
Mahal. Distance .000 5.671 1.000 1.440 6734
Cook's Distance .000 .002 .000 .000 6734
Centered Leverage
Value .000 .001 .000 .000 6734
a. Dependent Variable: Rural or Urban Area
10