Search results

Cover -- Half Title -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents -- List of Tables and Figures -- Preface -- Part One: Introduction -- Chapter 1: Problems and Prospects in the Study of Inequality, Crime, and Social Control -- Part Two: Directions for Theory -- Chapter 2: The Theoretical Bases for Inequality in Formal Social Control -- Chapter 3: Modeling the Conflict Perspective of Social Control -- Chapter 4: Rethinking and Unthinking "Social Control -- Chapter 5: The Police: Symbolic Capital, Class, and Control -- Part Three: Dimensions of Inequality -- Chapter 6: Ethnicity: The Forgotten Dimension of American Social -- Chapter 7: Gender and Punishment Disparity -- Chapter 8: Gender, Class, Racism, and Criminal Justice: Against Global and Gender-Centric Theories, For Poststructuralist Perspectives -- Part Four: Linkages Among Forms of Social Control -- Chapter 9: Labor Markets and the Relationships Among Forms of the Criminal Sanction -- Chapter 10: Gender, Race, and Social Control: Toward an Understanding of Sex Disparities in Imprisonment -- Chapter 11: Lethal Social Control in the South: Lynchings and Executions Between 1880 and 1930 -- Chapter 12: Double Jeopardy: The Abuse and Punishment of Homeless Youth -- Part Five: Human Agency -- Chapter 13: Eugenics, Class, and the Professionalization of Social Control -- Chapter 14: Children in the Therapeutic State: Lessons for the Sociology of Deviance and Social Control -- Chapter 15: Crime and the Social Control of Blacks: Offender/Victim Race and the Sentencing of Violent Offenders -- Chapter 16: The Symbolic Punishment of White-Collar Offenders -- References -- About the Book -- About the Editors and Contributors -- Index

Several recent studies have used records of calls‐for‐service (CFS) to police 911 centers to measure crime at the address, neighborhood, and city level. This article examines the limitations of this "new" indicator of crime. After pointing out several types of error in dispatch records, we use data from an observational study of policing in 60 neighborhoods to examine empirically how these errors might bias CFS‐based crime counts and discuss the consequences of such bias. We conclude with suggestions for future research on the validity of CFS as an indicator of crime.