LGBTI Variations in Crime Reporting: How Sexual Identity Influences Decisions to Call the Cops

Toby Miles-Johnson

doi:10.1177/2158244013490707

LGBTI Variations in Crime Reporting: How Sexual Identity Influences Decisions to Call the Cops

Miles-Johnson, Toby 2013-05-28 00:00:00 Research shows that people vary in their willingness to report crime to police depending on the type of crime experienced, their gender, age, and their race or ethnicity. Whether or not lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) and heterosexual people vary in their willingness to report crime to the police is not well understood in the extant literature. In this article, I examine variations in LGBTI respondents’ attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control on their intentions to report crimes to the police. Drawing on a survey of LGBTI individuals sampled from a Gay Pride community event and online LGBTI community forums (N = 329), I use quantitative statistical methods to examine whether LGBTI people’s beliefs in police homophobia are also directly associated with the behavioral intention to report crime. Overall, the results indicate that LGBTI and heterosexual people differ significantly in their intention to report crime to the police, and that a belief in police homophobia strongly influences LGBTI people’s intention to underreport crime to the police. Keywords police, crime reporting, sexual identity, homophobia, attitudes engage in a particular behavior. As crime reporting behavior Introduction is often reflective of attitudes toward the police as well as Variations in crime reporting behaviors have consistently how easy or difficult a person perceives the behavior to be, demonstrated that although people usually hold favorable the TPB can be a useful tool in understanding variations in views of the police and are willing to report crime to the crime reporting behaviors. police (Mastrofski, Parks, Reiss, & Worden, 1999), members The theoretical components of the TPB (attitude, subjec- of minority communities are far more reticent to report tive norms, and perceived behavioral control [PBC]) can crime (Webb & Marshall, 1995). Research focused on ele- provide a useful framework for describing the psychological ments that effect police reporting has a long history in vic- influences on crime reporting because previous studies have timization literature. The issue of reporting crime to the shown that the TPB is able to account for significant amounts police and its variation by age, gender, race/ethnicity, and of variance in intention to act in a particular way (Buchan, type of crime has been widely researched (see Bosick, 2005; McMillan & Conner, 2003). By applying the TPB to Rennison, Gover, & Dodge, 2012). Yet crime reporting vari- measure willingness to report crime within the lesbian, gay, ations due to differences in sexual identity is an area that has bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) and wider com- been underresearched, thereby resulting in a lack of com- munity, questions such as “who is more willing to report a plete understanding regarding how sexual identity impacts crime and why” and “does sexual identity make a difference an individual’s willingness to report crime to police. in reporting crime” are among the many questions that can One such theory that has been used to better understand be examined by applying this framework (Connor & the variation in willingness to engage with police and to Armitage, 1998). However, an application of the TPB to report crime is the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB; Ajzen, understand crime reporting behaviors between LGBTI and 1985). The TPB was initially conceptualized to link attitudes and beliefs to intention and behavior. The TPB followed on from the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA; Fishbein & The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia Ajzen, 1975) used to measure the predictive power of posi- Corresponding Author: tive evaluation (attitude), and subjective norms or how sig- Dr. Toby Miles-Johnson, The University of Queensland, Michie Building, nificant others shape an individual’s intention to perform St. Lucia Campus, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia. behavior, and the motivation or intention of an individual to Email: t.milesjohnson@uq.edu.au 2 SAGE Open heterosexual people has not been conducted within Australia members of minority groups (typically represented in previ- until now. ous research by racial or ethnic identifiers) are hesitant to Research examining the relationship between variations report crime to the police due to negative perceptions of in crime reporting behavior and sexual identity has largely police interaction, particularly negative perceptions of police been ignored in the Australian context. This is particularly interaction that may result in further victimization (Beckett, troublesome because research indicates that members of the Nyrop, & Pfingst, 2006; Browning, Cullen, Cao, Kopache, LGBTI community have far lower rates of reporting crime to & Stevenson, 1994; Fagan & Davies, 2000; Kane, 2002, the police than the general population (see Bernstein & 2005; Mastrofski, Reisig, & McCluskey, 2002; B. W. Smith Kostelac, 2002; Gerstenfeld, 2004; Herek, Cogan, & Gillis, & Holmes, 2003; D. A. Smith & Klein, 1984; D. A. Smith & 2003; M. Williams & Robinson, 2004). Hence, the present Visher, 1981; Terrill, Paoline, & Manning, 2003; Terrill & research aimed to determine whether the LGBTI community Reisig, 2003; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006; Worden, 1996). in Queensland underreports crime to the police and why. Accordingly, members of minority groups (whose subordi- Using data collected from a convenience sample of par- nate group status is defined due to external or other identify- ticipants at the “Gay Day” Celebrations in Brisbane, ing features) differ significantly from other members of Australia, and by online delivery (N = 329), the present study society in their willingness to interact with the police, regard- examines reasons why LGBTI people’s beliefs in police less of whether the grounds for contact with police are posi- homophobia are directly associated with the behavioral tive or negative and or whether the outcome of police intention to report crime to the police. I begin this article interaction may result in a constructive end to an adverse with a review of the extant literature. I then describe the situation (see Webb & Marshall, 1995). Certainly, this has research method, sample, and analytic approach. Finally, I been the case for members of minority groups (also identi- present the findings from the research, which indicates that fied in this way) residing in Australia (Murphy & Cherney, heterosexual participants had significantly more positive 2010). attitudes toward the police than LGBTI participants; experi- In 2007, the Australian Bureau of Statistics revealed that enced stronger-positive social pressures to report crime to criminal activity in Australia is frequently unrecorded simply the police; and found the practice of reporting crime to the because it is not reported to the police. Australian research police to be an easier experience than LGBTI participants. measuring variations in crime reporting behaviors have gen- erally concentrated on ethnic and indigenous minority groups (Murphy & Cherney, 2010). However, research examining Research Questions other minority groups (based on identifiers other than race or Specifically, the aim of the research was to address three ethnicity) and their attitudes toward crime reporting in research questions: Australia have largely gone unnoticed. This is problematic because recent research suggests that members of marginal- Research Question 1: Are LGBTI participants less willing ized minority groups whose identifiers are not based on race than heterosexual participants to report crime to the or ethnicity but other subjective factors are less likely than police? other members of society to call the police for help (see Carr, Research Question 2: Do participants’ attitudes, subjec- Napolitano, & Keating, 2007) and that most members of tive norms, PBC, and belief in police homophobia mainstream society have more reliance on the police (and determine their intentions to report crime to the police? therefore more positive expectations of police) than these Research Question 3: Are there differences between types of minority group members when deliberating over LGBTI and heterosexual participants’ attitudes, sub- whether to call the police in times of need. jective norms, PBC, and belief in police homophobia? Previous research has indicated that the decision to report or not report crime is typically the outcome of a complex decision-making process in which the victim will weigh the Background Literature costs and benefits of each course of action (Tarling & Morris, Research has consistently shown that typically most people 2010). It is also understood that a victim of crime may strug- have positive opinions about the police (Merry, Power, gle with the conscience duty to report crime, and that such McManus, & Alison, 2012). As such, the majority of people struggles may be linked to personal reasons such as the need have favorable opinions regarding engagement with police of immediate help, protection and treatment (in relation to when the need arises, for instance, when reporting a crime violent or sexual crime), or to obtain monetary redress in the (Mastrofski et al., 1999). However, the willingness of resi- form of compensation or insurance payments (in relation to dents to report crime varies depending on the type and sever- property crime). As such, the importance attached to the ity of the crime (Kääriäinen & Sirén, 2011) and contextual costs and benefits of crime reporting vary according to per- factors (such as culture ) that may influence crime reporting sonal characteristics and experiences of the victim. For (Schaible & Hughes, 2012). In addition, it has also been example, previous research indicates that women have been found that regardless of the type and severity of the crime, found to be more likely to report crime than men (see Miles-Johnson 3 Baumer, 2002; Carcach, 1997; Felson, Messner, Hoskin, & influence on a lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and inter- 4 5 Deane, 2002; Hart & Rennison, 2003; Rennison, 2007) sex (LGBTI) individual’s perceptions of the police over because men tend to be bigger and stronger than women, and above their general attitude toward the police and report- more skillful in physical combat, and more willing to use ing crime. violence (Felson et al., 2002). As a result, female victims of If the psychological mechanisms that influence LGBTI crime may be more likely to call the police for protection victims to report or not report crime can be identified, then than male victims of crime (Felson et al., 2002) because the there is the potential to develop interventions that, by influ- nature and circumstances surrounding an offence will also encing those mechanisms, may lead to changes in crime feature prominently in the decision to report crime to the reporting behavior (Viki, Culmer, Eller, & Abrams, 2006). police (Tarling & Morris, 2010). For example, it would be Accordingly, the theoretical components of the TPB (atti- anticipated that a serious crime such as physical assault tude, subjective norms, and PBC) can provide a useful would be reported to the police by males and females. Yet framework for describing the psychological influences on there is no consistent evidence regarding crime reporting crime reporting because previous studies have shown that rates for males or females based on their differences in sexu- the TPB is able to account for significant amounts of vari- ality (e.g., heterosexual people in comparison with LGBTI ance in intention to act in a particular way (Buchan, 2005; people) or the factors influencing a LGBTI person to report McMillan & Conner, 2003). By applying the TPB to measure or not report crime (such as a belief in police homophobia), willingness to report crime within the LGBTI and wider particularly when LGBTI people are often the victims of community, questions such as “who is more willing to report serious and minor crime (Meyer, 2010, 2011). a crime and why” and “does sexual identity make a differ- Unrecorded crime by the LGBTI community has several ence in reporting crime” are among the many questions that consequences: It contributes to the misallocation of police can be examined by applying this framework (Connor & resources (thereby minimizing resources allocated to help Armitage, 1998). However, an application of the TPB to and protect the LGBTI community), it prevents LGBTI vic- understand crime reporting behaviors between LGBTI and tims from accessing public and private benefits, affects heterosexual people has not been conducted within Australia insurance costs, and does not help shape the police role in the until now. LGBTI community (Tomsen & Mason, 2001). These factors impact community crime prevention and control strategies LGBTI People’s Attitudes to Crime Reporting and decisions about the allocation of police resources (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2007). Nonreporting of In a recent Australian survey by Leonard, Mitchell, Patel, crime by the LGBTI community also limits the deterrent and Fox (2008), the major barrier to LGBTI respondents capacity of the criminal justice system, hinders the formation reporting crime or seeking assistance from the police is the of an accurate picture of anti-LGBTI crime (thereby underes- belief that the majority of police officers are homophobic. timating the extent of victimization), stands in the way of They also found that LGBTI people in Australia perceived perpetrator convictions of anti-LGBTI crime, and affects the that reporting crime to police will lead to further abuse from police mandate of fighting anti-LGBTI crime (Bohn, 1993; service providers, and that the majority of LGBTI respon- Herek & Berrill, 1992; Stonewall, 1994). dents strongly believed that police officers would not treat Ajzen (2005) stated that by applying the TPB to examine LGBTI people fairly due to homophobic beliefs. They also a particular behavior, the proximal determinant of behavior found that almost all of the Australian LGBTI participants, “intention to engage in the behaviour” becomes the key con- who provided written responses to questions asking about cept of the research and is determined by three sets of vari- the barriers preventing them from reporting crime, wrote ables: (a) attitude (the overall evaluation and the outcome about targeting the homophobic beliefs of mainstream expectancy of the behavior), (b) subjective norms (percep- police officers. However, specific data relating to underre- tions of social pressure from significant others to perform a porting of crime by the LGBTI community throughout particular behavior), and (c) PBC (a person’s belief as to how Australia (and specifically in Queensland) are not readily easy or difficult performance of the behavior is likely to be). available. Under the theoretical framework of the TPB, to arrive at an In Australia, the actual population size of the LGBTI overall attitude, it is important to distinguish between atti- community is unknown. Yet the study of LGBTI crime tudes and beliefs because both mechanisms affect intention reporting behavior has meaning, particularly because the to behave in a particular way (Ajzen, 2005). A person’s belief Attorney General’s Department of New South Wales (2003) toward a particular object is the sum of all of that person’s found that the majority of LGBTI respondents who partici- beliefs toward each attribute associated with an object pated in their survey strongly believed that the police will not (Ajzen, 2005). For instance, an LGBTI person’s belief that take LGBTI violence and harassment seriously, and indi- police officers are homophobic links the object of opinion cated that they would be unwilling to report crime to the police to the consequence belief homophobia. Subsequently, police. Yet the first contact that many victims of crime have beliefs in police homophobia could have an incremental with the criminal justice system is with the police and the 4 SAGE Open decision to report or not report crime may be the most influ- minority groups such as the LGBTI community, who, in ential decision an individual makes in the criminal justice comparison with other members of society, purposefully system, thereby emphasizing the role of the citizen as the avoid contact and interaction with the police (Herek & gatekeeper for all that follows (Gottfredson & Gottfredson, Berrill, 1992). This is not to suggest that the relationship 1980). In two separate studies, Tyler (2005) and B. Williams between the police in Queensland and members of the (1998) found that the less confidence citizens have in the LGBTI community has been static or that the police have not police, the less willing they will be to cooperate with police, attempted to make significant changes in their policy and which includes reporting crime. This has been a particular practice implemented toward LGBTI people (e.g., LGBTI concern with research in the LGBTI community because police liaison officers and policing of hate crime). However, most LGBTI people underreport crime fearing “hostility and despite changes in the social, political, and legal history of abuse” from the police (Comstock, 1989, p. 104). Moreover, the relationship between police and LGBTI people (analyses in a recent study in the United Kingdom, it was determined of which are beyond the scope of this article), the nature of that 78% of LGBTI respondents who had experienced physi- the relationship between the police and LGBTI people in cal assault did not report the crime to the police, with the Queensland remains problematic (Crime and Misconduct majority of respondents indicating that they believed that the Commission [CMC], 2009). police would not treat their complaint seriously (Bourne, Herek (1990) stated that many LGBTI people are aware Reid, Hammond, & Weatherburn, 2010). of a level of police hostility and prejudice against homo- Historically, LGBTI people in Australia have experienced sexual behavior and LGBTI people long before the need for levels of social disadvantage that have resulted in decades of crime reporting occurs, and that this awareness is learnt inequitable treatment (Butler, 2012). Similar to the experi- either through hearsay, the media, or cultural, familial, and ence of LGBTI in other parts of the world (such as in the societal influences. In addition, Myers, Forest, and Miller United Kingdom and the United States), many Australian (2004) argued that it is typically a vicarious experience of LGBTI people have suffered stigma, family rejection, and police, and an awareness of the potential for police hostility social isolation, and have had a life experience of fear of that causes most people (particularly LGBTI people) to rejection and persecution, coupled with the impact of poten- have negative beliefs and attitudes toward the police. To tial or actual discrimination from social institutions (Butler, distinguish between LGBTI people’s general attitudes 2012). According to Leonard et al. (2008), this is reflected in toward reporting crime to the police, and a specific belief in the way that many members of the LGBTI community pur- police homophobia (which may be a particular influence on posefully avoid contact with institutions such as the police. LGBTI people’s crime reporting behavior), LGBTI peo- Yet how this impacts on crime reporting behaviors is largely ple’s beliefs in police homophobia need to be measured unknown. (Herek & Berrill, 1992). Tarling and Morris (2010) argued that most of what is known about crime reporting behaviors has been obtained LGBTI People’s PBC and Crime Reporting from international victim surveys distributed to the wider (heterosexual) public such as those conducted in the United Perceptions of nonnormative sexualities (such as those Kingdom (MacDonald, 2001; Skogan, 1994) and in the expressed by the LGBTI community) challenge mainstream United States (Baumer, 2002; Felson et al., 2002; Hart & models and practices of policing (Moran, 2007). The major- Rennison, 2003; Rennison, 2007). However, research under- ity of policing models and practices implemented toward taken in other countries such as Australia have been few and the community are based on a heteronormative model of far between, and have been typically based on a secondary society and a White, masculine, heterosexual ethos (Myers analysis of state victim surveys (see Carcach, 1997). This et al., 2004). Subsequently, when police are confronted raises questions whether crime reporting practices are differ- with a sexually diverse community (such as the LGBTI ent in Australia (or different in specific states within community), the breakdown in normative expectations of Australia) to what has been reported more universally in gendered behavior (which is situated in the context of het- other countries or if Australia is unique in its crime reporting erosexuality) results in homophobic confrontations (Myers practices to the police. et al., 2004). As such, the difficulty with which LGBTI per- ceive interaction with the police (and the ease or difficulty of reporting crime to the police) coupled with the lack of LGBTI People’s Subjective confidence that LGBTI people have in the police has Norms and Crime Reporting resulted in the underreporting of crime by members of this In Queensland, few minority groups defined by external community (Chakraborti, 2009). For example, previous behaviors or other features that distinguish them from the research indicates that LGBTI people are less likely than general population have voluntary contact or are involved in heterosexual people to enter a police station to report crime community partnership programs with the police (Cunneen, because many LGBTI people feel that the police view them 2001). This is particularly true of the members of diverse as a deviant group (see Mason, 1993). Miles-Johnson 5 Canales (2000) stated that the grouping of LGBTI sexual- nightclub is situated within the metropolitan area of the city ity into a homogeneous analytic framework may actually and has been established within the LGBTI (and wider) com- contribute to the “othering” of sexual identity associated munity as entertainment venues for more than 20 years. with the LGBTI community by heteronormative agencies While it is not known whether the nightclub has a history of such as the police. As such, concerns were raised in this police concern regarding problems with patron assaults (the research about combining LGBTI sexual identity into one venue would disclose this information), the venues have cluster or homogeneous group for use as an analytic frame- maintained a positive relationship with the police regarding work due to its diversity; an analysis of the large body of patron intoxication and drug use and/or drug dealing, and the sociological work examining the appropriateness of group- nightclub is monitored by private security guards. Unlike ing the LGBTI community into a sexually homogeneous nightclubs marketed for younger people (typically for conceptual and analytic framework is beyond the scope of patrons below 30 years of age), the venue attracts a wide age this research article. Yet grouped sexual identity (such as range of people, and is not recognized by police as a trouble normative sexuality [heterosexuality] and nonnormative sex- zone. For ethical reasons, the nightclub has been de-identified uality [such as LGBTI sexuality]) is one of the salient iden- in this research. The various online community groups (de- tity markers that many cultures use to categorize and judge identified as part of the ethical agreement) were also chosen others (Skeggs, 1999). For the purpose of this study, it was for their capacity to attract large numbers of LGBTI and het- deemed appropriate to analyze LGBTI sexuality as a homo- erosexual people, and because they are situated within a geneous group. large online social networking site (again de-identified for An in-depth analysis of LGBTI people’s beliefs in police ethical reasons). homophobia can provide a useful framework for determining whether this belief is based on personal or vicarious experi- Procedure ence (Myers et al., 2004). Previous studies have also indi- cated that a belief in police homophobia is a strong negative A face-to-face survey was administered to a nonprobability psychological determinant, often influencing the amount of sample of visitors at the “Gay Day” celebrations. An online contact many LGBTI people have with police officers survey was administered to a nonprobability sample of mem- (Herek, 1990; Myers et al., 2004). M. Williams and Robinson bers of an online community group (by online delivery) (2004) also indicated that up to three quarters of LGBTI vic- between March and April. It was anticipated that the conve- tims fail to report crime to the police primarily because they nience sample of visitors collected at the event and from the are fearful of secondary victimization from police officers as online community could provide results that would be suit- a result of perceived police homophobia (PPH). Ajzen (2005) able for the study because the LGBTI target population in argued that negative beliefs account for significant amounts Queensland is relatively diffuse and “hidden” and constitutes of variance in salient beliefs (assumed to be the immediate a “hard to get at population,” as a result recruiting a tradi- influence of a person’s attitude), which in turn persuade tional probability sample of LGBTI people was deemed intention, the predictor determining different kinds of behav- impractical (see Griffiths, Gossop, Powis, & Strang, 1993). ior. Subsequently, by examining LGBTI people’s beliefs in In addition, although members of the LGBTI community police homophobia in relation to crime reporting, the current have differing lifestyles and sexual identities that may pose research could determine if it is in fact a negative belief such problematic when linking LGBTI people together as a col- as PPH that is influencing LGBTI people to underreport lective group, it was determined that identity associations crime. In addition, by also examining LGBTI people’s atti- could be made between LGBTI people as they are primarily tudes, subjective norms, and PBC, it can also be determined interconnected by their notions of sexual identity that are dif- whether LGBTI people are different from heterosexual peo- ferent from normative heterosexual identities (see Ghaziani, ple in their willingness to report crime to the police. 2011). It was also recognized that collective grouping of LGBTI people would result in sample heterogeneity and therefore contribute some limitations to the study in terms of Method generalizability. However, it was anticipated that the results of this study would speak to the broader issues regarding Site Selection intention to report crime to the police, specifically, how sex- The research was conducted outside of a Brisbane nightclub ual identity difference shapes an individual’s attitude toward (situated in an inner city area), and online (by online deliv- crime reporting. ery). The nightclub was chosen for its involvement in the The online survey was posted on message boards within “Gay Day” celebrations (a festival for the LGBTI commu- Queensland-based Internet community groups that are vis- nity, their family, and friends), its capacity to attract large ited (and participated in) by LGBTI and heterosexual people. numbers of patrons, and because it is known to be openly The Internet link was also emailed to different community welcoming toward LGBTI and heterosexual people, although groups (de-identified for ethical reasons) participating within the nightclub is advertised as a Gay and Lesbian venue. The online community forums and redistributed throughout 6 SAGE Open Queensland by email. Participants were given a choice participants comprising 0.9% (n = 3). More than half of the between completing a paper-based survey or by completing participants in the sample (64.1%) were identified as LGBTI the survey online at a later time. If a participant wanted to (n = 211), and 35.9% of the participants were identified as complete the survey online, they were provided with an heterosexual (n = 118). More than half of the participants information leaflet detailing the online web address and sur- were in a relationship (n = 201; 61.1%) and only 11 partici- vey link. The online survey and the survey administered at pants (3.3%) were identified as Aboriginal Australian or the “Gay Day” celebrations were identical. Torres Strait Islander. The majority of the participants were Australian citizens (n = 319; 97%) and all of the participants in the study were from Queensland. Participants Preliminary data screening was conducted to examine Using a nonproportional quota sampling technique to ensure demographic differences (such as gender, sexual identity, that a minimum of 100 participants from the LGBTI and het- age range, and area of residency) between the two different erosexual community were represented in the study, 329 data collection methods: participants recruited from the participants were recruited to participate in the research. Brisbane “Gay Day” Celebrations and participants obtained Participants were randomly approached on the basis of gen- by online delivery. The analyses indicated that there were no der (male and female), their willingness to complete the statistically significant differences between the participants survey, and on their intention to enter the nightclub (either by recruited from the Brisbane “Gay Day” celebrations and par- standing in-line to enter or waiting outside of the night- ticipants obtained by online delivery; therefore, it was deter- club). The paper surveys (40 items) were administered to mined that for all further analyses the two samples would be the participants by a team of six volunteers (trained by the combined. The data were analyzed using univariate and mul- researcher to administer the survey and approved by an insti- tivariate approaches, as well as parametric and nonparamet- tutional ethics review board) and each of the surveys given to ric statistics. the participants was identical. Although many patrons refused to participate in the Measures research, overall, the research team received positive (and polite) reactions from the patrons, and the acceptance rate to Willingness to Report Crime. To measure participants’ will- participate in the study was higher than expected. While it ingness to report crime to the police, the participants were is acknowledged that some patrons who attend nightclubs asked to respond to vignettes (see the appendix) depicting may be more predisposed to dislike the police due to the four specific crimes (vandalism, assault, break and enter- 19 20 effects of intoxication, drug taking, and resulting incivility, ing, and stalking). These crimes were chosen because the there is no empirical research to suggest that patrons who CMC (2006) identified assault and stalking as the most frequent nightclubs will differ in their attitudes toward the feared (and typically experienced) forms of personal crime police than patrons of other social venues. As such, it was and vandalism, and break and entering as the most feared anticipated that the convenience sample of visitors collected (and typically experienced) form of property crime in Aus- at the venue could provide results that would be suitable for tralia. Participants were asked to respond on a 5-point Likert- the study. To avoid duplication of results, each respondent type scale (1 = extremely likely and 5 = extremely unlikely) to was asked if they had completed the survey prior to being the question “how willing would it be that they would report approached. The online participants were selected on the this crime to the police.” basis of gender (male and female) and participation/member- Initial inspection of the data indicated that the responses ship within the online community forums. To avoid duplica- to each of the four vignettes were bimodally distributed with tion of online results, each respondent was asked if they had few participants responding “don’t know.” Examination of previously completed the online survey. participant responses to the four vignettes indicated that 45% The final sample comprised 147 participants (44.7%) of participants would report vandalism to the police as recruited from visitors attending the Brisbane “Gay Day” opposed to 49.9% of participants who would not report van- Celebrations, and 182 participants (55.3%) obtained by online dalism to the police; 49.6% of participants would report delivery (N = 329). A 10-page, 40-item, self-report survey assault to the police as opposed to 47.7% of participants who was utilized to examine participants’ willingness to report would not report assault to the police; and 47.1% of partici- crime and to assess participant attitudes toward the police. pants would report stalking to the police as opposed to 43% There was 100% completion rate and no missing data. of participants who would not report stalking to the police. The ages of the participants ranged from 18 to 74 years Although 68.8% of participants would report a crime of (M = 35.32, SD = 12.03), and the majority of the participants break and entering to the police as opposed to 28.2% of par- were male (n = 173; 52.6%); with females comprising 44.1% ticipants who would not report break and entering to the (n = 145) of participants; transgender male to female partici- police, examination of the data indicated that there did not pants comprising 2.1% (n = 7); transgender female to male seem to be a difference between participants reporting per- participants comprising 0.3% (n = 1); and intersex sonal crime or reporting property crime. Miles-Johnson 7 Table 1. Correlations for Each Crime Vignette: Vandalism, the proximal determinant of behavior intention to engage in Assault, Break and Entering, and Stalking (N = 329). the behavior becomes the key concept of the research and is determined by three sets of variables: (a) attitude (the overall Crime vignette 1 2 3 4 evaluation and the outcome expectancy of the behavior), (b) 1. Vandalism .75** .68** .64** subjective norms (perceptions of social pressure from sig- 2. Assault .60** .65** nificant others to perform a particular behavior), and (c) PBC 3. Break and entering .39** (a person’s belief as to how easy or difficult performance of 4. Stalking the behavior is likely to be). To measure attitude, each participant was asked to respond **p < .01 (two-tailed). to eight statements on a 5-point, forced-choice Likert-type rating scale, ranging from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly Further inspection of the data also indicated that the disagree. A composite Attitude score was calculated by sum- responses to each of the four vignettes were highly intercor- ming across the eight items, with a minimum score of eight related (Table 1). Examination of participant responses to the indicating negative attitudes toward reporting to the police, four vignettes indicated that vandalism and assault were and a maximum score of 40 indicating positive attitudes highly correlated (r = .75, p < .01). Vandalism was also toward reporting to the police. The Attitude scale had good highly correlated with break and entering (r = .68, p < .01), internal consistency : α = .93 (DeVellis, 2003; George & and assault was highly correlated with stalking (r = .65, p < Mallery, 2003). To measure subjective norms, each partici- .01).This would also indicate that participant responses to pant was asked to respond to seven statements on a 5-point, each of the four crime vignettes were fairly consistent and forced-choice Likert-type rating scale, ranging from 1 = that respondents would report on one type of crime to the strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree. A composite subjec- police and on others. tive norms score was calculated by summing across the For the final analyses, participant responses to four seven items, with a minimum score of seven indicating posi- vignettes—vandalism, assault, break and entering, and tive social pressure from others to engage in a behavior, and stalking— were transformed into a single crime reporting a maximum score of 35 indicating negative social pressure variable. The crime reporting variable had good internal from others to not engage in a behavior. The Subjective consistency: α = .89 (DeVellis, 2003; George & Mallery, Norms scale had acceptable internal consistency: α = .79 2003). (DeVellis, 2003; George & Mallery, 2003). To measure PBC, each participant was asked to respond to 13 items on a Attitude, Subjective Norms, PBC, and PPH. Previous research by semantic differential scale with 11 scales ranging from 0 = Dovidio, Kawakami, Johnson, Johnson, and Howard (1997) not confident at all to 10 = extremely confident. A composite and Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, and Williams (1995) indicated PBC score was calculated, with a minimum score of zero that people are more likely to discriminate against group indicating a negative evaluation of the possible effects of members for whom they have more negative attitudes. Thus, reporting to the police, and a maximum score of 130 indicat- to distinguish between LGBTI people’s general attitudes ing a positive evaluation of the possible effects of reporting toward reporting crime to the police, and a specific belief in to the police. The PBC scale had good internal consistency: police homophobia (which may be a particular influence on α = .89 (DeVellis, 2003; George & Mallery, 2003). For each LGBTI people’s crime reporting behavior), LGBTI people’s item measuring beliefs of police homophobia, participant’s beliefs in police homophobia need to be measured (Fazio et al., overall responses were recoded into two categories: Yes and 1995). According to Fazio and Olson (2003), Greenwald and No. It was determined that the PPH scale had acceptable Banaji (1995), and Greenwald, McGhee, and Schwartz internal consistency: α = .74 (DeVellis, 2003; George & (1998), implicit measures of beliefs assess automatic evalua- Mallery, 2003). tions associated with attitude objects that the perceivers may not necessarily be aware of, or may not realize is influencing Limitations their overt behavior, or may not be able to control. However, Jellison, McConnell, and Gabriel (2004) determined that There were two specific limitations to the present study. when studying prejudiced beliefs, explicit (or controlled) First, it was determined that the research design may also measures of beliefs are belief-object-evaluations that indi- have limited the research project as the use of the vignettes viduals can consciously express and differ in general atti- asked participants to respond to only four different types of tudes that individuals may hold toward a specific group or scenarios depicting assault, break and entering, vandalism, object. Thus, explicit expressions of beliefs in police and stalking. However, as previous research indicated that homophobia may be more likely to predict crime reporting LGBTI people are less willing to report crime to the police behavior under conditions where social pressures have a than heterosexual people, careful consideration may need to strong influence (Ajzen, 2005). By applying the TPB to be given to determine specific types of crime experienced by examine the likelihood of crime reporting by LGBTI people, the LGBTI community. 8 SAGE Open Table 2. Overall Gender Differences in the Likelihood of LGBTI, and for males and females identifying as hetero- Reporting Crime to the Police (N = 329). sexual. For males, a significant relationship was found between sexual identity and willingness to report crime to Likelihood of crime reporting police, χ (1, N = 329) = 37.41, p < .001, ϕ = .48. Male LGBTI participants were less willing (25.3%) to state that High Low they would report crime to police than male heterosexual Participants n % n % participants (91.7%). Only two male heterosexual partici- pants said they would not report crime to police. A similar Gender significant relationship was found between sexual identity Male 60 34.9 114 72.6 and willingness to report crime to police for female partici- Female 112 65.1 43 27.4 pants, χ (1, N = 329) = 66.74, p < .001, ϕ = .68. Female Total sample 172 100 157 100 LGBTI participants were less willing (34.4%) than female heterosexual participants (96.8%) to report crime to police. Only three female heterosexual participants said they would Second, participants recruited for this research were not not report crime to police. obtained from a random sample of the population and there- While there is a difference between males and females in fore may not be representative of either the LGBTI or hetero- reporting crime to police, there is a very strong relationship sexual communities. For example, the sample of respondents between sexual identity and reporting crime. Regardless of who identified as heterosexual male was small in compari- gender, almost all heterosexual participants stated they son with the sample of respondents who identified as LGBTI would report the crimes to police. The majority of LGBTI male. As such, future research should attempt to select and participants said that they were more unwilling to report survey a large representative group of LGBTI and hetero- crime to police than willing to report crime to police. sexual people in Australia to examine whether the results However, this was more apparent for male LGBTI partici- presented here can be replicated. Even with these limitations, pants (74.7%) than female LGBTI participants (65.6%). however, the findings of the present study provide research- ers and the police with insights into crime reporting behav- iors of LGBTI and heterosexual people in Australia. Research Question 2: Do Participants’ Attitudes, Subjective Norms, PBC, and Belief in Police Homophobia Determine Their Intentions to Results Report Crime to the Police? Research Question 1: Are LGBTI Participants Less To determine if reporting crime to the police could be pre- Willing Than Heterosexual Participants to Report dicted from a specific set of measures under the TPB (atti- Crime to the Police? tude, subjective norms, PBC, and PPH), a Mann–Whitney U The differential behavior of females and males in reporting test was performed. crime incidents (see Baumer, 2002; Carcach, 1997; Felson The Mann–Whitney U test only revealed that there was et al., 2002; Hart & Rennison, 2003; Rennison, 2007) sug- only a significant difference in crime reporting behavior and gested the need to control gender as an influence on the will- levels of PBC for participants who were more willing to ingness to report crime to the police. To examine the report crime to the police (median = 6, n = 172) and partici- relationship between the dependent variable Likelihood of pants who were less willing to report crime to the police reporting crime to the police and gender (male/female), a (median = 6, n = 157), U = 11,621.50, z = −2.18, p < .05, r = chi-square test for independence (with Yates Continuity .12. As nonparametric tests tend to be less sensitive than Correction) was performed. The chi-square test indicated parametric tests, it was decided that a series of independent- that there was a significant association between gender and samples t test would also be performed. Although it was reporting of crime, χ (1, N = 329) = 45.39, p < .001, ϕ = .38, acknowledged that by using parametric tests with a conve- with females being more likely to report crime than males (n = nient sample, assumptions about the populations from which 112; 65.1%). The percentages for gender and the likelihood the sample was drawn would not necessarily be generaliz- of reporting crime to the police are presented in Table 2. able to the wider public. To control for the differences between males and females The t tests indicated that there was a significant difference in crime reporting, separate chi-square analyses were per- between PBC and participants who were more willing to formed for males and females examining the relationship report crime to the police (M = 81.81, SD = 21.56) and par- between sexuality and reporting crime to the police. ticipants who were less willing to report crime to the police Therefore, to examine the relationship between sexual iden- (M = 87.31, SD = 18.26); t(327) = −2.51; p < .05, two-tailed. tity and reporting crime to the police, chi-square analyses The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean differ- were performed for males and females identifying as ence = −5.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [−9.83, −1.18]) Miles-Johnson 9 Table 3. Results of t-Test Evaluating Attitude, Subjective Norms, participants scored lower on subjective norms than LGBTI PBC, and PPH (N = 329). participants indicating that LGBTI people were influenced by the social pressures put on them by significant others to Willingness to report crime report crime to the police. Inspection of the mean scores also indicated that LGBTI participants had lower levels of PBC Yes No than heterosexual participants indicating that LGBTI people Variable M SD M SD t(327) felt that it was more difficult for them to report a crime to the police than heterosexual participants. In addition, inspection Attitude 26.66 8.07 25.55 8.38 1.22 of the mean scores indicated that LGBTI people had stronger Subjective norms 16.01 4.23 16.27 4.25 −0.57 beliefs in police homophobia than heterosexual participants. PBC 81.81 21.56 87.31 18.26 −2.51* The results of the MANOVA test indicated that there are PPH 6.20 1.46 6.08 1.43 0.76 significant differences between LGBTI and heterosexual Note: PBC = perceived behavioral control; PPH = perceived police participants’ attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, and beliefs in homophobia. police homophobia. LGBTI participants were found to have *p < .05. significantly more negative attitudes, subjective norms, and 2 PBCs than heterosexual participants. In addition, LGBTI was very small (η = .005). The t tests indicated that there participants were found to have stronger beliefs in police was no significant difference between reporting crime to the homophobia than heterosexual participants. police and attitude, subjective norms, and PPH. The results for the four t tests are presented in Table 3. Overall, the results from the series of independent t tests Discussion and the Mann–Whitney U tests each indicated that the TPB The study aimed to understand whether LGBTI and hetero- variable PBC (a person’s belief as to how easy or difficult sexual people vary in their willingness to report crime to the performance of the behavior is likely to be) could predict the police. Specifically the first research question examined willingness of high/low crime reporting. whether LGBTI participants are less willing than heterosex- ual participants to report crime to the police. When willing- Research Question 3: Are There Differences ness to report crime to the police was examined by differences in sexual identity, a significant difference was found between Between LGBTI and Heterosexual the LGBTI and heterosexual communities. Participants’ Attitudes, Subjective Norms, The results of the chi-square test for independence indi- PBC, and Belief in Police Homophobia? cated that controlling for gender differences in reporting To examine the relationship between sexual identity and par- crime behavior, LGBTI participants were significantly less ticipants’ attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, and belief in willing than heterosexual participants to report crime to the police homophobia, a 2 × 2 factorial MANOVA was per- police. Almost all heterosexual participants said that they formed. The independent variables were sexuality (LGBTI/ would report crime to the police but only 25% of LGBTI heterosexual) and gender (male/female). No significant main participants stated that they would report crime to the police. effect was found for gender, F(4, 322) = 1.98, p = .10, Wilks’s This indicates that a person’s sexual identity influences crime lambda = .98, η = .02, and there was no significant Gender reporting behavior. Interestingly, a significant relationship × Sexuality interaction, F(4, 322) = 2.05, p = .09, Wilks’s was also found between female LGBTI participants and lambda = .98, = .02. However, a significant main effect female heterosexual participants in their willingness to report was found for sexuality, F(4, 322) = 31.72, p < .001, Wilks’s crime to the police. Female participants were more willing lambda = .72, η = .28. than male participants to report a crime to the police. The Applying a Bonferroni adjustment alpha level of .013 (to results indicated that over and above gender, sexual identity reduce the chance of a Type 1 error), examination of the indi- impacted on willingness to report crime to the police. vidual variables indicated that significant differences were The second research question examined whether partici- found between LGBTI and heterosexual participants on atti- pants’ attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, and belief in police tude, F(1, 325) = 35.74, p < .001, R = .13; subjective norms, homophobia determine their intentions to report crime to the F(1, 325) = 44.22, p < .001, R = .19; PBC, F(1, 325) = 50.27, police. The results indicated that a participant’s intention to 2 2 p < .001, R = .18; and PPH, F(1, 325) = 120.86, p < .001, R report crime to the police was influenced by PBC (or a per- = .38. The mean scores and standard deviation for attitude, son’s belief regarding how easy or difficult performance of subjective norms, PBC and PPH, and sexual identity are pre- the behavior is likely to be) particularly low levels of PBC sented in Table 4. indicating that if a person perceived crime reporting to be Examination of Table 3 indicated that LGBTI people had difficult, then they would be less willing to do it. Yet this significantly more negative attitudes than heterosexual peo- raises interesting questions regarding the typical factors that ple toward reporting crime to the police. Heterosexual may influence a person to not report crime to the police. 10 SAGE Open Table 4. Mean Scores and Standard Deviation for Measures of Attitude, Subjective Norms, PBC, and PPH Grouped by Sexual Identity (N = 329). Sexual identity LGBTI Heterosexual Variable M SD M SD Attitude 25.05 8.52 28.08 7.31 Subjective norms 20.57 3.43 18.25 2.85 PBC 75.09 29.55 83.25 21.38 PPH 1.29 .46 1.99 .09 Note: PBC = perceived behavioral control; PPH = perceived police homophobia; LGBTI = lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex. However, an in-depth analysis of such factors (e.g., the char- Therefore, the research identified that the differences acteristics of the victim, the nature of the offence, attitudes between LGBTI and heterosexual people’s willingness to toward police, and the victim’s relationship to the offender) report crime to the police are sensitive to differences in sexu- was beyond the scope of this research due to ethical agree- ality and the ensuing perceptions of treatment from police ments regarding information gathering about prior victimiza- such differences bring (in this case, negative perceptions of tion. The results also indicated that as a group of variables, police homophobia by LGBTI people). However, given that the components of the TPB and PPH were unable to collec- LGBTI people in Queensland have had higher instances of tively predict the willingness of crime reporting to the police. homophobia directed toward them from social institutions However, further investigation of the data suggested that on such as the police, such negative perceptions of police its own, behavioral control (particularly positive or negative homophobia by LGBTI people is unsurprising, and this will levels of PBC) can strongly affect the nature of intention to pose a long-term problem for the LGBTI community and the report crime to the police. police service unless it is addressed. The third research question examined whether there are Therefore, to change LGBTI people’s negative attitudes differences in sexual identity between LGBTI and heterosex- toward reporting crime, previous research suggests that an ual participant’s attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, and belief individual’s negative subjective norms can be transformed in police homophobia. Examination of the data indicated that by the influence of a significant other (see Ajzen, 2005). LGBTI participant attitudes, subjective norms, PBCs, and Subsequently, by encouraging influential members of the beliefs in police homophobia were significantly different LGBTI community to report crime to the police, it may also from those conveyed by the heterosexual community. LGBTI encourage other members of the LGBTI community to participants had more negative attitudes toward reporting engage in the same behavior. In addition, by encouraging crime to the police and more negative belief structures about members of the LGBTI community to become involved in police interaction than heterosexual participants. LGBTI par- non-crime-related activities with the police, strong percep- ticipants had stronger perceptions than heterosexual partici- tions of police homophobia may also be dispelled. Although pants of the social pressures put on them by significant others this strategy assumes that police officers are not homophobic to perform a particular behavior. In addition, LGBTI partici- and raises additional questions about how the attitudes of pants indicated that it was less easy for them to report a crime police officers who are homophobic can be erased. to the police than heterosexual participants. Furthermore, by changing the way that LGBTI people per- The results suggest that LGBTI participants have gener- ceive how easy or difficult it is to report a crime to the police, ally more negative belief structures than heterosexual par- negative levels of PBCs could also be dispelled. ticipants in relation to the police and crime reporting. The results also indicated that while there is a significant gender Conclusion difference in people’s intention to report crime to the police, there is also a very strong relationship between sexual iden- The present study demonstrated how an application of the tity and reporting crime. Regardless of gender, almost all het- TPB can be used to structure and interpret the psychological erosexual participants stated they would report crime to the mechanisms that influence intention to report crime. Results police. However, the majority of LGBTI participants said indicated that there are differences between LGBTI and het- that they were more willing not to report a crime to the police erosexual participant’s intentions to report crime, with than to report a crime to the police, although this was more LGBTI people being less willing to report crime than hetero- apparent for male members of the LGBTI community than sexual people. In addition, the relationship between crime female members. reporting rates is sensitive to differences in sexual identity. Miles-Johnson 11 The results also indicated that under the theoretical compo- only item that is missing—How likely would it be that you nents of the TPB there are differences in LGBTI and hetero- would report this crime to the police? sexual people’s psychological mechanisms that may account for LGBTI people’s reluctance to report crime to the police. 1. Highly likely Examination of the data indicated that the LGBTI participant 2. Likely attitudes, subjective norms, PBCs, and beliefs in police 3. Undecided homophobia were significantly different from those con- 4. Unlikely veyed by the heterosexual community. LGBTI participants 5. Highly unlikely had more negative attitudes toward reporting crime to the police and belief structures about the police than heterosex- Imagine that your ex-partner has been stalking you. This ex ual participants. The results indicated that LGBTI and het- has been harassing your friends; ringing your mobile then erosexual people differ significantly in their intention to hanging up; turning up outside your home; and texting abu- report crime to the police and that a belief in police homopho- sive messages at inappropriate times—How likely would it bia strongly influences LGBTI people’s intention to under- be that you would report this ex to the police? report crime to the police. To conclude, in Australia, underreporting of crime to police by LGBTI people poses 1. Highly likely long-term problems for the LGBTI community and the 2. Likely police service. Despite the extensive body of research exam- 3. Undecided ining crime reporting behavior, the empirical field is still in 4. Unlikely its infancy regarding variations in crime reporting behaviors 5. Highly unlikely due to differences in sexual identity. As such, specific atten- tion needs to be focused on creating micro level strategies Declaration of Conflicting Interests that will encourage LGBTI people to have better attitudes The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect toward the police, thereby increasing the likelihood that to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. LGBTI people will be willing to report crime to the police. Funding Appendix The author(s) received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article. Vignettes Depicting Vandalism, Assault, Break and Entering, and Stalking Notes Imagine that you have returned home to find that someone 1. For the purpose of this article, minority groups are defined as has vandalized your garden and graffitied on your front groups having external behaviors or other features that dis- tinguish them from the general population, thereby affording fence—How likely would it be that you would report this them a subordinate identity group status that results in signifi- crime to the police? cantly less control or power over their lives than other mem- bers of dominant or majority groups (United Nations Human 1. Highly likely Rights Office of the High Commissioner, 2010). 2. Likely 2. In this instance, “Culture” refers to systems of knowledge, and 3. Undecided the cumulative deposit of knowledge, experience, beliefs, val- 4. Unlikely ues, attitudes, meanings, and hierarchies shared by a relatively 5. Highly unlikely large group of people (Hofstede, 1997). 3. Although it should be noted that MacDonald (2001) found Imagine if you came home to find that your partner had been that insurance claims were not a key determinant in reporting assaulted. Your partner is upset but does not need medical crime to the police. 4. Intersex people are individuals with congenital differences that attention—How likely would it be that you would report this cause atypical development of their chromosomal, gonadal, or crime to the police? anatomic sex. It is recognized that the intersex category is a complex group, with many intersex females lacking a second 1. Highly likely X chromosome (two XX sex chromosomes being the norm), 2. Likely and many intersex males having an extra X chromosome (one 3. Undecided X and one Y sex chromosome being the norm). 4. Unlikely 5. It should be noted that although other Australian states and 5. Highly unlikely cities have different terms for the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and intersex community (such as “Gay and Imagine that you have returned home to find that your house Lesbian” or “Queer”), the terminology used in this research has been broken into. A sum of money (AUD $2,000) is the to identify members of this diverse community is based on the 12 SAGE Open Australian Human Rights Commission (2012) definition of the 16. Due to the ethics requirements, the participants were not asked community. about prior victimization; therefore, items regarding incident 6. The Australian Census does not collect information on peo- type, crime occurrence/frequency, and location of incident ple’s sexual orientation. were not included in the survey. 7. Although a comparative analysis of crime reporting practices 17. Although all the participants in the study resided in Queensland, between Australia and other countries was beyond the scope of the LGBTI sample included in the research may not be repre- this research, it is recognized that an integration of Australian sentative of the wider LGBTI population in Queensland (or crime reporting practices by the lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans- the wider Australian LGBTI population) as it is impossible to gender, and intersex (LGBTI) and heterosexual communities estimate the number of LGBTI people living in Australia due would place the research into a broader spectrum of crime to the absence of questions relating to sexual identity in the reporting practices. national census (Gay & Lesbian Community Health Alliance, 8. In addition, it should also be noted that as the participants 2012). from the bisexual, transgender, and intersex communities only 18. All statistical analyses were conducted using Predictive comprised a very small part of the overall LGBTI sample (see Analytics SoftWare (PASW) statistical analysis package ver- “Participants” section), it also determined that they would be sion 17.0. included with the lesbian and gay participants as a homoge- 19. Other jurisdictions may term this crime “breaking and enter- neous group. As such, it was decided that an analysis of intra- ing” or “break and enter”; however, Section 418 of the group difference or variability between the factions of the Criminal Code Queensland states that it is termed “Break and LGBTI community would not be conducted in this research. entering.” 9. Although much has been written about the “end of the closet” 20. In accordance with the ethics agreement, none of the partici- in the United States (see Seidman, 2001), in Queensland— pants were asked if they had been a victim of crime. As such, regardless of changes in the political climate about sexuality prior victimization was not controlled for in the analyses. and sexual politics (Moore, 2001)—there is still a reluctance 21. Initially the items included in this measure suggested that of LGBTI people to publicly disclose their sexual identity, with there could be two measures: (a) property crime (vandalism, higher instances of homophobia being identified in Queensland and break and entering) and (b) personal crime (assault and unlike other Australian states such as New South Wales (see stalking) and that the items could be considered as two mul- Barrett, Lewis, & Dwyer, 2011; Flood & Hamilton, 2005). tiple-item composite scores rather than one. However, it was 10. The message boards within Queensland-based Internet com- decided that for the purpose of this study the items would be munity groups were selected on the basis of being exclu- combined into one single composite score. sively provided for (and tailored for) LGBTI and heterosexual 22. For a list of the items used to operationalize each concept, Queensland residents. please contact the author directly. 11. It was determined that a minimum sample size of 100 partici- 23. None of the included items in the additive Theory of Planned pants from each population would minimize sampling error Behavior (TPB) measures had missing values; therefore, sums for each population, increase the confidence level of potential and not averages are presented in this research. representation of the true population, and determine a degree 24. Although other statistical analyses could have been performed of variability between each population included in the study to evaluate each of the scales (such as a factor analysis to see (see Israel, 2009). how the respective items loaded on one factor), it was decided 12. Although respondents were selected from both genders on the for the purposes of this study that Cronbach’s alpha would be basis of their outward appearance (as either male or female), a sufficient tool to measure internal consistency of each scale. all the participants included in the study regardless of gender Although several authors have recommended that the coeffi- status (i.e., male, female, or transgender) were given the option cient alpha should be minimally .90, with an ideal value of to disclose their gender identity within the demographic part of .95 (see Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994), DeVellis (2003) and the survey. George and Mallery (2003) argued that a coefficient alpha of 13. The survey was administered to patrons 2 hr before the “Gay .70 is acceptable for new scales. day” celebrations began because patrons had begun queuing 25. The same tests were also performed including age and race as to enter the nightclub approximately 2 hr before the venue an influence on the willingness to report crime to the police; opened. Entry to the celebrations was via one entrance to the however, there was no significant association between these nightclub and by ticketed entrance only. variables. 14. It was undetermined how many patrons in total refused to 26. It was determined that a chi-square analysis of independence answer the survey. rather than a chi-square test for goodness-of-fit test (or one- 15. It is acknowledged that the respondents who participated in tailed proportions test) would provide appropriate results for the study had little privacy when completing the survey, and this research question because assumptions regarding which that this “open” administration may have influenced their group would have the larger mean (or proportion of willing- responses to the survey. However, no patrons were seen to be ness to report crime to the police), a hypothesized value, was visibly consuming alcohol while waiting to enter the venue not made before data were collected. and the general mood of the patrons waiting to enter the venue 27. To assist in understanding crime reporting behavior, it was was positive and upbeat but not rowdy. As such, the patrons determined that each of the components of the TPB would who did participate in the survey responded to the survey in a be measured as separate elements that influence intention to serious manner. report crime to police. In this way, the current research was Miles-Johnson 13 able to gain insight into the underlying cognitive foundation Bourne, A., Reid, D., Hammond, G., & Weatherburn, P. (2010). of the factors that influence people’s intention to report crime Waltham Forest LGBT matters: The needs and experiences to the police before an independent variable such as sexuality of lesbians, gay men, bisexual and trans men and women in was introduced. Waltham Forest. London, England: Sigma Research. 28. As a convenience sample was used in the research, it was Browning, S. L., Cullen, F. T., Cao, L., Kopache, R., & Stevenson, determined that a Mann–Whitney U test could provide appro- T. J. (1994). Race and getting hassled by the police: A research priate statistical analysis of the data. It was used to initially note. Police Studies, 17, 1-11. determine differences between the two independent groups as Buchan, H. (2005). Ethical decision making in the public account- a nonparametric alternative to a t test. However, as nonpara- ing profession: An extension of Ajzen’s Theory of Planned metric tests may fail to detect differences between groups, an Behaviour. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 165-181. independent-samples t test was also performed. Butler, M. (2012). National lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgen- 29. It is acknowledged that in future studies such factors could be der and intersex (LGBTI) ageing and aged care strategy. statistically controlled for so that the estimated models could Canberra: Australian Government Department of Health and be better specified. Ageing. 30. It is recommended that further research is needed to gain a Canales, M. (2000). Othering: Toward an understanding of differ- more comprehensive understanding of the attitudes of police ence. Advances in Nursing Science, 22, 16-31. Carcach, C. (1997). Reporting crime to the police. Canberra: officers toward members of the LGBTI community. Australian Institute of Criminology. Carr, P. J., Napolitano, L., & Keating, J. (2007). We never call the References cops and here is why: A qualitative examination of legal cyni- Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned cism in three Philadelphia neighborhoods. Criminology, 45, behavior. In J. Kuhi & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: 445-480. From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). Heidelberg, Germany: Chakraborti, N. (2009). A glass half full? Assessing progress in the Springer. policing of hate crime. Policing, 3, 121-128. Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality and behaviour (2nd ed.). Comstock, G. (1989). Victims of anti-gay/lesbian violence. Journal Berkshire, UK: Open University Press. of Interpersonal Violence, 4, 101-106. Attorney General’s Department of New South Wales. (2003). You Connor, M., & Armitage, C. (1998). Extending the Theory of shouldn’t have to hide to be safe survey: A report on homopho- Planned Behaviour: A review and avenues for further research. bic hostilities and violence against gay men and lesbians in Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1429-1464. New South Wales. New South Wales, Australia: Author. Crime and Misconduct Commission. (2006). Fear of crime report. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2007). Recorded crime: Victims. Brisbane, Queensland, Australia: Crime and Misconduct Sydney, Australia: Australian Bureau of Statistics. Commission. Australian Human Rights Commission. (2012). Lesbian, gay, Crime and Misconduct Commission. (2009). Interactions between bisexual, trans and intersex equality. Retrieved from http:// police and young people. Brisbane, Queensland, Australia: www.hreoc.gov.au/human_rights/lgbti/index.html Crime and Misconduct Commission. Barrett, N., Lewis, J., & Dwyer, A. (2011). Effects of disclosure Cunneen, C. (2001). Conflict, politics and crime: Aboriginal com- of sexual identity at work for gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans- munities and the police. New South Wales, Australia: Allen gender and intersex (GLBTI) employees in Queensland. and Unwin. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Australian and New Zealand DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and application Academy of Management Conference, Australian and New (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Zealand Academy of Management (ANZAM), Amora Hotel, Dovidio, J., Kawakami, K., Johnson, C., Johnson, B., & Howard, A. Wellington, New Zealand. Available from http://eprints.qut. (1997). On the nature of prejudice: Automatic and controlled edu.au/46897/ processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 5-17. Baumer, E. P. (2002). Neighbourhood disadvantage and police Fagan, J., & Davies, G. (2000). Street stops and broken windows: notification by victims of violence. Criminology, 40, 579- Terry, race and disorder in New York City. Fordham Urban 616. Law Journal, 28, 457-504. Beckett, K., Nyrop, K., & Pfingst, L. (2006). Race, drugs and Fazio, R., Jackson, J., Dunton, B., & Williams, C. (1995). Variability policing: Understanding disparities in drug delivery arrests. in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial atti- Criminology, 44, 105-138. tudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Bernstein, M., & Kostelac, C. (2002). Lavender and blue: Attitudes Psychology, 69, 1013-1027. about homosexuality and behaviour toward lesbians and gay Fazio, R., & Olson, M. (2003). Implicit measures in social cog- men among police officers. Journal of Contemporary Criminal nition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Justice, 18, 302-330. Psychology, 54, 297-327. Bohn, T. (1993). Homophobic violence: Implications for social Felson, R. B., Messner, S. F., Hoskin, A. W., & Deane, G. (2002). work practice. Journal of Social Work & Human Sexuality, 2, Reasons for reporting and not reporting domestic violence to 91-112. the police. Criminology, 40, 617-648. Bosick, S., Rennison, C. M., Gover, A. R., & Dodge, M. (2012). Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and Reporting violence to the police: Predictors through the life behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, course. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40, 441-451. MA: Addison-Wesley. 14 SAGE Open Flood, M., & Hamilton, C. (2005). Mapping homophobia in Mason, G. (1993). Violence against lesbians and gay men (Violence Australia. Victoria: The Australia Institute. Prevention Today Series No. 2). Canberra: Australian Institute Gay & Lesbian Community Health Alliance. (2012). Researching of Criminology. LGBTI health. Retrieved from http://www.lgbthealth.org.au/ Mastrofski, S. D., Parks, R., Reiss, A., & Worden, R. (1999). research Policing neighbourhoods: A report from St. Petersburg. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for windows step by step: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. A simple guide and reference (11.0 update, 4th ed.). Boston, Mastrofski, S. D., Reisig, M. D., & McCluskey, J. D. (2002). Police MA: Allyn & Bacon. disrespect toward the public: An encounter-based analysis. Gerstenfeld, P. (2004). Hate crimes: Causes, controls, controver- Criminology, 40, 515-551. sies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. McMillan, B., & Conner, M. (2003). Applying an extended version Ghaziani, A. (2011). Post-gay collective identity construction. of the Theory of Planned Behaviour to illicit drug use among Social Problems, 58, 99-125. students. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 1662-1683. Gottfredson, M., & Gottfredson, D. (1980). Decision making in Merry, S., Power, N., McManus, M., & Alison, L. (2012). Drivers criminal justice. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. of public trust and confidence in police in the UK. International Greenwald, A., & Banaji, M. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Journal of Police Science & Management, 14, 118-135. Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, Meyer, D. (2010). Evaluating the severity of hate-motivated vio- 102, 4-27. lence: Intersectional differences among LGBT hate crime vic- Greenwald, A., McGhee, D., & Schwartz, J. (1998). Measuring tims. Sociology, 44, 980-995. individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Meyer, D. (2011). Intersecting systems of oppression: Race, class, Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social and gender differences among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans- Psychology, 74, 1464-1480. gender (LGBT) hate crime victims. ProQuest Dissertations Griffiths, P., Gossop, M., Powis, B., & Strang, J. (1993). Reaching and Theses, 1-249. Available from http://gas.sagepub.com/ hidden populations of drug users by privileged access inter- content/26/6/849.short viewers: Methodological and practical issues. Addiction, 88, Moore, C. (2001). Sunshine and rainbows: The development of 1617-1626. gay and lesbian culture in Queensland. Queensland, Australia: Hart, T. C., & Rennison, C. M. (2003). Reporting crime to the University of Queensland Press. police, 1992-2000 (Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report). Moran, L. (2007). Invisible minorities: Challenging community and Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. neighbourhood models of Policing. Criminology & Criminal Herek, G. (1990). The context of anti-gay violence: Notes on cul- Justice, 7, 417-441. tural and psychological heterosexism. Journal of Interpersonal Murphy, K., & Cherney, A. (2010). Policing ethnic minority groups Violence, 5, 316-333. with procedural justice: An empirical study (Working Paper Herek, G., & Berrill, K. (1992). Hate crimes: Confronting violence No. 2). Geelong, Victoria, Australia: Alfred Deakin Research against lesbians and gay men. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Institute. Herek, G. M., Cogan, J. C., & Gillis, J. R. (2003). Victim experi- Myers, K., Forest, K., & Miller, S. (2004). Officer friendly and the ences in hate crimes based on sexual orientation. Journal of tough cop: Gays and lesbians navigate homophobia and polic- Social Issues, 58, 319-339. ing. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 17-38. Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd mind. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Israel, G. (2009). Determining sample size. Gainesville, FL: Rennison, C. M. (2007). Reporting to the police by Hispanic vic- University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences tims of violence. Violence and Victims, 22, 754-772. (IFAS) Extension. Schaible, L. M., & Hughes, L. A. (2012). Neighborhood disadvantage Jellison, W., McConnell, A., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Implicit and and reliance on the police. Crime & Delinquency, 58, 245-276. explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: In-group Seidman, S. (2001). From identity to queer politics: Shifts in norma- preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and tive heterosexuality and the meaning of citizenship. Citizenship straight men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, Studies, 5, 321-328. 629-642. Skeggs, B. (1999). Matter out of place: Visibility and sexualities in Kääriäinen, J., & Sirén, R. (2011). Trust in the police, generalized leisure spaces. Leisure Studies, 18, 213-232. trust and reporting crime. European Journal of Criminology, Skogan, W. G. (1994). Contacts between police and public: Findings 8, 65-83. from the 1992 British Crime Survey (Home Office Research Kane, R. J. (2002). The social ecology of police misconduct. Study No. 134). London, England: Home Office. Retrieved Criminology, 40, 867-896. from http://www.skogan.org/files/Contact_Between_Police_ Kane, R. J. (2005). Compromised police legitimacy as a predic- Public_Hors_134.pdf tor of violent crime in structurally disadvantaged communities. Smith, B. W., & Holmes, M. D. (2003). Community accountability, Criminology, 43, 469-498. minority threat, and police brutality: An examination of civil Leonard, W., Mitchell, A., Patel, S., & Fox, C. (2008). Coming for- rights criminal complaints. Criminology, 41, 1035-1064. ward: The underreporting of heterosexist violence and same Smith, D. A., & Klein, J. R. (1984). Police control of interpersonal sex partner abuse in Victoria. Journal of Law, 69, 1-34. disputes. Social Problems, 31, 68-481. MacDonald, Z. (2001). Revisiting the dark figure: A microecono- Smith, D. A., & Visher, C. A. (1981). Street-level justice: Situational metric analysis of the under-reporting of property crime and determinants of police arrest decisions. Social Problems, 29, its implications. British Journal of Criminology, 41, 127-149. 167-177. Miles-Johnson 15 Stonewall. (1994). Queer bashing: A national survey of hate crimes Webb, V., & Marshall, C. (1995). The relative importance of race against lesbians and gay men. London, England: Stonewall. and ethnicity on citizen attitudes toward police. American Tarling, R., & Morris, K. (2010). Reporting crime to the police. Journal of Police, 14, 45-66. British Journal of Criminology, 50, 474-490. Weitzer, R., & Tuch, S. A. (2006). Race and policing in America: Terrill, W., Paoline, E. A., & Manning, P. K. (2003). Police culture Conflict and reform. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University and coercion. Criminology, 41, 1003-1034. Press. Terrill, W., & Reisig, M. D. (2003). Neighborhood context Williams, B. (1998). Citizen perspectives on community policing. and police use of force. Journal of Research in Crime & New York: State University of New York Press. Williams, M., & Robinson, A. (2004). Problems and prospects with Delinquency, 40, 291-321. policing the lesbian, gay and bisexual community in Wales. Tomsen, S., & Mason, G. (2001). Engendering homopho- Policing and Society, 14, 213-232. bia: Violence, sexuality and gender conformity. Journal of Worden, R. E. (1996). The causes of police brutality: Theory and evi- Sociology, 37, 257-273. dence on police use of force. In W. A. Geller & H. Toch (Eds.), Tyler, T. (2005). Policing in Black and White: Ethnic group differ- Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of ences in trust and confidence in the police. Police Quarterly, force (pp. 23-51). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 8, 322-342. United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. Author Biography (2010). Minority rights: International standards and guidance for implementation. New York, NY: United Nations. Toby Miles-Johnson is a lecturer based in the School of Social Viki, G. T., Culmer, M., Eller, A., & Abrams, D. (2006). Race and Science at The University of Queensland. His research interests willingness to cooperate with the police: The roles of quality of include policing, procedural justice, gender victimization and contact, attitudes towards the behaviour and subjective norms. crime, sexuality victimization and crime, race, victimization and British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 285-302. crime, prejudiced motivated crime, and international security. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png SAGE Open SAGE http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/sage/lgbti-variations-in-crime-reporting-how-sexual-identity-influences-eYhrTQOeMO

Loading next page...

References (91)

Nathan. Barrett, J. Lewis, A. Dwyer (2011)
Effects of disclosure of sexual identity at work for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (GLBTI) employees in Queensland
Kristina Murphy, Adrian Cherney (2010)
Policing ethnic minority groups with procedural justice: An empirical study
Wesley Skogan (1994)
Contacts Between Police and The Public: A British Crime Survey Report (Home Office Research Study, No. 135)
R. Kane (2005)
COMPROMISED POLICE LEGITIMACY AS A PREDICTOR OF VIOLENT CRIME IN STRUCTURALLY DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES
Criminology, 43
A. Greenwald, M. Banaji (1995)
Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes.
Psychological review, 102 1
M. Fishbein, I. Ajzen (1977)
Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research
Contemporary Sociology, 6
Bev Skeggs (1999)
Matter out of place: visibility and sexualities in leisure spaces
Leisure Studies, 18
Carlos Carcach (1997)
Reporting crime to the police
Michael Flood, C. Hamilton (2008)
Mapping Homophobia in Australia
Clive Moore (2001)
Sunshine and Rainbows: The Development of Gay and Lesbian Culture in Queensland
C. Rennison (2007)
Reporting to the Police by Hispanic Victims of Violence
Violence and Victims, 22
G. Mason (1993)
Violence against lesbians and gay men
H. Buchan (2005)
Ethical Decision Making in the Public Accounting Profession: An Extension of Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior
Journal of Business Ethics, 61
C. Rennison (2003)
Reporting Crime to the Police , 1992-2000
R. Worden (1995)
THE "CAUSES" OF POLICE BRUTALITY: THEORY AND EVIDENCE ON POLICE USE OF FORCE
Susan Johnson, D. Budz, M. Pathé, Zoe Ellerman (2009)
Interactions between police and young people
S. Merry, N. Power, M. McManus, Laurence Alison (2012)
Drivers of Public Trust and Confidence in Police in the UK
International Journal of Police Science & Management, 14
W. Terrill, Michael Reisig (2003)
Neighborhood Context and Police Use of Force
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40
R. Felson, S. Messner, A. Hoskin, G. Deane (2002)
REASONS FOR REPORTING AND NOT REPORTING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TO THE POLICE
Criminology, 40
E. Fess (1995)
Determining sample size.
Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists, 8 4
I. Ajzen (1988)
Attitudes, Personality and Behavior
J. Kääriäinen, Reino Sirén (2011)
Trust in the police, generalized trust and reporting crime
European Journal of Criminology, 8
Brad Smith, M. Holmes (2003)
COMMUNITY ACCOUNTABILITY, MINORITY THREAT, AND POLICE BRUTALITY: AN EXAMINATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS
Criminology, 41
Lavender and blue: Attitudes about homosexuality and behaviour toward lesbians and gay men among police officers
Mary Canales (2000)
Othering: toward an understanding of difference.
ANS. Advances in nursing science, 22 4
K. Beckett, Kris Nyrop, Lori Pfingst (2006)
RACE, DRUGS, AND POLICING: UNDERSTANDING DISPARITIES IN DRUG DELIVERY ARRESTS*
Criminology, 44
(2003)
You shouldn't have to hide to be safe survey: A report on homophobic hostilities and violence against gay men and lesbians in New South Wales
(1994)
Queer bashing: A national survey of hate crimes against lesbians and gay men
Lonnie Schaible, L. Hughes (2012)
Neighborhood Disadvantage and Reliance on the Police
Crime & Delinquency, 58
Doug Meyer (2010)
Evaluating the Severity of Hate-motivated Violence: Intersectional Differences among LGBT Hate Crime Victims
Sociology, 44
Officer friendly and the tough cop: Gays and lesbians navigate homophobia and policing
(1998)
Citizen perspectives on community policing
K. Myers, K. Forest, Susan Miller (2004)
Officer Friendly and the Tough Cop
Journal of Homosexuality, 47
Douglas Smith, Christy Visher (1981)
Street-Level Justice: Situational Determinants of Police Arrest Decisions
Social Problems, 29
Doug Meyer (2011)
Intersecting systems of oppression: Race, class, and gender differences among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) hate crime victims
Wesley Skogan (1994)
Contacts between police and public : findings from the 1992 British crime survey
A. Greenwald, D. McGhee, Jordan Schwartz (1998)
Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test.
Journal of personality and social psychology, 74 6
P. Carr, Laura Napolitano, J. Keating (2007)
WE NEVER CALL THE COPS AND HERE IS WHY: A QUALITATIVE EXAMINATION OF LEGAL CYNICISM IN THREE PHILADELPHIA NEIGHBORHOODS*
Criminology, 45
Edie Greene, L. Ellis (2008)
Decision Making, in Criminal Justice
(1994)
Race and getting hassled by the police: A research note
M. Conner, C. Armitage (1998)
Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Review and Avenues for Further Research
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28
(2012)
National lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) ageing and aged care strategy
Mary Bernstein, C. Kostelac (2002)
Lavender and Blue
Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 18
D. George, Paul Mallery (1998)
SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference
(2007)
Recorded crime: Victims
J. Morse (2000)
Determining Sample Size
Qualitative Health Research, 10
C. Cunneen (2001)
Conflict, Politics and Crime: Aboriginal Communities and the Police
(1994)
Psychometric theory (3rd ed.)
(2006)
Fear of crime report
Stacey Bosick, C. Rennison, Angela Gover, M. Dodge (2012)
Reporting violence to the police: Predictors through the life course
Journal of Criminal Justice, 40
G. Herek, J. Cogan, J. Gillis (2002)
Victim Experiences in Hate Crimes Based on Sexual Orientation
Journal of Social Issues, 58
G. Viki, Michelle Culmer, Anja Eller, D. Abrams (2006)
Race and willingness to cooperate with the police: The roles of quality of contact, attitudes towards the behaviour and subjective norms.
The British journal of social psychology, 45 Pt 2
The context of anti-gay violence: Notes on cultural and psychological heterosexism
(2012)
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex equality
(2010)
Minority rights: International standards and guidance for implementation
S. Seidman (2001)
From Identity to Queer Politics: Shifts in Normative Heterosexuality and the Meaning of Citizenship
Citizenship Studies, 5
A. Bourne, D. Reid, G. Hammond, P. Weatherburn (2010)
Waltham Forest LGBT matters: the needs and experiences of lesbians, gay men, bisexual and trans men and women in Waltham Forest
R. Tarling, Katie Morris (2010)
Reporting Crime to the Police
British Journal of Criminology, 50
(1999)
Policing neighbourhoods: A report from St. Petersburg
W. Terrill, E. Paoline, P. Manning (2003)
POLICE CULTURE AND COERCION
Criminology, 41
(2012)
Researching LGBTI health
G. Hofstede, G. Hofstede, M. Minkov (1991)
Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind
R. Kane (2002)
THE SOCIAL ECOLOGY OF POLICE MISCONDUCT
Criminology, 40
P. Griffiths, M. Gossop, B. Powis, J. Strang (1993)
Reaching hidden populations of drug users by privileged access interviewers: methodological and practical issues.
Addiction, 88 12
Ted Bohn (1984)
Homophobic Violence:: Implications for Social Work Practice
Journal of social work and human sexuality, 2
(2004)
Hate crimes: Causes, controls, controversies
G. Comstock (1989)
Victims of Anti-Gay/Lesbian Violence
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 4
V. Webb, C. Marshall (1995)
The relative importance of race and ethnicity on citizen attitudes toward the police
American Journal of Police, 14
William Jellison, Allen Mcconnell, Shira Gabriel (2004)
Implicit and Explicit Measures of Sexual Orientation Attitudes: In Group Preferences and Related Behaviors and Beliefs among Gay and Straight Men
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30
S. Mastrofski, Michael Reisig, John McCluskey (2002)
POLICE DISRESPECT TOWARD THE PUBLIC: AN ENCOUNTER‐BASED ANALYSIS*
Criminology, 40
William Leonard, A. Mitchell, M. Pitts, Sunil Patel (2008)
Coming forward: the underreporting of heterosexist violence and same sex partner abuse in Victoria
G. Herek (1990)
The Context of Anti-Gay Violence
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5
T. Tyler (2005)
Policing in Black and White: Ethnic Group Differences in Trust and Confidence in the Police
Police Quarterly, 8
Douglas Smith, J. Klein (1984)
Police Control of Interpersonal Disputes
Social Problems, 31
J. Kuhl, J. Beckmann (1985)
Action control : from cognition to behavior
B. Mcmillan, M. Conner (2003)
Applying an Extended Version of the Theory of Planned Behavior to Illicit Drug Use Among Students1
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33
Yu-ping Xie, R. Devellis (1992)
Scale Development: Theory and Applications.
Contemporary Sociology, 21
(2007)
Invisible minorities: Challenging community and neighbourhood models of Policing
J. Dovidio, Kerry Kawakami, Craig Johnson, Brenda Johnson, Adaiah Howard (1997)
On the nature of prejudice: Automatic and controlled processes
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33
A. Ghaziani (2011)
Post-Gay Collective Identity Construction
Social Problems, 58
Stephen Tomsen, G. Mason (2001)
Engendering homophobia: violence, sexuality and gender conformity
Journal of Sociology, 37
J. Fagan, Garth Davies (2001)
Street Stops and Broken Windows: Terry, Race and Disorder in New York City
Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28
N. Chakraborti (2009)
A Glass Half Full? Assessing Progress in the Policing of Hate Crime
Policing-an International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 3
(2006)
Crime and Misconduct Commission. Crime and Misconduct Commission
Z. Macdonald (2001)
Revisiting the Dark Figure A Microeconometric Analysis of the Under-reporting of Property Crime and Its Implications
British Journal of Criminology, 41
E. Baumer (2002)
NEIGHBORHOOD DISADVANTAGE AND POLICE NOTIFICATION BY VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE
Criminology, 40
I. Ajzen (1985)
From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior
M. Williams, A. Robinson (2004)
Problems and Prospects with Policing the Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Community in Wales
Policing and Society, 14
R. Fazio, M. Olson (2003)
Implicit measures in social cognition. research: their meaning and use.
Annual review of psychology, 54
Ronald Weitzer, S. Tuch (2006)
Race and Policing in America: Conflict and Reform
R. Fazio, Joni Jackson, B. Dunton, C. Williams (1995)
Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: a bona fide pipeline?
Journal of personality and social psychology, 69 6

Publisher: SAGE
Copyright: Copyright © 2022 by SAGE Publications Inc, unless otherwise noted. Manuscript content on this site is licensed under Creative Commons Licenses.
ISSN: 2158-2440
eISSN: 2158-2440
DOI: 10.1177/2158244013490707
Publisher site: See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Research shows that people vary in their willingness to report crime to police depending on the type of crime experienced, their gender, age, and their race or ethnicity. Whether or not lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) and heterosexual people vary in their willingness to report crime to the police is not well understood in the extant literature. In this article, I examine variations in LGBTI respondents’ attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control on their intentions to report crimes to the police. Drawing on a survey of LGBTI individuals sampled from a Gay Pride community event and online LGBTI community forums (N = 329), I use quantitative statistical methods to examine whether LGBTI people’s beliefs in police homophobia are also directly associated with the behavioral intention to report crime. Overall, the results indicate that LGBTI and heterosexual people differ significantly in their intention to report crime to the police, and that a belief in police homophobia strongly influences LGBTI people’s intention to underreport crime to the police. Keywords police, crime reporting, sexual identity, homophobia, attitudes engage in a particular behavior. As crime reporting behavior Introduction is often reflective of attitudes toward the police as well as Variations in crime reporting behaviors have consistently how easy or difficult a person perceives the behavior to be, demonstrated that although people usually hold favorable the TPB can be a useful tool in understanding variations in views of the police and are willing to report crime to the crime reporting behaviors. police (Mastrofski, Parks, Reiss, & Worden, 1999), members The theoretical components of the TPB (attitude, subjec- of minority communities are far more reticent to report tive norms, and perceived behavioral control [PBC]) can crime (Webb & Marshall, 1995). Research focused on ele- provide a useful framework for describing the psychological ments that effect police reporting has a long history in vic- influences on crime reporting because previous studies have timization literature. The issue of reporting crime to the shown that the TPB is able to account for significant amounts police and its variation by age, gender, race/ethnicity, and of variance in intention to act in a particular way (Buchan, type of crime has been widely researched (see Bosick, 2005; McMillan & Conner, 2003). By applying the TPB to Rennison, Gover, & Dodge, 2012). Yet crime reporting vari- measure willingness to report crime within the lesbian, gay, ations due to differences in sexual identity is an area that has bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) and wider com- been underresearched, thereby resulting in a lack of com- munity, questions such as “who is more willing to report a plete understanding regarding how sexual identity impacts crime and why” and “does sexual identity make a difference an individual’s willingness to report crime to police. in reporting crime” are among the many questions that can One such theory that has been used to better understand be examined by applying this framework (Connor & the variation in willingness to engage with police and to Armitage, 1998). However, an application of the TPB to report crime is the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB; Ajzen, understand crime reporting behaviors between LGBTI and 1985). The TPB was initially conceptualized to link attitudes and beliefs to intention and behavior. The TPB followed on from the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA; Fishbein & The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia Ajzen, 1975) used to measure the predictive power of posi- Corresponding Author: tive evaluation (attitude), and subjective norms or how sig- Dr. Toby Miles-Johnson, The University of Queensland, Michie Building, nificant others shape an individual’s intention to perform St. Lucia Campus, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia. behavior, and the motivation or intention of an individual to Email: t.milesjohnson@uq.edu.au 2 SAGE Open heterosexual people has not been conducted within Australia members of minority groups (typically represented in previ- until now. ous research by racial or ethnic identifiers) are hesitant to Research examining the relationship between variations report crime to the police due to negative perceptions of in crime reporting behavior and sexual identity has largely police interaction, particularly negative perceptions of police been ignored in the Australian context. This is particularly interaction that may result in further victimization (Beckett, troublesome because research indicates that members of the Nyrop, & Pfingst, 2006; Browning, Cullen, Cao, Kopache, LGBTI community have far lower rates of reporting crime to & Stevenson, 1994; Fagan & Davies, 2000; Kane, 2002, the police than the general population (see Bernstein & 2005; Mastrofski, Reisig, & McCluskey, 2002; B. W. Smith Kostelac, 2002; Gerstenfeld, 2004; Herek, Cogan, & Gillis, & Holmes, 2003; D. A. Smith & Klein, 1984; D. A. Smith & 2003; M. Williams & Robinson, 2004). Hence, the present Visher, 1981; Terrill, Paoline, & Manning, 2003; Terrill & research aimed to determine whether the LGBTI community Reisig, 2003; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006; Worden, 1996). in Queensland underreports crime to the police and why. Accordingly, members of minority groups (whose subordi- Using data collected from a convenience sample of par- nate group status is defined due to external or other identify- ticipants at the “Gay Day” Celebrations in Brisbane, ing features) differ significantly from other members of Australia, and by online delivery (N = 329), the present study society in their willingness to interact with the police, regard- examines reasons why LGBTI people’s beliefs in police less of whether the grounds for contact with police are posi- homophobia are directly associated with the behavioral tive or negative and or whether the outcome of police intention to report crime to the police. I begin this article interaction may result in a constructive end to an adverse with a review of the extant literature. I then describe the situation (see Webb & Marshall, 1995). Certainly, this has research method, sample, and analytic approach. Finally, I been the case for members of minority groups (also identi- present the findings from the research, which indicates that fied in this way) residing in Australia (Murphy & Cherney, heterosexual participants had significantly more positive 2010). attitudes toward the police than LGBTI participants; experi- In 2007, the Australian Bureau of Statistics revealed that enced stronger-positive social pressures to report crime to criminal activity in Australia is frequently unrecorded simply the police; and found the practice of reporting crime to the because it is not reported to the police. Australian research police to be an easier experience than LGBTI participants. measuring variations in crime reporting behaviors have gen- erally concentrated on ethnic and indigenous minority groups (Murphy & Cherney, 2010). However, research examining Research Questions other minority groups (based on identifiers other than race or Specifically, the aim of the research was to address three ethnicity) and their attitudes toward crime reporting in research questions: Australia have largely gone unnoticed. This is problematic because recent research suggests that members of marginal- Research Question 1: Are LGBTI participants less willing ized minority groups whose identifiers are not based on race than heterosexual participants to report crime to the or ethnicity but other subjective factors are less likely than police? other members of society to call the police for help (see Carr, Research Question 2: Do participants’ attitudes, subjec- Napolitano, & Keating, 2007) and that most members of tive norms, PBC, and belief in police homophobia mainstream society have more reliance on the police (and determine their intentions to report crime to the police? therefore more positive expectations of police) than these Research Question 3: Are there differences between types of minority group members when deliberating over LGBTI and heterosexual participants’ attitudes, sub- whether to call the police in times of need. jective norms, PBC, and belief in police homophobia? Previous research has indicated that the decision to report or not report crime is typically the outcome of a complex decision-making process in which the victim will weigh the Background Literature costs and benefits of each course of action (Tarling & Morris, Research has consistently shown that typically most people 2010). It is also understood that a victim of crime may strug- have positive opinions about the police (Merry, Power, gle with the conscience duty to report crime, and that such McManus, & Alison, 2012). As such, the majority of people struggles may be linked to personal reasons such as the need have favorable opinions regarding engagement with police of immediate help, protection and treatment (in relation to when the need arises, for instance, when reporting a crime violent or sexual crime), or to obtain monetary redress in the (Mastrofski et al., 1999). However, the willingness of resi- form of compensation or insurance payments (in relation to dents to report crime varies depending on the type and sever- property crime). As such, the importance attached to the ity of the crime (Kääriäinen & Sirén, 2011) and contextual costs and benefits of crime reporting vary according to per- factors (such as culture ) that may influence crime reporting sonal characteristics and experiences of the victim. For (Schaible & Hughes, 2012). In addition, it has also been example, previous research indicates that women have been found that regardless of the type and severity of the crime, found to be more likely to report crime than men (see Miles-Johnson 3 Baumer, 2002; Carcach, 1997; Felson, Messner, Hoskin, & influence on a lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and inter- 4 5 Deane, 2002; Hart & Rennison, 2003; Rennison, 2007) sex (LGBTI) individual’s perceptions of the police over because men tend to be bigger and stronger than women, and above their general attitude toward the police and report- more skillful in physical combat, and more willing to use ing crime. violence (Felson et al., 2002). As a result, female victims of If the psychological mechanisms that influence LGBTI crime may be more likely to call the police for protection victims to report or not report crime can be identified, then than male victims of crime (Felson et al., 2002) because the there is the potential to develop interventions that, by influ- nature and circumstances surrounding an offence will also encing those mechanisms, may lead to changes in crime feature prominently in the decision to report crime to the reporting behavior (Viki, Culmer, Eller, & Abrams, 2006). police (Tarling & Morris, 2010). For example, it would be Accordingly, the theoretical components of the TPB (atti- anticipated that a serious crime such as physical assault tude, subjective norms, and PBC) can provide a useful would be reported to the police by males and females. Yet framework for describing the psychological influences on there is no consistent evidence regarding crime reporting crime reporting because previous studies have shown that rates for males or females based on their differences in sexu- the TPB is able to account for significant amounts of vari- ality (e.g., heterosexual people in comparison with LGBTI ance in intention to act in a particular way (Buchan, 2005; people) or the factors influencing a LGBTI person to report McMillan & Conner, 2003). By applying the TPB to measure or not report crime (such as a belief in police homophobia), willingness to report crime within the LGBTI and wider particularly when LGBTI people are often the victims of community, questions such as “who is more willing to report serious and minor crime (Meyer, 2010, 2011). a crime and why” and “does sexual identity make a differ- Unrecorded crime by the LGBTI community has several ence in reporting crime” are among the many questions that consequences: It contributes to the misallocation of police can be examined by applying this framework (Connor & resources (thereby minimizing resources allocated to help Armitage, 1998). However, an application of the TPB to and protect the LGBTI community), it prevents LGBTI vic- understand crime reporting behaviors between LGBTI and tims from accessing public and private benefits, affects heterosexual people has not been conducted within Australia insurance costs, and does not help shape the police role in the until now. LGBTI community (Tomsen & Mason, 2001). These factors impact community crime prevention and control strategies LGBTI People’s Attitudes to Crime Reporting and decisions about the allocation of police resources (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2007). Nonreporting of In a recent Australian survey by Leonard, Mitchell, Patel, crime by the LGBTI community also limits the deterrent and Fox (2008), the major barrier to LGBTI respondents capacity of the criminal justice system, hinders the formation reporting crime or seeking assistance from the police is the of an accurate picture of anti-LGBTI crime (thereby underes- belief that the majority of police officers are homophobic. timating the extent of victimization), stands in the way of They also found that LGBTI people in Australia perceived perpetrator convictions of anti-LGBTI crime, and affects the that reporting crime to police will lead to further abuse from police mandate of fighting anti-LGBTI crime (Bohn, 1993; service providers, and that the majority of LGBTI respon- Herek & Berrill, 1992; Stonewall, 1994). dents strongly believed that police officers would not treat Ajzen (2005) stated that by applying the TPB to examine LGBTI people fairly due to homophobic beliefs. They also a particular behavior, the proximal determinant of behavior found that almost all of the Australian LGBTI participants, “intention to engage in the behaviour” becomes the key con- who provided written responses to questions asking about cept of the research and is determined by three sets of vari- the barriers preventing them from reporting crime, wrote ables: (a) attitude (the overall evaluation and the outcome about targeting the homophobic beliefs of mainstream expectancy of the behavior), (b) subjective norms (percep- police officers. However, specific data relating to underre- tions of social pressure from significant others to perform a porting of crime by the LGBTI community throughout particular behavior), and (c) PBC (a person’s belief as to how Australia (and specifically in Queensland) are not readily easy or difficult performance of the behavior is likely to be). available. Under the theoretical framework of the TPB, to arrive at an In Australia, the actual population size of the LGBTI overall attitude, it is important to distinguish between atti- community is unknown. Yet the study of LGBTI crime tudes and beliefs because both mechanisms affect intention reporting behavior has meaning, particularly because the to behave in a particular way (Ajzen, 2005). A person’s belief Attorney General’s Department of New South Wales (2003) toward a particular object is the sum of all of that person’s found that the majority of LGBTI respondents who partici- beliefs toward each attribute associated with an object pated in their survey strongly believed that the police will not (Ajzen, 2005). For instance, an LGBTI person’s belief that take LGBTI violence and harassment seriously, and indi- police officers are homophobic links the object of opinion cated that they would be unwilling to report crime to the police to the consequence belief homophobia. Subsequently, police. Yet the first contact that many victims of crime have beliefs in police homophobia could have an incremental with the criminal justice system is with the police and the 4 SAGE Open decision to report or not report crime may be the most influ- minority groups such as the LGBTI community, who, in ential decision an individual makes in the criminal justice comparison with other members of society, purposefully system, thereby emphasizing the role of the citizen as the avoid contact and interaction with the police (Herek & gatekeeper for all that follows (Gottfredson & Gottfredson, Berrill, 1992). This is not to suggest that the relationship 1980). In two separate studies, Tyler (2005) and B. Williams between the police in Queensland and members of the (1998) found that the less confidence citizens have in the LGBTI community has been static or that the police have not police, the less willing they will be to cooperate with police, attempted to make significant changes in their policy and which includes reporting crime. This has been a particular practice implemented toward LGBTI people (e.g., LGBTI concern with research in the LGBTI community because police liaison officers and policing of hate crime). However, most LGBTI people underreport crime fearing “hostility and despite changes in the social, political, and legal history of abuse” from the police (Comstock, 1989, p. 104). Moreover, the relationship between police and LGBTI people (analyses in a recent study in the United Kingdom, it was determined of which are beyond the scope of this article), the nature of that 78% of LGBTI respondents who had experienced physi- the relationship between the police and LGBTI people in cal assault did not report the crime to the police, with the Queensland remains problematic (Crime and Misconduct majority of respondents indicating that they believed that the Commission [CMC], 2009). police would not treat their complaint seriously (Bourne, Herek (1990) stated that many LGBTI people are aware Reid, Hammond, & Weatherburn, 2010). of a level of police hostility and prejudice against homo- Historically, LGBTI people in Australia have experienced sexual behavior and LGBTI people long before the need for levels of social disadvantage that have resulted in decades of crime reporting occurs, and that this awareness is learnt inequitable treatment (Butler, 2012). Similar to the experi- either through hearsay, the media, or cultural, familial, and ence of LGBTI in other parts of the world (such as in the societal influences. In addition, Myers, Forest, and Miller United Kingdom and the United States), many Australian (2004) argued that it is typically a vicarious experience of LGBTI people have suffered stigma, family rejection, and police, and an awareness of the potential for police hostility social isolation, and have had a life experience of fear of that causes most people (particularly LGBTI people) to rejection and persecution, coupled with the impact of poten- have negative beliefs and attitudes toward the police. To tial or actual discrimination from social institutions (Butler, distinguish between LGBTI people’s general attitudes 2012). According to Leonard et al. (2008), this is reflected in toward reporting crime to the police, and a specific belief in the way that many members of the LGBTI community pur- police homophobia (which may be a particular influence on posefully avoid contact with institutions such as the police. LGBTI people’s crime reporting behavior), LGBTI peo- Yet how this impacts on crime reporting behaviors is largely ple’s beliefs in police homophobia need to be measured unknown. (Herek & Berrill, 1992). Tarling and Morris (2010) argued that most of what is known about crime reporting behaviors has been obtained LGBTI People’s PBC and Crime Reporting from international victim surveys distributed to the wider (heterosexual) public such as those conducted in the United Perceptions of nonnormative sexualities (such as those Kingdom (MacDonald, 2001; Skogan, 1994) and in the expressed by the LGBTI community) challenge mainstream United States (Baumer, 2002; Felson et al., 2002; Hart & models and practices of policing (Moran, 2007). The major- Rennison, 2003; Rennison, 2007). However, research under- ity of policing models and practices implemented toward taken in other countries such as Australia have been few and the community are based on a heteronormative model of far between, and have been typically based on a secondary society and a White, masculine, heterosexual ethos (Myers analysis of state victim surveys (see Carcach, 1997). This et al., 2004). Subsequently, when police are confronted raises questions whether crime reporting practices are differ- with a sexually diverse community (such as the LGBTI ent in Australia (or different in specific states within community), the breakdown in normative expectations of Australia) to what has been reported more universally in gendered behavior (which is situated in the context of het- other countries or if Australia is unique in its crime reporting erosexuality) results in homophobic confrontations (Myers practices to the police. et al., 2004). As such, the difficulty with which LGBTI per- ceive interaction with the police (and the ease or difficulty of reporting crime to the police) coupled with the lack of LGBTI People’s Subjective confidence that LGBTI people have in the police has Norms and Crime Reporting resulted in the underreporting of crime by members of this In Queensland, few minority groups defined by external community (Chakraborti, 2009). For example, previous behaviors or other features that distinguish them from the research indicates that LGBTI people are less likely than general population have voluntary contact or are involved in heterosexual people to enter a police station to report crime community partnership programs with the police (Cunneen, because many LGBTI people feel that the police view them 2001). This is particularly true of the members of diverse as a deviant group (see Mason, 1993). Miles-Johnson 5 Canales (2000) stated that the grouping of LGBTI sexual- nightclub is situated within the metropolitan area of the city ity into a homogeneous analytic framework may actually and has been established within the LGBTI (and wider) com- contribute to the “othering” of sexual identity associated munity as entertainment venues for more than 20 years. with the LGBTI community by heteronormative agencies While it is not known whether the nightclub has a history of such as the police. As such, concerns were raised in this police concern regarding problems with patron assaults (the research about combining LGBTI sexual identity into one venue would disclose this information), the venues have cluster or homogeneous group for use as an analytic frame- maintained a positive relationship with the police regarding work due to its diversity; an analysis of the large body of patron intoxication and drug use and/or drug dealing, and the sociological work examining the appropriateness of group- nightclub is monitored by private security guards. Unlike ing the LGBTI community into a sexually homogeneous nightclubs marketed for younger people (typically for conceptual and analytic framework is beyond the scope of patrons below 30 years of age), the venue attracts a wide age this research article. Yet grouped sexual identity (such as range of people, and is not recognized by police as a trouble normative sexuality [heterosexuality] and nonnormative sex- zone. For ethical reasons, the nightclub has been de-identified uality [such as LGBTI sexuality]) is one of the salient iden- in this research. The various online community groups (de- tity markers that many cultures use to categorize and judge identified as part of the ethical agreement) were also chosen others (Skeggs, 1999). For the purpose of this study, it was for their capacity to attract large numbers of LGBTI and het- deemed appropriate to analyze LGBTI sexuality as a homo- erosexual people, and because they are situated within a geneous group. large online social networking site (again de-identified for An in-depth analysis of LGBTI people’s beliefs in police ethical reasons). homophobia can provide a useful framework for determining whether this belief is based on personal or vicarious experi- Procedure ence (Myers et al., 2004). Previous studies have also indi- cated that a belief in police homophobia is a strong negative A face-to-face survey was administered to a nonprobability psychological determinant, often influencing the amount of sample of visitors at the “Gay Day” celebrations. An online contact many LGBTI people have with police officers survey was administered to a nonprobability sample of mem- (Herek, 1990; Myers et al., 2004). M. Williams and Robinson bers of an online community group (by online delivery) (2004) also indicated that up to three quarters of LGBTI vic- between March and April. It was anticipated that the conve- tims fail to report crime to the police primarily because they nience sample of visitors collected at the event and from the are fearful of secondary victimization from police officers as online community could provide results that would be suit- a result of perceived police homophobia (PPH). Ajzen (2005) able for the study because the LGBTI target population in argued that negative beliefs account for significant amounts Queensland is relatively diffuse and “hidden” and constitutes of variance in salient beliefs (assumed to be the immediate a “hard to get at population,” as a result recruiting a tradi- influence of a person’s attitude), which in turn persuade tional probability sample of LGBTI people was deemed intention, the predictor determining different kinds of behav- impractical (see Griffiths, Gossop, Powis, & Strang, 1993). ior. Subsequently, by examining LGBTI people’s beliefs in In addition, although members of the LGBTI community police homophobia in relation to crime reporting, the current have differing lifestyles and sexual identities that may pose research could determine if it is in fact a negative belief such problematic when linking LGBTI people together as a col- as PPH that is influencing LGBTI people to underreport lective group, it was determined that identity associations crime. In addition, by also examining LGBTI people’s atti- could be made between LGBTI people as they are primarily tudes, subjective norms, and PBC, it can also be determined interconnected by their notions of sexual identity that are dif- whether LGBTI people are different from heterosexual peo- ferent from normative heterosexual identities (see Ghaziani, ple in their willingness to report crime to the police. 2011). It was also recognized that collective grouping of LGBTI people would result in sample heterogeneity and therefore contribute some limitations to the study in terms of Method generalizability. However, it was anticipated that the results of this study would speak to the broader issues regarding Site Selection intention to report crime to the police, specifically, how sex- The research was conducted outside of a Brisbane nightclub ual identity difference shapes an individual’s attitude toward (situated in an inner city area), and online (by online deliv- crime reporting. ery). The nightclub was chosen for its involvement in the The online survey was posted on message boards within “Gay Day” celebrations (a festival for the LGBTI commu- Queensland-based Internet community groups that are vis- nity, their family, and friends), its capacity to attract large ited (and participated in) by LGBTI and heterosexual people. numbers of patrons, and because it is known to be openly The Internet link was also emailed to different community welcoming toward LGBTI and heterosexual people, although groups (de-identified for ethical reasons) participating within the nightclub is advertised as a Gay and Lesbian venue. The online community forums and redistributed throughout 6 SAGE Open Queensland by email. Participants were given a choice participants comprising 0.9% (n = 3). More than half of the between completing a paper-based survey or by completing participants in the sample (64.1%) were identified as LGBTI the survey online at a later time. If a participant wanted to (n = 211), and 35.9% of the participants were identified as complete the survey online, they were provided with an heterosexual (n = 118). More than half of the participants information leaflet detailing the online web address and sur- were in a relationship (n = 201; 61.1%) and only 11 partici- vey link. The online survey and the survey administered at pants (3.3%) were identified as Aboriginal Australian or the “Gay Day” celebrations were identical. Torres Strait Islander. The majority of the participants were Australian citizens (n = 319; 97%) and all of the participants in the study were from Queensland. Participants Preliminary data screening was conducted to examine Using a nonproportional quota sampling technique to ensure demographic differences (such as gender, sexual identity, that a minimum of 100 participants from the LGBTI and het- age range, and area of residency) between the two different erosexual community were represented in the study, 329 data collection methods: participants recruited from the participants were recruited to participate in the research. Brisbane “Gay Day” Celebrations and participants obtained Participants were randomly approached on the basis of gen- by online delivery. The analyses indicated that there were no der (male and female), their willingness to complete the statistically significant differences between the participants survey, and on their intention to enter the nightclub (either by recruited from the Brisbane “Gay Day” celebrations and par- standing in-line to enter or waiting outside of the night- ticipants obtained by online delivery; therefore, it was deter- club). The paper surveys (40 items) were administered to mined that for all further analyses the two samples would be the participants by a team of six volunteers (trained by the combined. The data were analyzed using univariate and mul- researcher to administer the survey and approved by an insti- tivariate approaches, as well as parametric and nonparamet- tutional ethics review board) and each of the surveys given to ric statistics. the participants was identical. Although many patrons refused to participate in the Measures research, overall, the research team received positive (and polite) reactions from the patrons, and the acceptance rate to Willingness to Report Crime. To measure participants’ will- participate in the study was higher than expected. While it ingness to report crime to the police, the participants were is acknowledged that some patrons who attend nightclubs asked to respond to vignettes (see the appendix) depicting may be more predisposed to dislike the police due to the four specific crimes (vandalism, assault, break and enter- 19 20 effects of intoxication, drug taking, and resulting incivility, ing, and stalking). These crimes were chosen because the there is no empirical research to suggest that patrons who CMC (2006) identified assault and stalking as the most frequent nightclubs will differ in their attitudes toward the feared (and typically experienced) forms of personal crime police than patrons of other social venues. As such, it was and vandalism, and break and entering as the most feared anticipated that the convenience sample of visitors collected (and typically experienced) form of property crime in Aus- at the venue could provide results that would be suitable for tralia. Participants were asked to respond on a 5-point Likert- the study. To avoid duplication of results, each respondent type scale (1 = extremely likely and 5 = extremely unlikely) to was asked if they had completed the survey prior to being the question “how willing would it be that they would report approached. The online participants were selected on the this crime to the police.” basis of gender (male and female) and participation/member- Initial inspection of the data indicated that the responses ship within the online community forums. To avoid duplica- to each of the four vignettes were bimodally distributed with tion of online results, each respondent was asked if they had few participants responding “don’t know.” Examination of previously completed the online survey. participant responses to the four vignettes indicated that 45% The final sample comprised 147 participants (44.7%) of participants would report vandalism to the police as recruited from visitors attending the Brisbane “Gay Day” opposed to 49.9% of participants who would not report van- Celebrations, and 182 participants (55.3%) obtained by online dalism to the police; 49.6% of participants would report delivery (N = 329). A 10-page, 40-item, self-report survey assault to the police as opposed to 47.7% of participants who was utilized to examine participants’ willingness to report would not report assault to the police; and 47.1% of partici- crime and to assess participant attitudes toward the police. pants would report stalking to the police as opposed to 43% There was 100% completion rate and no missing data. of participants who would not report stalking to the police. The ages of the participants ranged from 18 to 74 years Although 68.8% of participants would report a crime of (M = 35.32, SD = 12.03), and the majority of the participants break and entering to the police as opposed to 28.2% of par- were male (n = 173; 52.6%); with females comprising 44.1% ticipants who would not report break and entering to the (n = 145) of participants; transgender male to female partici- police, examination of the data indicated that there did not pants comprising 2.1% (n = 7); transgender female to male seem to be a difference between participants reporting per- participants comprising 0.3% (n = 1); and intersex sonal crime or reporting property crime. Miles-Johnson 7 Table 1. Correlations for Each Crime Vignette: Vandalism, the proximal determinant of behavior intention to engage in Assault, Break and Entering, and Stalking (N = 329). the behavior becomes the key concept of the research and is determined by three sets of variables: (a) attitude (the overall Crime vignette 1 2 3 4 evaluation and the outcome expectancy of the behavior), (b) 1. Vandalism .75** .68** .64** subjective norms (perceptions of social pressure from sig- 2. Assault .60** .65** nificant others to perform a particular behavior), and (c) PBC 3. Break and entering .39** (a person’s belief as to how easy or difficult performance of 4. Stalking the behavior is likely to be). To measure attitude, each participant was asked to respond **p < .01 (two-tailed). to eight statements on a 5-point, forced-choice Likert-type rating scale, ranging from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly Further inspection of the data also indicated that the disagree. A composite Attitude score was calculated by sum- responses to each of the four vignettes were highly intercor- ming across the eight items, with a minimum score of eight related (Table 1). Examination of participant responses to the indicating negative attitudes toward reporting to the police, four vignettes indicated that vandalism and assault were and a maximum score of 40 indicating positive attitudes highly correlated (r = .75, p < .01). Vandalism was also toward reporting to the police. The Attitude scale had good highly correlated with break and entering (r = .68, p < .01), internal consistency : α = .93 (DeVellis, 2003; George & and assault was highly correlated with stalking (r = .65, p < Mallery, 2003). To measure subjective norms, each partici- .01).This would also indicate that participant responses to pant was asked to respond to seven statements on a 5-point, each of the four crime vignettes were fairly consistent and forced-choice Likert-type rating scale, ranging from 1 = that respondents would report on one type of crime to the strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree. A composite subjec- police and on others. tive norms score was calculated by summing across the For the final analyses, participant responses to four seven items, with a minimum score of seven indicating posi- vignettes—vandalism, assault, break and entering, and tive social pressure from others to engage in a behavior, and stalking— were transformed into a single crime reporting a maximum score of 35 indicating negative social pressure variable. The crime reporting variable had good internal from others to not engage in a behavior. The Subjective consistency: α = .89 (DeVellis, 2003; George & Mallery, Norms scale had acceptable internal consistency: α = .79 2003). (DeVellis, 2003; George & Mallery, 2003). To measure PBC, each participant was asked to respond to 13 items on a Attitude, Subjective Norms, PBC, and PPH. Previous research by semantic differential scale with 11 scales ranging from 0 = Dovidio, Kawakami, Johnson, Johnson, and Howard (1997) not confident at all to 10 = extremely confident. A composite and Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, and Williams (1995) indicated PBC score was calculated, with a minimum score of zero that people are more likely to discriminate against group indicating a negative evaluation of the possible effects of members for whom they have more negative attitudes. Thus, reporting to the police, and a maximum score of 130 indicat- to distinguish between LGBTI people’s general attitudes ing a positive evaluation of the possible effects of reporting toward reporting crime to the police, and a specific belief in to the police. The PBC scale had good internal consistency: police homophobia (which may be a particular influence on α = .89 (DeVellis, 2003; George & Mallery, 2003). For each LGBTI people’s crime reporting behavior), LGBTI people’s item measuring beliefs of police homophobia, participant’s beliefs in police homophobia need to be measured (Fazio et al., overall responses were recoded into two categories: Yes and 1995). According to Fazio and Olson (2003), Greenwald and No. It was determined that the PPH scale had acceptable Banaji (1995), and Greenwald, McGhee, and Schwartz internal consistency: α = .74 (DeVellis, 2003; George & (1998), implicit measures of beliefs assess automatic evalua- Mallery, 2003). tions associated with attitude objects that the perceivers may not necessarily be aware of, or may not realize is influencing Limitations their overt behavior, or may not be able to control. However, Jellison, McConnell, and Gabriel (2004) determined that There were two specific limitations to the present study. when studying prejudiced beliefs, explicit (or controlled) First, it was determined that the research design may also measures of beliefs are belief-object-evaluations that indi- have limited the research project as the use of the vignettes viduals can consciously express and differ in general atti- asked participants to respond to only four different types of tudes that individuals may hold toward a specific group or scenarios depicting assault, break and entering, vandalism, object. Thus, explicit expressions of beliefs in police and stalking. However, as previous research indicated that homophobia may be more likely to predict crime reporting LGBTI people are less willing to report crime to the police behavior under conditions where social pressures have a than heterosexual people, careful consideration may need to strong influence (Ajzen, 2005). By applying the TPB to be given to determine specific types of crime experienced by examine the likelihood of crime reporting by LGBTI people, the LGBTI community. 8 SAGE Open Table 2. Overall Gender Differences in the Likelihood of LGBTI, and for males and females identifying as hetero- Reporting Crime to the Police (N = 329). sexual. For males, a significant relationship was found between sexual identity and willingness to report crime to Likelihood of crime reporting police, χ (1, N = 329) = 37.41, p < .001, ϕ = .48. Male LGBTI participants were less willing (25.3%) to state that High Low they would report crime to police than male heterosexual Participants n % n % participants (91.7%). Only two male heterosexual partici- pants said they would not report crime to police. A similar Gender significant relationship was found between sexual identity Male 60 34.9 114 72.6 and willingness to report crime to police for female partici- Female 112 65.1 43 27.4 pants, χ (1, N = 329) = 66.74, p < .001, ϕ = .68. Female Total sample 172 100 157 100 LGBTI participants were less willing (34.4%) than female heterosexual participants (96.8%) to report crime to police. Only three female heterosexual participants said they would Second, participants recruited for this research were not not report crime to police. obtained from a random sample of the population and there- While there is a difference between males and females in fore may not be representative of either the LGBTI or hetero- reporting crime to police, there is a very strong relationship sexual communities. For example, the sample of respondents between sexual identity and reporting crime. Regardless of who identified as heterosexual male was small in compari- gender, almost all heterosexual participants stated they son with the sample of respondents who identified as LGBTI would report the crimes to police. The majority of LGBTI male. As such, future research should attempt to select and participants said that they were more unwilling to report survey a large representative group of LGBTI and hetero- crime to police than willing to report crime to police. sexual people in Australia to examine whether the results However, this was more apparent for male LGBTI partici- presented here can be replicated. Even with these limitations, pants (74.7%) than female LGBTI participants (65.6%). however, the findings of the present study provide research- ers and the police with insights into crime reporting behav- iors of LGBTI and heterosexual people in Australia. Research Question 2: Do Participants’ Attitudes, Subjective Norms, PBC, and Belief in Police Homophobia Determine Their Intentions to Results Report Crime to the Police? Research Question 1: Are LGBTI Participants Less To determine if reporting crime to the police could be pre- Willing Than Heterosexual Participants to Report dicted from a specific set of measures under the TPB (atti- Crime to the Police? tude, subjective norms, PBC, and PPH), a Mann–Whitney U The differential behavior of females and males in reporting test was performed. crime incidents (see Baumer, 2002; Carcach, 1997; Felson The Mann–Whitney U test only revealed that there was et al., 2002; Hart & Rennison, 2003; Rennison, 2007) sug- only a significant difference in crime reporting behavior and gested the need to control gender as an influence on the will- levels of PBC for participants who were more willing to ingness to report crime to the police. To examine the report crime to the police (median = 6, n = 172) and partici- relationship between the dependent variable Likelihood of pants who were less willing to report crime to the police reporting crime to the police and gender (male/female), a (median = 6, n = 157), U = 11,621.50, z = −2.18, p < .05, r = chi-square test for independence (with Yates Continuity .12. As nonparametric tests tend to be less sensitive than Correction) was performed. The chi-square test indicated parametric tests, it was decided that a series of independent- that there was a significant association between gender and samples t test would also be performed. Although it was reporting of crime, χ (1, N = 329) = 45.39, p < .001, ϕ = .38, acknowledged that by using parametric tests with a conve- with females being more likely to report crime than males (n = nient sample, assumptions about the populations from which 112; 65.1%). The percentages for gender and the likelihood the sample was drawn would not necessarily be generaliz- of reporting crime to the police are presented in Table 2. able to the wider public. To control for the differences between males and females The t tests indicated that there was a significant difference in crime reporting, separate chi-square analyses were per- between PBC and participants who were more willing to formed for males and females examining the relationship report crime to the police (M = 81.81, SD = 21.56) and par- between sexuality and reporting crime to the police. ticipants who were less willing to report crime to the police Therefore, to examine the relationship between sexual iden- (M = 87.31, SD = 18.26); t(327) = −2.51; p < .05, two-tailed. tity and reporting crime to the police, chi-square analyses The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean differ- were performed for males and females identifying as ence = −5.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [−9.83, −1.18]) Miles-Johnson 9 Table 3. Results of t-Test Evaluating Attitude, Subjective Norms, participants scored lower on subjective norms than LGBTI PBC, and PPH (N = 329). participants indicating that LGBTI people were influenced by the social pressures put on them by significant others to Willingness to report crime report crime to the police. Inspection of the mean scores also indicated that LGBTI participants had lower levels of PBC Yes No than heterosexual participants indicating that LGBTI people Variable M SD M SD t(327) felt that it was more difficult for them to report a crime to the police than heterosexual participants. In addition, inspection Attitude 26.66 8.07 25.55 8.38 1.22 of the mean scores indicated that LGBTI people had stronger Subjective norms 16.01 4.23 16.27 4.25 −0.57 beliefs in police homophobia than heterosexual participants. PBC 81.81 21.56 87.31 18.26 −2.51* The results of the MANOVA test indicated that there are PPH 6.20 1.46 6.08 1.43 0.76 significant differences between LGBTI and heterosexual Note: PBC = perceived behavioral control; PPH = perceived police participants’ attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, and beliefs in homophobia. police homophobia. LGBTI participants were found to have *p < .05. significantly more negative attitudes, subjective norms, and 2 PBCs than heterosexual participants. In addition, LGBTI was very small (η = .005). The t tests indicated that there participants were found to have stronger beliefs in police was no significant difference between reporting crime to the homophobia than heterosexual participants. police and attitude, subjective norms, and PPH. The results for the four t tests are presented in Table 3. Overall, the results from the series of independent t tests Discussion and the Mann–Whitney U tests each indicated that the TPB The study aimed to understand whether LGBTI and hetero- variable PBC (a person’s belief as to how easy or difficult sexual people vary in their willingness to report crime to the performance of the behavior is likely to be) could predict the police. Specifically the first research question examined willingness of high/low crime reporting. whether LGBTI participants are less willing than heterosex- ual participants to report crime to the police. When willing- Research Question 3: Are There Differences ness to report crime to the police was examined by differences in sexual identity, a significant difference was found between Between LGBTI and Heterosexual the LGBTI and heterosexual communities. Participants’ Attitudes, Subjective Norms, The results of the chi-square test for independence indi- PBC, and Belief in Police Homophobia? cated that controlling for gender differences in reporting To examine the relationship between sexual identity and par- crime behavior, LGBTI participants were significantly less ticipants’ attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, and belief in willing than heterosexual participants to report crime to the police homophobia, a 2 × 2 factorial MANOVA was per- police. Almost all heterosexual participants said that they formed. The independent variables were sexuality (LGBTI/ would report crime to the police but only 25% of LGBTI heterosexual) and gender (male/female). No significant main participants stated that they would report crime to the police. effect was found for gender, F(4, 322) = 1.98, p = .10, Wilks’s This indicates that a person’s sexual identity influences crime lambda = .98, η = .02, and there was no significant Gender reporting behavior. Interestingly, a significant relationship × Sexuality interaction, F(4, 322) = 2.05, p = .09, Wilks’s was also found between female LGBTI participants and lambda = .98, = .02. However, a significant main effect female heterosexual participants in their willingness to report was found for sexuality, F(4, 322) = 31.72, p < .001, Wilks’s crime to the police. Female participants were more willing lambda = .72, η = .28. than male participants to report a crime to the police. The Applying a Bonferroni adjustment alpha level of .013 (to results indicated that over and above gender, sexual identity reduce the chance of a Type 1 error), examination of the indi- impacted on willingness to report crime to the police. vidual variables indicated that significant differences were The second research question examined whether partici- found between LGBTI and heterosexual participants on atti- pants’ attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, and belief in police tude, F(1, 325) = 35.74, p < .001, R = .13; subjective norms, homophobia determine their intentions to report crime to the F(1, 325) = 44.22, p < .001, R = .19; PBC, F(1, 325) = 50.27, police. The results indicated that a participant’s intention to 2 2 p < .001, R = .18; and PPH, F(1, 325) = 120.86, p < .001, R report crime to the police was influenced by PBC (or a per- = .38. The mean scores and standard deviation for attitude, son’s belief regarding how easy or difficult performance of subjective norms, PBC and PPH, and sexual identity are pre- the behavior is likely to be) particularly low levels of PBC sented in Table 4. indicating that if a person perceived crime reporting to be Examination of Table 3 indicated that LGBTI people had difficult, then they would be less willing to do it. Yet this significantly more negative attitudes than heterosexual peo- raises interesting questions regarding the typical factors that ple toward reporting crime to the police. Heterosexual may influence a person to not report crime to the police. 10 SAGE Open Table 4. Mean Scores and Standard Deviation for Measures of Attitude, Subjective Norms, PBC, and PPH Grouped by Sexual Identity (N = 329). Sexual identity LGBTI Heterosexual Variable M SD M SD Attitude 25.05 8.52 28.08 7.31 Subjective norms 20.57 3.43 18.25 2.85 PBC 75.09 29.55 83.25 21.38 PPH 1.29 .46 1.99 .09 Note: PBC = perceived behavioral control; PPH = perceived police homophobia; LGBTI = lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex. However, an in-depth analysis of such factors (e.g., the char- Therefore, the research identified that the differences acteristics of the victim, the nature of the offence, attitudes between LGBTI and heterosexual people’s willingness to toward police, and the victim’s relationship to the offender) report crime to the police are sensitive to differences in sexu- was beyond the scope of this research due to ethical agree- ality and the ensuing perceptions of treatment from police ments regarding information gathering about prior victimiza- such differences bring (in this case, negative perceptions of tion. The results also indicated that as a group of variables, police homophobia by LGBTI people). However, given that the components of the TPB and PPH were unable to collec- LGBTI people in Queensland have had higher instances of tively predict the willingness of crime reporting to the police. homophobia directed toward them from social institutions However, further investigation of the data suggested that on such as the police, such negative perceptions of police its own, behavioral control (particularly positive or negative homophobia by LGBTI people is unsurprising, and this will levels of PBC) can strongly affect the nature of intention to pose a long-term problem for the LGBTI community and the report crime to the police. police service unless it is addressed. The third research question examined whether there are Therefore, to change LGBTI people’s negative attitudes differences in sexual identity between LGBTI and heterosex- toward reporting crime, previous research suggests that an ual participant’s attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, and belief individual’s negative subjective norms can be transformed in police homophobia. Examination of the data indicated that by the influence of a significant other (see Ajzen, 2005). LGBTI participant attitudes, subjective norms, PBCs, and Subsequently, by encouraging influential members of the beliefs in police homophobia were significantly different LGBTI community to report crime to the police, it may also from those conveyed by the heterosexual community. LGBTI encourage other members of the LGBTI community to participants had more negative attitudes toward reporting engage in the same behavior. In addition, by encouraging crime to the police and more negative belief structures about members of the LGBTI community to become involved in police interaction than heterosexual participants. LGBTI par- non-crime-related activities with the police, strong percep- ticipants had stronger perceptions than heterosexual partici- tions of police homophobia may also be dispelled. Although pants of the social pressures put on them by significant others this strategy assumes that police officers are not homophobic to perform a particular behavior. In addition, LGBTI partici- and raises additional questions about how the attitudes of pants indicated that it was less easy for them to report a crime police officers who are homophobic can be erased. to the police than heterosexual participants. Furthermore, by changing the way that LGBTI people per- The results suggest that LGBTI participants have gener- ceive how easy or difficult it is to report a crime to the police, ally more negative belief structures than heterosexual par- negative levels of PBCs could also be dispelled. ticipants in relation to the police and crime reporting. The results also indicated that while there is a significant gender Conclusion difference in people’s intention to report crime to the police, there is also a very strong relationship between sexual iden- The present study demonstrated how an application of the tity and reporting crime. Regardless of gender, almost all het- TPB can be used to structure and interpret the psychological erosexual participants stated they would report crime to the mechanisms that influence intention to report crime. Results police. However, the majority of LGBTI participants said indicated that there are differences between LGBTI and het- that they were more willing not to report a crime to the police erosexual participant’s intentions to report crime, with than to report a crime to the police, although this was more LGBTI people being less willing to report crime than hetero- apparent for male members of the LGBTI community than sexual people. In addition, the relationship between crime female members. reporting rates is sensitive to differences in sexual identity. Miles-Johnson 11 The results also indicated that under the theoretical compo- only item that is missing—How likely would it be that you nents of the TPB there are differences in LGBTI and hetero- would report this crime to the police? sexual people’s psychological mechanisms that may account for LGBTI people’s reluctance to report crime to the police. 1. Highly likely Examination of the data indicated that the LGBTI participant 2. Likely attitudes, subjective norms, PBCs, and beliefs in police 3. Undecided homophobia were significantly different from those con- 4. Unlikely veyed by the heterosexual community. LGBTI participants 5. Highly unlikely had more negative attitudes toward reporting crime to the police and belief structures about the police than heterosex- Imagine that your ex-partner has been stalking you. This ex ual participants. The results indicated that LGBTI and het- has been harassing your friends; ringing your mobile then erosexual people differ significantly in their intention to hanging up; turning up outside your home; and texting abu- report crime to the police and that a belief in police homopho- sive messages at inappropriate times—How likely would it bia strongly influences LGBTI people’s intention to under- be that you would report this ex to the police? report crime to the police. To conclude, in Australia, underreporting of crime to police by LGBTI people poses 1. Highly likely long-term problems for the LGBTI community and the 2. Likely police service. Despite the extensive body of research exam- 3. Undecided ining crime reporting behavior, the empirical field is still in 4. Unlikely its infancy regarding variations in crime reporting behaviors 5. Highly unlikely due to differences in sexual identity. As such, specific atten- tion needs to be focused on creating micro level strategies Declaration of Conflicting Interests that will encourage LGBTI people to have better attitudes The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect toward the police, thereby increasing the likelihood that to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. LGBTI people will be willing to report crime to the police. Funding Appendix The author(s) received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article. Vignettes Depicting Vandalism, Assault, Break and Entering, and Stalking Notes Imagine that you have returned home to find that someone 1. For the purpose of this article, minority groups are defined as has vandalized your garden and graffitied on your front groups having external behaviors or other features that dis- tinguish them from the general population, thereby affording fence—How likely would it be that you would report this them a subordinate identity group status that results in signifi- crime to the police? cantly less control or power over their lives than other mem- bers of dominant or majority groups (United Nations Human 1. Highly likely Rights Office of the High Commissioner, 2010). 2. Likely 2. In this instance, “Culture” refers to systems of knowledge, and 3. Undecided the cumulative deposit of knowledge, experience, beliefs, val- 4. Unlikely ues, attitudes, meanings, and hierarchies shared by a relatively 5. Highly unlikely large group of people (Hofstede, 1997). 3. Although it should be noted that MacDonald (2001) found Imagine if you came home to find that your partner had been that insurance claims were not a key determinant in reporting assaulted. Your partner is upset but does not need medical crime to the police. 4. Intersex people are individuals with congenital differences that attention—How likely would it be that you would report this cause atypical development of their chromosomal, gonadal, or crime to the police? anatomic sex. It is recognized that the intersex category is a complex group, with many intersex females lacking a second 1. Highly likely X chromosome (two XX sex chromosomes being the norm), 2. Likely and many intersex males having an extra X chromosome (one 3. Undecided X and one Y sex chromosome being the norm). 4. Unlikely 5. It should be noted that although other Australian states and 5. Highly unlikely cities have different terms for the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and intersex community (such as “Gay and Imagine that you have returned home to find that your house Lesbian” or “Queer”), the terminology used in this research has been broken into. A sum of money (AUD $2,000) is the to identify members of this diverse community is based on the 12 SAGE Open Australian Human Rights Commission (2012) definition of the 16. Due to the ethics requirements, the participants were not asked community. about prior victimization; therefore, items regarding incident 6. The Australian Census does not collect information on peo- type, crime occurrence/frequency, and location of incident ple’s sexual orientation. were not included in the survey. 7. Although a comparative analysis of crime reporting practices 17. Although all the participants in the study resided in Queensland, between Australia and other countries was beyond the scope of the LGBTI sample included in the research may not be repre- this research, it is recognized that an integration of Australian sentative of the wider LGBTI population in Queensland (or crime reporting practices by the lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans- the wider Australian LGBTI population) as it is impossible to gender, and intersex (LGBTI) and heterosexual communities estimate the number of LGBTI people living in Australia due would place the research into a broader spectrum of crime to the absence of questions relating to sexual identity in the reporting practices. national census (Gay & Lesbian Community Health Alliance, 8. In addition, it should also be noted that as the participants 2012). from the bisexual, transgender, and intersex communities only 18. All statistical analyses were conducted using Predictive comprised a very small part of the overall LGBTI sample (see Analytics SoftWare (PASW) statistical analysis package ver- “Participants” section), it also determined that they would be sion 17.0. included with the lesbian and gay participants as a homoge- 19. Other jurisdictions may term this crime “breaking and enter- neous group. As such, it was decided that an analysis of intra- ing” or “break and enter”; however, Section 418 of the group difference or variability between the factions of the Criminal Code Queensland states that it is termed “Break and LGBTI community would not be conducted in this research. entering.” 9. Although much has been written about the “end of the closet” 20. In accordance with the ethics agreement, none of the partici- in the United States (see Seidman, 2001), in Queensland— pants were asked if they had been a victim of crime. As such, regardless of changes in the political climate about sexuality prior victimization was not controlled for in the analyses. and sexual politics (Moore, 2001)—there is still a reluctance 21. Initially the items included in this measure suggested that of LGBTI people to publicly disclose their sexual identity, with there could be two measures: (a) property crime (vandalism, higher instances of homophobia being identified in Queensland and break and entering) and (b) personal crime (assault and unlike other Australian states such as New South Wales (see stalking) and that the items could be considered as two mul- Barrett, Lewis, & Dwyer, 2011; Flood & Hamilton, 2005). tiple-item composite scores rather than one. However, it was 10. The message boards within Queensland-based Internet com- decided that for the purpose of this study the items would be munity groups were selected on the basis of being exclu- combined into one single composite score. sively provided for (and tailored for) LGBTI and heterosexual 22. For a list of the items used to operationalize each concept, Queensland residents. please contact the author directly. 11. It was determined that a minimum sample size of 100 partici- 23. None of the included items in the additive Theory of Planned pants from each population would minimize sampling error Behavior (TPB) measures had missing values; therefore, sums for each population, increase the confidence level of potential and not averages are presented in this research. representation of the true population, and determine a degree 24. Although other statistical analyses could have been performed of variability between each population included in the study to evaluate each of the scales (such as a factor analysis to see (see Israel, 2009). how the respective items loaded on one factor), it was decided 12. Although respondents were selected from both genders on the for the purposes of this study that Cronbach’s alpha would be basis of their outward appearance (as either male or female), a sufficient tool to measure internal consistency of each scale. all the participants included in the study regardless of gender Although several authors have recommended that the coeffi- status (i.e., male, female, or transgender) were given the option cient alpha should be minimally .90, with an ideal value of to disclose their gender identity within the demographic part of .95 (see Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994), DeVellis (2003) and the survey. George and Mallery (2003) argued that a coefficient alpha of 13. The survey was administered to patrons 2 hr before the “Gay .70 is acceptable for new scales. day” celebrations began because patrons had begun queuing 25. The same tests were also performed including age and race as to enter the nightclub approximately 2 hr before the venue an influence on the willingness to report crime to the police; opened. Entry to the celebrations was via one entrance to the however, there was no significant association between these nightclub and by ticketed entrance only. variables. 14. It was undetermined how many patrons in total refused to 26. It was determined that a chi-square analysis of independence answer the survey. rather than a chi-square test for goodness-of-fit test (or one- 15. It is acknowledged that the respondents who participated in tailed proportions test) would provide appropriate results for the study had little privacy when completing the survey, and this research question because assumptions regarding which that this “open” administration may have influenced their group would have the larger mean (or proportion of willing- responses to the survey. However, no patrons were seen to be ness to report crime to the police), a hypothesized value, was visibly consuming alcohol while waiting to enter the venue not made before data were collected. and the general mood of the patrons waiting to enter the venue 27. To assist in understanding crime reporting behavior, it was was positive and upbeat but not rowdy. As such, the patrons determined that each of the components of the TPB would who did participate in the survey responded to the survey in a be measured as separate elements that influence intention to serious manner. report crime to police. In this way, the current research was Miles-Johnson 13 able to gain insight into the underlying cognitive foundation Bourne, A., Reid, D., Hammond, G., & Weatherburn, P. (2010). of the factors that influence people’s intention to report crime Waltham Forest LGBT matters: The needs and experiences to the police before an independent variable such as sexuality of lesbians, gay men, bisexual and trans men and women in was introduced. Waltham Forest. London, England: Sigma Research. 28. As a convenience sample was used in the research, it was Browning, S. L., Cullen, F. T., Cao, L., Kopache, R., & Stevenson, determined that a Mann–Whitney U test could provide appro- T. J. (1994). Race and getting hassled by the police: A research priate statistical analysis of the data. It was used to initially note. Police Studies, 17, 1-11. determine differences between the two independent groups as Buchan, H. (2005). Ethical decision making in the public account- a nonparametric alternative to a t test. However, as nonpara- ing profession: An extension of Ajzen’s Theory of Planned metric tests may fail to detect differences between groups, an Behaviour. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 165-181. independent-samples t test was also performed. Butler, M. (2012). National lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgen- 29. It is acknowledged that in future studies such factors could be der and intersex (LGBTI) ageing and aged care strategy. statistically controlled for so that the estimated models could Canberra: Australian Government Department of Health and be better specified. Ageing. 30. It is recommended that further research is needed to gain a Canales, M. (2000). Othering: Toward an understanding of differ- more comprehensive understanding of the attitudes of police ence. Advances in Nursing Science, 22, 16-31. Carcach, C. (1997). Reporting crime to the police. Canberra: officers toward members of the LGBTI community. Australian Institute of Criminology. Carr, P. J., Napolitano, L., & Keating, J. (2007). We never call the References cops and here is why: A qualitative examination of legal cyni- Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned cism in three Philadelphia neighborhoods. Criminology, 45, behavior. In J. Kuhi & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: 445-480. From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). Heidelberg, Germany: Chakraborti, N. (2009). A glass half full? Assessing progress in the Springer. policing of hate crime. Policing, 3, 121-128. Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality and behaviour (2nd ed.). Comstock, G. (1989). Victims of anti-gay/lesbian violence. Journal Berkshire, UK: Open University Press. of Interpersonal Violence, 4, 101-106. Attorney General’s Department of New South Wales. (2003). You Connor, M., & Armitage, C. (1998). Extending the Theory of shouldn’t have to hide to be safe survey: A report on homopho- Planned Behaviour: A review and avenues for further research. bic hostilities and violence against gay men and lesbians in Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1429-1464. New South Wales. New South Wales, Australia: Author. Crime and Misconduct Commission. (2006). Fear of crime report. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2007). Recorded crime: Victims. Brisbane, Queensland, Australia: Crime and Misconduct Sydney, Australia: Australian Bureau of Statistics. Commission. Australian Human Rights Commission. (2012). Lesbian, gay, Crime and Misconduct Commission. (2009). Interactions between bisexual, trans and intersex equality. Retrieved from http:// police and young people. Brisbane, Queensland, Australia: www.hreoc.gov.au/human_rights/lgbti/index.html Crime and Misconduct Commission. Barrett, N., Lewis, J., & Dwyer, A. (2011). Effects of disclosure Cunneen, C. (2001). Conflict, politics and crime: Aboriginal com- of sexual identity at work for gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans- munities and the police. New South Wales, Australia: Allen gender and intersex (GLBTI) employees in Queensland. and Unwin. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Australian and New Zealand DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and application Academy of Management Conference, Australian and New (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Zealand Academy of Management (ANZAM), Amora Hotel, Dovidio, J., Kawakami, K., Johnson, C., Johnson, B., & Howard, A. Wellington, New Zealand. Available from http://eprints.qut. (1997). On the nature of prejudice: Automatic and controlled edu.au/46897/ processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 5-17. Baumer, E. P. (2002). Neighbourhood disadvantage and police Fagan, J., & Davies, G. (2000). Street stops and broken windows: notification by victims of violence. Criminology, 40, 579- Terry, race and disorder in New York City. Fordham Urban 616. Law Journal, 28, 457-504. Beckett, K., Nyrop, K., & Pfingst, L. (2006). Race, drugs and Fazio, R., Jackson, J., Dunton, B., & Williams, C. (1995). Variability policing: Understanding disparities in drug delivery arrests. in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial atti- Criminology, 44, 105-138. tudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Bernstein, M., & Kostelac, C. (2002). Lavender and blue: Attitudes Psychology, 69, 1013-1027. about homosexuality and behaviour toward lesbians and gay Fazio, R., & Olson, M. (2003). Implicit measures in social cog- men among police officers. Journal of Contemporary Criminal nition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Justice, 18, 302-330. Psychology, 54, 297-327. Bohn, T. (1993). Homophobic violence: Implications for social Felson, R. B., Messner, S. F., Hoskin, A. W., & Deane, G. (2002). work practice. Journal of Social Work & Human Sexuality, 2, Reasons for reporting and not reporting domestic violence to 91-112. the police. Criminology, 40, 617-648. Bosick, S., Rennison, C. M., Gover, A. R., & Dodge, M. (2012). Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and Reporting violence to the police: Predictors through the life behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, course. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40, 441-451. MA: Addison-Wesley. 14 SAGE Open Flood, M., & Hamilton, C. (2005). Mapping homophobia in Mason, G. (1993). Violence against lesbians and gay men (Violence Australia. Victoria: The Australia Institute. Prevention Today Series No. 2). Canberra: Australian Institute Gay & Lesbian Community Health Alliance. (2012). Researching of Criminology. LGBTI health. Retrieved from http://www.lgbthealth.org.au/ Mastrofski, S. D., Parks, R., Reiss, A., & Worden, R. (1999). research Policing neighbourhoods: A report from St. Petersburg. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for windows step by step: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. A simple guide and reference (11.0 update, 4th ed.). Boston, Mastrofski, S. D., Reisig, M. D., & McCluskey, J. D. (2002). Police MA: Allyn & Bacon. disrespect toward the public: An encounter-based analysis. Gerstenfeld, P. (2004). Hate crimes: Causes, controls, controver- Criminology, 40, 515-551. sies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. McMillan, B., & Conner, M. (2003). Applying an extended version Ghaziani, A. (2011). Post-gay collective identity construction. of the Theory of Planned Behaviour to illicit drug use among Social Problems, 58, 99-125. students. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 1662-1683. Gottfredson, M., & Gottfredson, D. (1980). Decision making in Merry, S., Power, N., McManus, M., & Alison, L. (2012). Drivers criminal justice. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. of public trust and confidence in police in the UK. International Greenwald, A., & Banaji, M. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Journal of Police Science & Management, 14, 118-135. Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, Meyer, D. (2010). Evaluating the severity of hate-motivated vio- 102, 4-27. lence: Intersectional differences among LGBT hate crime vic- Greenwald, A., McGhee, D., & Schwartz, J. (1998). Measuring tims. Sociology, 44, 980-995. individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Meyer, D. (2011). Intersecting systems of oppression: Race, class, Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social and gender differences among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans- Psychology, 74, 1464-1480. gender (LGBT) hate crime victims. ProQuest Dissertations Griffiths, P., Gossop, M., Powis, B., & Strang, J. (1993). Reaching and Theses, 1-249. Available from http://gas.sagepub.com/ hidden populations of drug users by privileged access inter- content/26/6/849.short viewers: Methodological and practical issues. Addiction, 88, Moore, C. (2001). Sunshine and rainbows: The development of 1617-1626. gay and lesbian culture in Queensland. Queensland, Australia: Hart, T. C., & Rennison, C. M. (2003). Reporting crime to the University of Queensland Press. police, 1992-2000 (Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report). Moran, L. (2007). Invisible minorities: Challenging community and Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. neighbourhood models of Policing. Criminology & Criminal Herek, G. (1990). The context of anti-gay violence: Notes on cul- Justice, 7, 417-441. tural and psychological heterosexism. Journal of Interpersonal Murphy, K., & Cherney, A. (2010). Policing ethnic minority groups Violence, 5, 316-333. with procedural justice: An empirical study (Working Paper Herek, G., & Berrill, K. (1992). Hate crimes: Confronting violence No. 2). Geelong, Victoria, Australia: Alfred Deakin Research against lesbians and gay men. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Institute. Herek, G. M., Cogan, J. C., & Gillis, J. R. (2003). Victim experi- Myers, K., Forest, K., & Miller, S. (2004). Officer friendly and the ences in hate crimes based on sexual orientation. Journal of tough cop: Gays and lesbians navigate homophobia and polic- Social Issues, 58, 319-339. ing. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 17-38. Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd mind. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Israel, G. (2009). Determining sample size. Gainesville, FL: Rennison, C. M. (2007). Reporting to the police by Hispanic vic- University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences tims of violence. Violence and Victims, 22, 754-772. (IFAS) Extension. Schaible, L. M., & Hughes, L. A. (2012). Neighborhood disadvantage Jellison, W., McConnell, A., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Implicit and and reliance on the police. Crime & Delinquency, 58, 245-276. explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: In-group Seidman, S. (2001). From identity to queer politics: Shifts in norma- preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and tive heterosexuality and the meaning of citizenship. Citizenship straight men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, Studies, 5, 321-328. 629-642. Skeggs, B. (1999). Matter out of place: Visibility and sexualities in Kääriäinen, J., & Sirén, R. (2011). Trust in the police, generalized leisure spaces. Leisure Studies, 18, 213-232. trust and reporting crime. European Journal of Criminology, Skogan, W. G. (1994). Contacts between police and public: Findings 8, 65-83. from the 1992 British Crime Survey (Home Office Research Kane, R. J. (2002). The social ecology of police misconduct. Study No. 134). London, England: Home Office. Retrieved Criminology, 40, 867-896. from http://www.skogan.org/files/Contact_Between_Police_ Kane, R. J. (2005). Compromised police legitimacy as a predic- Public_Hors_134.pdf tor of violent crime in structurally disadvantaged communities. Smith, B. W., & Holmes, M. D. (2003). Community accountability, Criminology, 43, 469-498. minority threat, and police brutality: An examination of civil Leonard, W., Mitchell, A., Patel, S., & Fox, C. (2008). Coming for- rights criminal complaints. Criminology, 41, 1035-1064. ward: The underreporting of heterosexist violence and same Smith, D. A., & Klein, J. R. (1984). Police control of interpersonal sex partner abuse in Victoria. Journal of Law, 69, 1-34. disputes. Social Problems, 31, 68-481. MacDonald, Z. (2001). Revisiting the dark figure: A microecono- Smith, D. A., & Visher, C. A. (1981). Street-level justice: Situational metric analysis of the under-reporting of property crime and determinants of police arrest decisions. Social Problems, 29, its implications. British Journal of Criminology, 41, 127-149. 167-177. Miles-Johnson 15 Stonewall. (1994). Queer bashing: A national survey of hate crimes Webb, V., & Marshall, C. (1995). The relative importance of race against lesbians and gay men. London, England: Stonewall. and ethnicity on citizen attitudes toward police. American Tarling, R., & Morris, K. (2010). Reporting crime to the police. Journal of Police, 14, 45-66. British Journal of Criminology, 50, 474-490. Weitzer, R., & Tuch, S. A. (2006). Race and policing in America: Terrill, W., Paoline, E. A., & Manning, P. K. (2003). Police culture Conflict and reform. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University and coercion. Criminology, 41, 1003-1034. Press. Terrill, W., & Reisig, M. D. (2003). Neighborhood context Williams, B. (1998). Citizen perspectives on community policing. and police use of force. Journal of Research in Crime & New York: State University of New York Press. Williams, M., & Robinson, A. (2004). Problems and prospects with Delinquency, 40, 291-321. policing the lesbian, gay and bisexual community in Wales. Tomsen, S., & Mason, G. (2001). Engendering homopho- Policing and Society, 14, 213-232. bia: Violence, sexuality and gender conformity. Journal of Worden, R. E. (1996). The causes of police brutality: Theory and evi- Sociology, 37, 257-273. dence on police use of force. In W. A. Geller & H. Toch (Eds.), Tyler, T. (2005). Policing in Black and White: Ethnic group differ- Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of ences in trust and confidence in the police. Police Quarterly, force (pp. 23-51). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 8, 322-342. United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. Author Biography (2010). Minority rights: International standards and guidance for implementation. New York, NY: United Nations. Toby Miles-Johnson is a lecturer based in the School of Social Viki, G. T., Culmer, M., Eller, A., & Abrams, D. (2006). Race and Science at The University of Queensland. His research interests willingness to cooperate with the police: The roles of quality of include policing, procedural justice, gender victimization and contact, attitudes towards the behaviour and subjective norms. crime, sexuality victimization and crime, race, victimization and British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 285-302. crime, prejudiced motivated crime, and international security.

Journal

SAGE Open – SAGE

Published: May 28, 2013

Keywords: police; crime reporting; sexual identity; homophobia; attitudes

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

LGBTI Variations in Crime Reporting: How Sexual Identity Influences Decisions to Call the Cops

LGBTI Variations in Crime Reporting: How Sexual Identity Influences Decisions to Call the Cops

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

LGBTI Variations in Crime Reporting: How Sexual Identity Influences Decisions to Call the Cops

LGBTI Variations in Crime Reporting: How Sexual Identity Influences Decisions to Call the Cops

References (91)

Abstract

Journal

Recommended Articles

There are no references for this article.

Our policy towards the use of cookies