U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Program Bureau of Justice Statistics Urban, Suburban, and Rural Victimization, 1993-98 October 2000, NCJ 182031 ---------------------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.wk1) and the full report including tables and graphics in http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/usrv98.htm ----------------------------------------------------------------- Detis T. Duhart, Ph.D. BJS Statistician ----------------------------------------------------------------- Highlights * From 1993 to 1998 the trends in violent and property crime for urban and suburban areas were similar. For both urban and suburban areas, violent and property crime trends during this period decreased at a greater rate than in rural areas. * The average annual 1993-98 violent crime rate in urban areas was about 74% higher than the rural rate and 37% higher than the suburban rate. * Urban males experienced violent victimizations at rates 64% higher than the average combined suburban and rural male rate and 47% higher than urban females. * Although most violent crimes in urban (60%), suburban (68%), and rural (70%) areas were committed without a weapon, firearm usage in the commission of a violent crime was higher in urban areas when compared to suburban or rural areas (12% urban versus 9% suburban and 8% rural). * Between 1993 and 1998, 19 in 20 suburban and rural households owned motor vehicles; however, in suburban households the theft of motor vehicles (13 per 1,000 households) was twice the rural rate (6 per 1,000 households) during this period. * Property crimes were generally completed at higher rates against urban households than against suburban or rural households. * Urban violent crime victims were more likely than suburban or rural crime victims to be victimized by a stranger (respectively, 53%, 47%, and 34% of violent crime victims). ------------------------------------------------------------------ Violent and property crime victimization disproportionately affected urban residents during 1998. Urbanites accounted for 29% of the United States population and sustained 38% (12 million) of all violent and property crime victimizations. In comparison, the percentages of suburban and rural residents who were victims of crime were lower than their percentages of the population. Fifty-one percent of the U.S. population were suburban residents who experienced 47% (15 million) of all violent and property victimizations. Rural residents accounted for 20% of the U.S. population but sustained 15% (5 million) of all violent and property crime victimizations, according to National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) data. During 1998 urban residents experienced overall violent crime, rape and sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault, and personal theft at higher rates than suburban or rural residents. Urban households also sustained overall property crime, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft at higher rates than suburban or rural households. Data and measurement This report presents findings based on NCVS data collected by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The NCVS gathers data about crimes from an ongoing, nationally representative sample of households in the United States. NCVS data include information about crime victims (age, gender, race, ethnicity, marital status, income, and educational level), criminal offenders (gender, race, approximate age, and victim-offender relationship), and the nature of the crime (time and place of occurrence, use of weapons, nature of injury, and victims' reaction to attack). Homicide data are collected by the FBI, under the Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) of the Uniform Crime Reporting Program (UCR). Geographic areas in this report are based on Metropolitan Areas (MA's). The U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classifies areas into three segments based on their relationship to an MA: central city, outside central city, and nonmetropolitan area. These classification categories are labeled in this report as urban, suburban, and rural, respectively.***Footnote 1: For more information about MA's visit http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/metroarea.html.*** Urban, suburban, and rural victimization, 1998 Victimization theorists and practitioners argue that victimization rates are related to locality of residence. The results of these analyses are consistent with previous studies that examined victimizations by locality of occurrence. Urban areas generally experienced criminal victimizations at rates higher than suburban or rural areas in 1998. Violent crimes Urban residents experienced overall violent crime at a higher rate than suburban or rural residents during 1998. Violent victimization rates for urbanites, suburbanites, and rural residents were 48, 37, and 28 per 1,000 persons, respectively. Similar results were found for all categories of violent crime (rape and sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault) with two exceptions. Urban residents' simple assault rate was slightly higher than suburban residents' rate, and rape and sexual assault rates were similar across all areas during 1998. Urban, suburban, and rural residents' simple assault rates were almost triple the rates of any other violent crime. Personal thefts Urbanites were victims of personal theft at a significantly higher rate than suburbanites. The urban personal theft rate was twice the rate experienced by suburban residents (2 versus 1 per 1,000 residents). Property crimes During 1998 urban households were characterized by a higher overall property crime rate than were suburban or rural households. For example, urban households' property crime rate was 36% higher than suburban households and 57% higher than rural households (271 urban, 199 suburban, and 173 rural property crimes per 1,000 households, respectively). In addition, urban households experienced burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft at higher rates than households in other areas. Theft rates were higher than burglary or motor vehicle theft rates in all areas. Trends in urban, suburban, and rural victimization, 1993-98 Victimization rates are declining. Violent crime, personal theft, and property crime rates fell between 1993 and 1998. The trends in violent and property crime for urban and suburban areas were similar, decreasing at a greater rate than in rural areas (see appendix table 1 for populations). Violent crimes Violent victimization rates fell for residents in urban, suburban, and rural areas between 1993 and 1998. There were 74 urban violent victimizations (per 1,000 urbanites) in 1993 compared to 48 in 1998 -- a 36% decrease. Suburbanites experienced violent crime victimization at a rate about 25% lower in 1998 than in 1993 (37 compared to 50 per 1,000 suburbanites). During the same period, rural victimization rates fell significantly (34%) from 42 to 28 per 1,000 rural residents. The percent decrease in violent crime victimization between 1993 and 1998 for urban residents was higher than that experienced in suburban and rural areas. In all types of localities, aggravated and simple assault rates were lower in 1998 than they were in 1993. Urban and rural residents experienced rape and sexual assault at significantly lower rates; suburban residents at somewhat lower rates. Urban and suburban robbery rates fell between 1993 and 1998, while rural robbery rates remained similar. Homicide From 1976 to 1998 changes in homicide trends were driven by changes in the number of homicides in large American cities (defined as cities with populations of 100,000 or more). Over half of the homicides during this period occurred in large cities; almost a quarter of the homicides occurred in cities with a population of more than 1 million. Small cities are defined as those with a population of less than 100,000. Personal thefts Urban and suburban personal theft (pocket picking or purse snatching) rates declined from 1993 to 1998. In 1993 urbanites experienced more than twice the rate of personal theft than they experienced in 1998 (5 versus 2 personal thefts per 1,000 urbanites). For suburbanites, personal theft rates fell 41% between 1993 and 1998 (2 versus 1 personal theft per 1,000 suburbanites). Property crimes On average, urban, suburban, and rural property crime rates were 33% lower in 1998 than they were in 1993. Specifically, urban rates fell 34%, suburban rates 35%, and rural rates 31%. For each category of property crime, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft, rates were lower in 1998 than in 1993, regardless of type of locality considered. Urban household rates of burglary and motor vehicle theft declined more than suburban or rural household rates. Average annual urban, suburban, and rural victimization, 1993-98 Violent crime Individuals living in urban areas were victims of overall violent crime, rape and sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault at rates significantly higher than for those living in suburban or rural areas. The average annual overall violent crime rate in urban areas was about 74% higher than the average rural rate and 37% higher than the average suburban rate. In all localities rates for robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault in which no injuries occurred were higher than rates for these same offenses resulting in injuries. Personal theft On average, urban residents experienced personal theft at higher rates than suburban or rural residents (3 versus 2 and 1 per 1,000, respectively). Purse snatchings and pocket pickings were completed at a rate of 3 per 1,000 urban residents, twice the suburban rate, and 4 times the rural rate. Property crime Urban households experienced overall property crime at rates significantly higher than those for other households. Burglaries were sustained among urban households at rates higher than rural households (46 per 1,000), which in turn experienced burglaries at rates higher than suburban households (40 per 1,000). Urban households also experienced thefts at higher rates than suburban households. A higher percentage of suburban and rural households owned motor vehicles than did urban households (96%, 95%, and 87%, respectively). The percentage of completed motor vehicle thefts was highest among rural households (79% in rural areas, 66% in urban areas, and 69% in suburban areas). Demographics characteristics of violent crime victims Certain population groups -- especially males, blacks, persons in low income categories, the young, persons who never married, and divorced or separated persons -- experience higher rates of victimization than others. The same groups were also most susceptible to victimization in urban, suburban, and rural areas. Gender Urban males and females were violently victimized at rates higher than males and females in other areas. Across all areas of interest, urban male violent victimization rates were the highest. Stated differently, urban males experienced violent victimizations at a rate 87% higher than rural males and 47% higher than urban females. Race Violent crimes were committed against blacks at rates higher than whites in urban localities. Black urbanites experienced 68 violent victimizations (per 1,000) while urban whites were victimized at a rate of 59 (per 1,000). Suburban blacks experienced violent crime at a rate marginally higher than white suburbanites. Rural residents of other races were twice as likely to be victims of violent crime as were black or white rural residents (68 victimizations compared to 31 and 34 per 1,000 persons, respectively).***Footnote 2: For information about urban, suburban, and rural victimizations among American Indians, see American Indians and Crime, NCJ 173386, February 1999.*** Ethnicity In all areas, violent crime victimization rates among Hispanics were statistically similar. Non-Hispanics in urban areas experienced violent crime at a higher rate than Hispanics (61 versus 52 per 1,000, respectively), while suburban and rural Hispanics sustained violence at a higher rate than respective non-Hispanic residents. Annual household income In general regardless of the type of area considered, as annual household income increased, violent victimization rates decreased. Persons with household incomes of less than $7,500 in all areas experienced a violent victimization at more than twice the rate of persons with household incomes of $75,000 or more. Urban residents in the highest income category were victims of violent crime more than similar suburban or rural residents. Urban residents in the lowest income category were violently victimized at a rate slightly higher than low-income suburbanites and 41% higher than low-income rural residents. Age Residents younger than 20 years old in all areas experienced violent crime more than all other age groups, while residents age 65 or over experienced violent crime the least of all age groups. In each age group, urbanites were victims of violent crime at rates higher than suburban or rural residents. Marital status In urban and suburban areas, persons who had never married were violently victimized more than those in any other category of marital status. Urban residents, whether never married, married, or widowed, were victimized at higher rates than similar residents in suburban or rural areas. Divorced or separated urbanites were violent crime victims at a rate somewhat higher than similar suburbanites and at a rate higher than rural residents. Demographic characteristics of victims of rape and sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault In general, regardless of the characteristics, urban residents were victims of all types of violent crimes at higher rates than suburban or rural residents. Gender Urban females were raped or sexually assaulted at rates 53% higher than suburban or rural females. Males were robbed and assaulted more than females in all localities of interest. The rate of aggravated assault against urban males was about twice that of urban females. Race Blacks were robbed and experienced aggravated assault more than whites and persons of other races in urban and suburban areas. In rural areas robbery rates were similar for all races; however, slightly more aggravated assaults occurred among rural blacks than among rural whites. White rural residents were simple assault victims more often than blacks in similar areas. Rural residents of other races were simple assault victims more than white or black rural residents. Annual household income Generally, in all localities, residents with low household incomes experienced all categories of violent crime more than residents with high household incomes. For all levels of income, urban residents were robbed more than other residents. Urban and suburban residents in the lowest and highest income categories were aggravated assault victims at similar rates. Except for households with incomes between $7,500-$24,999 and $35,000-$49,999, the simple assault rate among urban residents was similar to suburbanites and higher than rural residents. Age In general, in all areas, younger residents were victims of all categories of violent crime at higher rates than older residents. Rape and sexual assault rates among 20-49 year old urbanites were marginally higher than suburbanites' rates in the same age category. Except for residents age 65 or older, urban residents were robbed and experienced aggravated assaults more than suburban or rural residents. Urban residents younger than age 20 experienced simple assault at rates similar to suburban residents of the same ages, and at higher rates than all other residents, regardless of age. Marital status In all types of localities, residents who never married or were divorced or separated were raped and sexually assaulted, robbed, and assaulted more than people who were married or widowed. Urban robbery rates were higher than suburban or rural rates for all marital categories except among widowed residents. Aggravated assault rates were higher in urban areas for never married and married residents. Widowed and divorced or separated residents aggravated assault rates did not vary significantly by location. Demographic characteristics of property crime victims Gender Urban households headed by males experienced property crime at a rate about 9% higher than that found among urban households headed by females. Urban households with male and female heads were victimized at rates significantly higher than equivalent suburban and rural households. Race Black and white households experienced property victimization at similar rates whether living in urban or rural areas. Both black and white urban households were victims of property crime at significantly higher rates than black and white suburban and rural households. In suburban areas, blacks experienced property crimes at rates higher than whites. Rural households headed by persons of other races were victims of property crime at higher rates than black or white rural households (343, 200, and 211 per 1,000 households, respectively). Ethnicity Urban households headed by Hispanic or non-Hispanic persons experienced property crime at rates higher than similar suburban or rural households. Regardless of locality, Hispanics were victims of property crime more than non-Hispanics. Annual household income Urban households at all income levels experienced property crime at higher rates, followed by suburban and rural households. For example, the property crime rate for urban households with annual incomes of $25,000-$34,999 was 375 crimes per 1,000 households. Suburban and rural households at this income level had property crime rates of 257 and 225 crimes per 1,000 households, respectively. Age of household head Generally, younger households in all areas of residence were more likely to experience property crimes than households headed by older residents. Urban households headed by persons under age 20 experienced property crimes at more than twice the rate sustained by households headed by persons ages 50-64. Urban households headed by persons age 20 or over were victims of property crime at significantly higher rates than similar suburban or rural households. Marital status of household head Households headed by divorced or separated persons and households headed by persons who never married were victims of property crime at higher rates than households of married or widowed persons regardless of the locality of residence. Urban households were the victims of property crime at higher rates when compared to suburban or rural households for all categories of marital status. Demographic characteristics of burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft victims In general, households in urban areas experienced overall property crime, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft, at rates significantly higher than suburban or rural households. Gender Female-headed households were burglarized more than male-headed households in all areas of residence. The burglary rates for rural male-and female-headed households were higher than suburban male- and female-headed household rates (42 rural males and 54 rural females per 1,000 households compared to 37 suburban males and 46 suburban females per 1,000 households). Motor vehicle theft rates were similar for male- and female-headed households in all localities except urban areas; where households headed by males were victims of motor vehicle theft more than households headed by females. Male-headed households experienced theft more than households headed by females in all areas. Race Black households were burglarized and sustained motor vehicle thefts at rates higher than white households in urban and suburban areas, while rural blacks and whites experienced these crimes at similar rates. Theft rates for white households were higher than black household rates in urban areas and somewhat higher in rural areas. Rural households of other races were victims of thefts at rates higher than black or white households. Rural households of other races were burglarized more than white households and slightly more than black households. Annual household Income Households with low incomes were generally burglarized at higher rates than households with higher annual incomes across all areas of residence. Generally, within each type of area, motor vehicle theft rates were similar for all levels of income. However, in all areas of residence, households in high-income categories were generally more likely to be the victims of thefts than households in low-income categories. Age of household head In all areas, households headed by younger persons were generally victims of burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft at rates higher than older households. Except among households headed by persons between the ages of 12-19 years, urban households were the victims of burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft more than suburban or rural households. Marital status of household head In all areas households with heads who never married or those who divorced or separated were burglarized at rates higher than households headed by married or widowed persons. Never married, widowed, and divorced or separated rural households were burglarized more than similar suburban households. Motor vehicle theft and theft rates were lowest for widowed households regardless of residence location. Motor vehicle theft and theft rates for suburban households were higher than rural for all categories of marital status except for theft among widowed households. Characteristics of victimization Many characteristics of crime were similar across all types of locality. Location of residence had very little effect on the time of victimization, victims' reaction to the attack, type of injury sustained from the victimization, and whether offender used a weapon in the commission of the act. Location of victimization Most violent crimes in urban and suburban areas occurred in open areas, on the street, or on public transportation. Between 1993 and 1998, more than a quarter (26%) of violent crime victimizations among urban residents, and about a fifth (19%) among suburban residents occurred in these areas. Rural residents were more likely to be victimized in their homes when compared to other areas where victimizations occurred. About 18% of rural victims of violent crime were victimized at their homes compared to urban (15%) or suburban (14%) victimizations. Time of victimization Crimes happened at similar times of the day among residents living in urban, suburban, and rural areas. About half of the violent crime experienced by urban (49%), suburban (52%), and rural (51%) residents were committed between 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. Around 3 out of 10 violent crimes occurred between 6 p.m. and midnight. Victims' reaction to attack Most violent crime victims did not defend themselves or their property (no resistance, unarmed confrontation, and non-confrontational tactics) in urban (87%), suburban (85%), and rural (86%) areas. About 3% of violent crime victims in urban and rural areas compared to 2% of suburban victims defended themselves by threatening or attacking their assailant with a firearm or other weapon. Type of injury About 20% of violent crimes in all areas resulted in minor injury; about 5% resulted in serious injury. Weapons used Most violent offenders were unarmed in every type of locality (60% urban, 68% suburban, and 70% rural). Urban violent offenders were more likely than offenders elsewhere (12% urban versus 9% suburban and 8% rural) to use a firearm. Characteristics of offender Gender of offender Males were perceived to be the offenders of violent crimes more often than females regardless of the area examined. Males were perceived to have committed 80% of the urban violent victimizations and 79% of suburban and rural violent crimes. Although the percentage of females perceived to have committed violent crimes in suburban and rural areas was similar (16%), the percentage of females committing violent crimes in suburban areas was significantly higher than the percentage of females committing violent crimes in urban areas (14%). The percentage of violent crime committed by females in rural areas was slightly higher than the percentage committed by females in urban areas. Race of offender Whites were perceived to be the assailants in violent crime more often than blacks or persons of other races in all types of localities. However, the percentage of whites in the urban, suburban, and rural populations was higher than the percentage of offenses perceived to have been committed by whites in each area. In contrast, the percentage of blacks in all localities was lower than their percentage of violent crime victimizations. For example, between 1993-98, 90% of the rural population was white and whites were perceived to have committed 72% of rural violent victimizations. Although blacks comprised 8% of the rural population, they were perceived to have committed 16% of rural violent crimes (see appendix table 1 for total populations). Age of offender In all localities, almost two-thirds of the violent crime victims perceived the offender to have been age 18 or older (urban 63%, suburban 62%, and rural 64%). Only about a quarter of violent offenders in all localities was perceived to be younger than age 18. The percentage of suburban and rural crime victims who perceived their offender to be less than 18 was higher than urban victims' percentage (23% and 24% versus 19%, respectively). Offender substance abuse The percentage of urban and suburban violent crime offenders perceived to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs was similar (29%); the percentage of rural offenders perceived to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs while committing a violent crime (35%) was higher than that in urban or suburban areas. Victim offender relationship In suburban and rural areas, victims were more likely to be victimized by someone they knew than by a stranger. About 50% of suburban victims and 63% of rural victims knew their offender compared to 47% and 34% of stranger victimization in each respective area. Urban violent crime victims were more likely to be victimized by a stranger, accounting for 53% of all urban violent victimizations. Who reports to the police Gender Females were more likely to report victimizations to the police than males in urban and rural areas. Suburban males and females reported to the police at similar percentages. Race Urban and suburban blacks reported their victimizations to the police at higher percentages than whites in similar localities. Blacks and whites living in all reported victimizations to the police at similar percentages. Residents of other races were least likely to report being victimized to the police in suburban areas. Ethnicity Hispanics and non-Hispanics reported crimes at similar rates in all localities. Non-Hispanics reported more crime than Hispanics in urban and suburban areas; in rural areas both groups reported at similar percentages. What crimes are reported to the police In all localities robberies and aggravated assaults were the violent crimes most likely to be reported to the police. Rape and sexual assaults were the least likely to be reported in urban and suburban areas. In rural areas rape and sexual assaults and simple assaults were reported the least. Residents of all localities reported about 3 in 10 personal thefts to the police. Victims of motor vehicle thefts reported their victimization to the police more than any other property crime. Rural residents reported household burglaries less than suburban residents and slightly less than urban residents. Methodology The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) measures personal and household offenses, including crimes not reported to the police. The crimes measured are rape and sexual assault, robbery, aggravated and simple assault, personal theft (purse snatching and pocket picking), household burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft. Information is obtained from a continuous, nationally representative sample of households in the United States. The sample includes persons living in group quarters, such as dormitories, rooming houses, and religious group dwellings. Crew members of merchant vessels, Armed Forces personnel living in military barracks or temporary housing, and institutionalized persons, such as correctional facility inmates, and hospital or nursing home patients, were not included. Between 1993 and 1998 approximately 293,400 households and 574,000 individuals age 12 or older were interviewed about the crimes they experienced in the previous 6 months. Yearly response rates for the NCVS data presented varied between 93% and 96% of eligible households and between 89% and 92% of eligible individuals. Estimates for 1998 in this report are obtained about victimizations experienced in the same calendar year, called a data year. The data in the BJS Bulletin Criminal Victimization 1998: Changes 1997-98 with Trends 1993-98 were collected during the calendar year being estimated, termed a collection year. Estimates for 1998 in this report and estimates in the Bulletin may differ somewhat because of differences in the two collection methods. Standard error computations for NCVS estimates Comparisons of percentages and rates in this report were tested to determine if differences were statistically significant. Differences described in the text as higher, lower, or different and changes over time characterized as having increased or decreased passed a hypothesis test at the .05 level of statistical significance (95% confidence level). That is, the tested difference in the estimates was greater than twice the standard error of that difference. For comparisons that were statistically significant at the .10 level of statistical significance (90% confidence level), the terms somewhat different, marginally different, or slight difference are used to note the nature of the difference. Caution is required when comparing estimates not explicitly discussed in the text. What may appear to be large differences may not test as statistically significant at the 95% or the 90% confidence level. Significance testing calculations were conducted at the Bureau of Justice Statistics using statistical programs developed specifically for the NCVS by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. These programs take into consideration many aspects of the complex NCVS sample design when calculating generalized variance estimates. Trends in violent and property victimization A linear trend test was used to test the change in violent and property crime estimates over time. This test allows one to examine whether, for example, the rate of violent crime victimization decreased (or increased) over time. Based on a regression with, for example, time as the independent variable and violent victimization rate as the dependent variable, the test involves computing the regression coefficient (b) and its corresponding standard error (F). The ratio of these two (b/F) is the test statistic t. If t is greater than 1.96, the null hypothesis is rejected. In addition, independent sample t tests were conducted on the adjusted yearly rates of victimizations in urban, suburban, and rural areas to determine if the decline in each area differed significantly from each other. Calculation of rates and annual levels Except as noted, the rates in this report are average annual rates for 1993-98. The numerator of a given number is the sum of crimes that occurred for each year from 1993 through 1998; the denominator is the sum of the annual population of persons or households for these years (or the number falling within the particular demographic group being measured). These numbers are multiplied by 1,000 to obtain the average annual rates. Average annual levels of criminal victimization are obtained by summing the number of victimizations between 1993 and 1998 and dividing by six. Population totals used in this report are calculated from estimates derived from the NCVS. Included in the population are persons age 12 or older living in the households, including group quarters such as dormitories. Population estimates do not include children less than age 12, institutionalized persons, U.S. citizens living aboard, crew members of merchant vessels, and Armed Forces personnel living in military barracks. The percentages are calculated using the method similar to the one used for average annual rates. Homicide data Homicide data presented in this report are collected by the FBI, under the Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) of the Uniform Crime Reporting Program (UCR). The homicide data provide incident-level data on about 92% of the homicides in the United States, including the victim and offender relationship. The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D., is director. BJS Special Reports address a specific topic in depth from one or more datasets that cover many topics. Detis T. Duhart, Ph.D., wrote this report under the supervision of Michael Rand. Tom Hester and Ellen Goldberg produced and edited the report, with assistance from Rhonda C. Keith. Callie Rennison provided statistical assistance, and Cathy Maston provided verification. October 2000, NCJ 182031 End of file 10/13/00 ih