Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SHORT, E.
Right arrow Articles by DITTON, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The British Journal of Criminology 38:404-428 (1998)
© 1998 Centre for Crime & Justice Studies (formerly ISTD)

RESEARCH-ARTICLE

SEEN AND NOW HEARD

Talking to the Targets of Open Street CCTV

EMMA SHORT and JASON DITTON

Scottish Centre for Criminology, Faculty of Law, University of Sheffield

Correspondence to J. Ditton at: Scottish Centre for Criminology, Charing Cross Clinic, 8 Woodside Crescent, Glasgow, C3 7UY

The presence of closed circuit television cameras (CCTV) in town and city centres, mostly with Home Office or Scottish Office support, has grown enormously in the past few years. Analysis of their effectiveness in preventing crime is infrequent, and then usually relies only on comparing police recorded or otherwise reported criminal victimization rates before and after camera installation. It is difficult for this approach to tackle convincingly the possibility of camera-induced crime displacement. This article tries an alternative approach to displacement: asking offenders. To test the efficacy of the approach, an area whose criminal statistical profile had previously been studied intensely—Airdrie, a small town near Glasgow which has one of the first CCTV schemes to be installed in Scotland—was revisited. Thirty offenders (most were then on probation or doing community service) were interviewed and their attitudes to the cameras and to reoffending recorded. Few, if any, clear patterns emerged. Indeed, what is more remarkable is the rich and broad diversity of views, which, in turn, serve to defy any obvious or common-sense categorization of offender reaction to CCTV surveillance.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Police QuarterlyHome page
R. Surette
CCTV and Citizen Guardianship Suppression: A Questionable Proposition
Police Quarterly, March 1, 2006; 9(1): 100 - 125.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Prog Hum GeogrHome page
R. Pain
Place, social relations and the fear of crime: a review
Progress in Human Geography, September 1, 2000; 24(3): 365 - 387.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.