Crime prevention research: How can it be shared across language barriers?

Abstract

This is the first of two papers addressing language barriers in criminological discourse. The present paper rehearses arguments for comparative criminological research and identifies the administrative processes of journals leading to acceptance or rejection role of language as a contributory factor acting against the interests of those lacking fluency in a journal’s specified language of submission. Revisions of the common editorial practices of peer-reviewed journals are suggested. The potential contribution of machine translation is discussed.

Appendix

The text below shows an abstract of a paper published in this journal by two of the present writers. It shows both the text as it originally appeared and (italicised) the same text having been translated to and from Russian. It is claimed here that the basic meaning of the text is retained, so the process made in suggestion 4 of the text is viable, but also that the suggested process of toggling between author preferred language and language of submission could with minor changes yield a more nuanced version of the original.

This exploratory paper delves into differences and similarities in the rated seriousness of offences suffered by victims of different national origins. This research paper examines differences and similarities in assessing the severity of crimes committed by victims of different national backgrounds. The issue is important because a mismatch between police and victim assessments of seriousness is likely to fuel discord. This issue is important because the discrepancy between assessments of the seriousness of the actions of the police and the victims can lead to controversy.

It was found that first-generation immigrants did not differ in their rating of the seriousness of offences against the person from either the indigenous population or according to region of birth. It was revealed that immigrants in the first generation did not differ in assessing the severity of offenses against a person either from the indigenous population or by region of birth. However, those of Asian origin rated vehicle and property crime they had suffered as more serious than did other groups However, people of Asian descent rated the crimes they suffered, like vehicles and property, as more serious than other groups. The anticipated higher seriousness rating of offences reported to the police was observed for all groups. The expected higher severity rating of offenses reported to the police was observed for all groups. People of Asian origin reported to the police a smaller proportion of offences they rated trivial than did people in other groups. People of Asian descent reported to the police a lower proportion of offenses they considered minor than members of other groups.

Analysis of seriousness judgements in victimisation surveys represents a much-underused resource for understanding the nexus between public perceptions and criminal justice responses. Analysis of judgments of severity in victimisation surveys is a grossly underutilised resource for understanding the relationship between public opinion and criminal justice response.