What Matters More, Perceived or Real Crime?

Crime consistently penetrates public and political debate, where crime, either perceived or real, shapes one's sense of security, safety and wellbeing. This matters, as the perceived versus real dilemma influences policy decisions. But what matters most? Here the evidence is mixed with often highly inconsistent findings. Against this background, and employing more recent and arguably more robust econometric models, we compare the effect of real crime and perceived crime on self-reported life satisfaction after controlling for the effect of victimisation. We also explore the heterogenous effects of real crime and perceived crime among different socioeconomic and demographic groups. Overall, our results, across all model specifications, demonstrate that perceived crime always matters, while real crime only matters to those on high-incomes. We also find that females tend to be more sensitive to their perceptions, while living outside major cities does not have a significant effect. Our results support our belief that more should be done to reduce the misperceptions of crime. Further, public media coverage related to crime should be more objective and informative to avoid inflating misperceptions and public distress.

Automated summary

Crime has a consistent impact on public and political debates, where perceived crime has a greater influence on life satisfaction, particularly for those with higher incomes. Females are more sensitive to their perceptions of crime, while living outside major cities does not significantly affect crime perception. Efforts should be made to reduce misperceptions of crime, and public media coverage should be objective and informative to avoid exaggerating misperceptions and causing public distress.