Do physical barriers affect urban crime trips? The effect of a highway, a railroad, a park or a canal on the flow of crime in The Hague

FdR – Publicaties zonder aanstelling Universiteit Leide

VAT compliance in the United Kingdom

This study aimed to uncover the factors that influence Value Added Tax (VAT) compliance. Small businesses from the catering and flooring/furnishing trades in the United Kingdom were sent a questionnaire designed to elicit their views on VAT and related issues. Responses were obtained from 359 businesses. Results showed that VAT compliance in small businesses shares a number of similarities with private income tax compliance: Social norms, equity, economic factors and personality are all important in predicting compliance

Evidence-based aanpak van woninginbraak: Enkele voorstellen voor een intensievere aanpak van woninginbraak, op basis van een inventarisatie van de criminologische literatuur.

Regiopolitie Amsterdam-Amstelland, District WestFdR – Publicaties zonder aanstelling Universiteit Leide

Needy or Greedy? The Social Psychology of Individuals Who Fraudulently Claim Unemployment Benefits

This study explored the relationships between diverse social psychological and economic variables and self‐reported and officially documented unemployment benefit fraud. Two groups receiving unemployment benefit were studied; a fraudulent group of 45 individuals and an honest group of 51 individuals. Interview measures of financial strain, social norms, opportunity for fraud, social controls, personal strain, personal orientation, perceived risk of punishment, and intolerance of fraud were obtained. The results of univariate and regression analyses revealed that although financial strain and social norms did not differ between the two groups, the fraudulent group had more opportunity, were less well educated, were more alienated and inclined to take risks, and had more positive attitudes toward a variety of kinds of fraud. Copyrigh

Bridging the gap between judges and the public? A multi-method study.

This article examines the gap between dutch judges and the public in terms of preferred severity of sentences. It focuses on one particular explanation usually given for the gap: the lack of case-specific, detailed information on the part of the general public. Findings from three studies are reported and combined: (a) a survey among a sample from the dutch population (n = 2,127), (b) a sentencing experiment with judges in dutch criminal courts (n = 180), and (c) a sentencing experiment, using the same case materials as with judges, but now with a sample from the dutch population (n = 917). Results show that providing the public with detailed case information indeed reduces severity of sentences preferred. Moreover, those members of the public who were given short and unbalanced newspaper reports preferred much harsher sentences than did those who were given the full case files. However, despite such a reduction in punitiveness as a result of information, the public’s preferred sentences remain much more punitive than judges’ sentences pertaining to exactly the same case files