1. Patterns of Police Reporting Amongst Victims of Partner Abuse: Analysis of the SCJS 2008/09 Sarah MacQueen Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research Paul Norris School of Social and Political Science

2. Research Aims Why? Relative lack of quantitative research and analysis on how and why victims of partner abuse come to report their abuse to police Raises methodological and substantive questions: Can research question be addressed with survey data? Will patterns found in data match those in the wider literature on more general crime reporting behaviour? Key research question: ‘Which factors are associated with whether victims report partner abuse to the police?’

3. Methodological questions: Survey methodology Drew on secondary analysis of Scottish Crime and Justice Survey 2008/09 to produce generalisable findings (much existing domestic violence research qualitative) Ongoing debate around whether surveys are appropriate for capturing experiences of domestic violence Issues of complex causality and contextualisation Sensitivity of topic Issues of definition and acceptance Recall issues Steps taken within SCJS overcome these issues Self completion questionnaire for partner abuse questions Term ‘partner abuse’ not used in questionnaire

4. Methodological questions: Focus on the SCJS 08/09 Sampling frame –Draws solely on private households, exclusion of temporary or communal accommodation Structure of questionnaire –Self-completion questionnaire not completed by all survey respondents, over 60s and those in most deprived neighbourhoods least likely to complete Reference period –Overcome recall difficulties by focusing detailed questions on incidents within ‘last 12 months’ or the ‘most recent’ incident –Not representative of victim experience of continuum of abusive behaviour over time Question wording “Did the police come to know about the most recent incident when your partner or ex partner did these things to you?”

5. Methodological questions: Diminishing Sample Sample for AnalysisNo. of CasesPercentage of Full Sample Full SCJS sample16,003100.0% Completed Self-completion questionnaire10,97468.8% Had a partner since age 1610,11063.1% Victim of partner abuse1,97512.3% Most recent incident in reference period3452.2% Did not wish to reply3352.1% Events notified to the police100n/a Notified by victim41n/a

6. Methodological questions: Identifying explanatory variables Key variables identified in previous research as significantly associated with victims of partner abuse (and other crime) reporting to the police : Indicators of severity (physical and psychological harm) Repeat victimisation Children present during the abuse Older victims (curvilinear) Female victims Social classification Perception of police and criminal justice system Neighbourhood characteristics Partnership status at time of incident Income Ethnic minority Abuser being under the influence of drugs or alcohol Victim being under the influence of drugs or alcohol Use of a weapon

7. Predicting Whether or Not Police Informed About Partner Abuse: Selected Variables Individual characteristics Age Gender Disability Attitude to criminal justice system (general and local) Household/ structural characteristics Social classification Household tenure Living with abusive partner (never, at time of incident, at time of incident and still is) Offence characteristics Did children see or hear most recent incident? Types of abuse and number of incidents Effects of abuse

8. Individual characteristicsOdds RatioStd. Error AgeYears past 16 th birthday1.120.05* Years past 16 th birthday squared0.99<0.00* GenderMaleReference Female3.021.13** Confidence in Local PoliceIndex of positive perceptions of local police (0-6)1.190.09* Household/ Structural characteristics Social ClassificationManagerial and professional occupations0.610.31 Intermediate occupations0.780.44 Routine and manual occupationsReference Never worked and long term unemployed5.232.29** Student1.991.42 Living with partnerNever lived with partnerReference Living with at time of most recent incident but does not now1.220.45 Living with at time of most recent incident and still is0.110.08** * (p≤.05) ** (p≤.01), N=320 Predicting Whether or Not Police Informed About Partner Abuse: Results

9. Abuse characteristicsOdds RatioStd. Error Variety of AbuseVariety of types of abuse suffered since 16 (maximum 19)1.140.06** Number of partner abuse incidents in last 12 months Single incidentReference More than one incident2.721.05* Refused to say1.250.61 Don’t know0.370.20 Physical Effects of Most Recent Incident Count of physical effects in most recent incident (maximum 8)1.440.23* Psychological Effects of Most Recent Incident Count of Psychological effects in most recent incident (maximum 9) 0.750.10* Children witness to most recent incident No children in household at time of most recent incidentReference Children living in household at time of most recent abuse and did see or hear incident 2.971.12** Children living in household at time of most recent incident but did not see or hear incident 0.920.59 * (p≤.05) ** (p≤.01) Fit statistics: Nagelkerke’s adjusted R².49, Hosmer-Lemeshow.457, -2LL 126.96 (p=<001, compared to intercept only model -2LL 193.752) N=320 Predicting Whether or Not Police Informed About Partner Abuse: Results

10. Outcomes and Concluding Comments Number of limitations with questionnaire and dataset hinder the explanatory power of the model… …but led to debate and discussion on amending the partner abuse elements of the SCJS questionnaire High proportion of victims of partner abuse are excluded from discussing their experiences within the SCJS However, analysis has produced interesting results, reflecting expectations, and relevant to current debates