Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy

Why are some areas weaker than violence against other areas? The extent to which community and sociologically measurable methods contribute to causality and prevention of community crime. Are neighborhood-level predictors sufficient to explain the difference between violent crime rates among communities? These are some of the questions raised in a 1997 statistically strong paper published by Sampson, Raudenbush, and Earls in Science in 1997. The authors analyzed the data of the Chicago Community Human Development Project (PHDCN), which divided the community into neighboring clusters (NC) based on census criteria and geographical continuity.

• Community goals and values ​​are reflected in the number of crimes that have occurred. "Community and violent crime - multilevel survey of collective efficacy" announced by Science magazine in 1997 by Robert J. Sampson, Stephen W. Raudenbush, and Felton Earls suggests that the ability of communities to access resources and public services is signs I found out that it has nothing to do with it. For example, the less resources a community puts at home, the more likely it is to find a vacant house, a building that was intentionally destroyed and burned down, and a condition that causes a crime.

The incidence of violent crime in the neighborhood has been linked to a series of intertwined features such as poverty, apartheid, inequality, collective effectiveness, barriers, trusts and institutions, access to work, immigration, housing instability, foreclosure etc It is relevant. Vacancy rate and expulsion, land use and construction environment, neighborhood change, and housing assistance position. These features may be the cause and consequences of violent crime 39. Community Dynamics: Violence affects people who leave and leads to increased isolation and violence 40. Neighborhood nearby. After suppressing the internal characteristics of the community, the incidence of violence in the Chicago community had a significantly positive correlation with the incidence of violence in the surrounding area 41.