Crime Mapping On-line: Public Perception of Privacy Issues
- 709 Downloads
The Web 2.0 technology introduced dynamic web mapping, which in turn has dramatically changed the distribution and use of geographical information in our society. Some of the many advantages of online mapping include the fast information dissemination to the public, the interactivity between the users and the map interface, as well as the frequent and easy database updates. However, the theme of these maps may entail privacy risks at times. Such examples include the crime mapping initiatives where crime information is considered as private and sensitive. With respect to privacy disclosure risks, this study employs a survey design to investigate the public’s perception of location privacy when information about crimes is being displayed on public maps. Participants from the London Borough of Camden were recruited and their views were analysed by means of a questionnaire accompanied by mapping material (n = 201). Participants expressed a clear concern when practical implications related to the crime maps were revealed to them. Further, the majority of participants, if given the choice, would opt for a medium-risk protection method in terms of risk of privacy violation. Lastly, in regards to the impact that different visualizations may have on local crime perception the study revealed that the current police.uk cartographic technique creates the perception of more unsafe neighbourhoods than an alternative hot routes density map.
KeywordsConfidentiality Location privacy Public perception and crime mapping
This research was funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) through the Doctoral College GIScience at the University of Salzburg (DK W 1237-N23).
- Abdel Malik, P., Boulos, M. N. K., & Jones, R. (2008). The perceived impact of location privacy: A web-based survey of public health perspectives and requirements in the UK and Canada. BMC Public Health, 8.Google Scholar
- Beresford, A. R., & Stajano, F. (2003). Location privacy in pervasive computing. IEEE CS and IEEE Communications Society, 1, 46–55.Google Scholar
- Blumberg, A. J., & Eckersley, P. (2009). On locational privacy, and how to avoid losing it forever. Electronic Frontier Foundation: White Paper. retrieved at https://www.eff.org/wp/locational-privacy.
- Cassa, C. A., Wieland, S. C., & Mandl, K. D. (2008). Re-identification of home addresses from spatial locations anonymized by Gaussian skew. International Journal of Health Geographics, 7(45).Google Scholar
- Chaplin, R., Flatley, J., & Smith, K. (2011). Crime in England and Wales 2010/11: Findings from the British Crime Survey and police recorded crime (2nd Edition). Home Office Statistical Bulletin 10/11. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
- Duffy, B., & Rowden, L. (2005). You are what you read? London: MORI.Google Scholar
- Duwe, G. (2009). Residency restrictions and sex offender recidivism: Implications for public safety. Geography & Public Safety, 2(1), 6–8.Google Scholar
- Graham, C. (2012). Anonymisation: managing data protection risk code of practice. Information Commissioner’s Office. Google Scholar
- ICO. (2012). Crime-mapping and geo-spatial crime data: privacy and transparency principles. Information: Commissioner’s Office.Google Scholar
- Leitner, M., Mills, J. W., & Curtis, A. (2007). Can Novices to Geospatial Technology Compromise Spatial Confidentially? Kartographische Nachrichten, 57(2), 78–84.Google Scholar
- Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140: 1–55.Google Scholar
- police.uk (2012). Anonymisation Methodology. Available at http://data.police.uk/about/#anonymisation. Accessed 29 May 2014.
- Quinton, P. (2011). The impact of information about crime and policing on public perceptions: The results of a randomised controlled trial. London: NPIA.Google Scholar
- Ray, K., Davidson, R., Husain, F., Vegeris, S., Vowden, K., & Karn, J. (2012). Perceptions of the policing and crime mapping ‘Trailblazers’. Home Office, Policing research and analysis, Research Report, 67.Google Scholar
- Tompson, L., & Chainey, S. (2012). Engagement, empowerment and transparency: publishing crime statistics using online crime mapping. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 6(3):228–239.Google Scholar
- Tompson, L., Partridge, H., & Shepherd, N. (2009). Hot Routes: Developing a New Technique for the Spatial Analysis of Crime. Crime Mapping: A Journal of Research and Practice, 1(1), 77–96.Google Scholar
- Wartell, J. (2001). Evaluating a Crime Mapping Web Site. Crime Mapping News, 3(3), 1–4.Google Scholar
- Wartell, J., & McEwen, J. T. (2001). Privacy in the Information Age: A Guide for Sharing Crime Maps and Spatial Data Series: Research Report. Institute for Law and Justice. Google Scholar
- Weatherburn, D., Matka, E., & Lind, B. (1996). Crime Perception and Reality. Crime and Justice Bulletin, 28.Google Scholar