- 11 Jun 2020
Corporate policy statement
Revisions and corrections to previously published Scottish Crime and Justice Survey data are dealt with in accordance with the Scottish Government Statistician Group corporate policy statement on revisions and corrections.
SCJS revisions and corrections
The SCJS adheres to the corporate policy statement on revisions and corrections noted above. Key things to note are:
- there are no SCJS statistics which are subject to regular scheduled revisions
- all revisions and corrections will be brought to the attention of users as soon as they are identified with appropriate notes added to the relevant publications and releases online
- substantial revisions will be summarised on this page
If you have any comments or queries regarding revisions and errors in the SCJS, then please contact us via the contact details at the bottom of this page.
Please be aware of the following revisions and corrections within the SCJS:
SCJS 2018/19 main findings report
An updated version of the 2018/19 Main Findings Report, which supersedes the original, was published in October 2020. The latest version updates small inaccuracies in Chapter 8 (PDF pages 131 and 134). The original report stated that "In 2018/19, 13% of adults said that they had been insulted, pestered or intimidated in the previous year, in line with the proportion of respondents who experienced such incidents in 2008/09 and 2017/18. Younger adults were more likely to have experienced harassment than older adults (27% of 16-24 year olds compared to 15% of 25-44 year olds, 12% of 45-59 year olds and 6% of people aged 60 and over)". 13% should have been 12%, 27% should have been 26% and 15% should have been 14%. The findings on comparisons over time and variations between age groups are not impacted. Also, these changes do not affect any other results in the report.
SCJS 2017/18 main findings report
An error was found in the 2017/18 figures in Annex table “A1.4: Rates of crime in Scotland, per 10,000 households/adults, 2008/09 to 2017/18”. These figures have been corrected in the 2018/19 Main Findings Report (published 16th June 2020) to reflect the use of NRS household estimates and NRS Mid-2017 adult (aged 16 and over) population estimates. We recommend users revert to Annex table A1.4 in the 2018/19 report.
An updated version of the 2017/18 SCJS Main Report, which supersedes the original, was published in July 2019. The latest version updates an error in Chapter 3 (PDF page 48). Originally, the report stated that “the proportion of cases involving offenders aged 40 and over had increased from 12% in 2008/09” to 23% in 2017/18. This 2008/09 figure should have been 18%, however, which meant that the apparent increase was not statistically significant. All figures for 2017/18 remained unchanged.
SCJS 2014/15 technical report
An updated version of the 2014/15 SCJS Technical Report, which supersedes the original, was published in March 2017. The latest version updates the fieldwork outcomes tables 3.1 and 3.2 with the corrected number and proportion of cases assigned to specific non-response and ineligible categories. This does not affect the overall response rate. The tables in Annex 11 have also been updated, with corrected design factors (the original tables contained design effects, the square of the design factors).
SCJS 2014/15 main findings excel tables
The 2014/15 Main Findings Excel data tables were republished on 7th July 2016. The formula bar in the new tables provides results to three decimal places, rather than two decimal places, which enhances the ability for users to conduct statistical significance testing using the SCJS 2014/15 Statistical Testing Tool.
SJCS 2012/13 Partner Abuse Report
The 2012/13 SCJS Partner Abuse Report included analysis on who victims tell about their abuse (section 4.2) and on reporting to the police (section 4.3). Each of these sections was split into two parts. These two parts were described as being based on the most recent incident and based on any other incident. The part noted as being based on the most recent incident is correct and includes all respondents, however the parts based ‘any other incident’ included the 213 respondents who experienced one of more incidents of partner abuse in the last 12 months (and excluded 21 respondents who refused to answer or said they didn’t know how many times they experienced partner abuse in the last 12 months). The 2014/15 SCJS Partner Abuse Report presents results based only on the most recent incident and includes all respondents.
SCJS 2012/13 main findings report
The pdf version of the SCJS 2012/13 Main Findings Report was updated and can now be printed in its entirety.
Please note that the one of the points in the main findings section of Chapter 5 of the 2012/13 SCJS report has been changed to “Nearly one-in-four violent crimes (23%) went unreported to the police because the victim “dealt with the matter themselves” and 14% of violent crimes were unreported because the incident was considered a personal or family matter.” from “Nearly one-in-ten violent crimes (9%) went unreported to the police because the victim “dealt with the matter themselves” and 14% of violent crimes were unreported because the incident was considered a personal or family matter.” This change has been made to both the HTML and pdf versions originally released on 7 March 2014.
SCJS drug use reports : 2008/09 to 2012/13
During the quality assurance process in advance of publication of the SCJS 2014/15 Drug Use report in June 2016, a small number of relatively minor errors were found in previous iterations of the report. These involve
the classification of amphetamines in the 2012/13 report and published data tables
some minor inaccuracies in the values in annex data tables in the 2012/13 report for amphetamines, crack, cannabis, anabolic steroids and tranquilisers
description of the base sizes for the analysis of the experiences of those using drugs in some instances in the 2010/11 and 2012/13 reports
the placement of crystal meth within annex data tables in each report since 2008/09
SCJS Design Factors for 2008/09, 2009/10 and 2010/11
A change in sample structure in the 2012/13 SCJS highlighted an error in the calculation of design factors that were presented in Annex A4 and Table A4.1 of the 2008/09, 2009/10 and 2010/11 SCJS surveys.
In summary, while the 2008/09, 2009/10 and 2010/11 surveys do present accurate complex standard errors and confidence intervals, the calculation of the survey design factor (a measure of the survey efficiency) did not take account of survey weighting correctly. More information on this is highlighted in Annex A4 of the 2012/13 SCJS report, and also summarised here with more details of the design factor change.
The ‘generic’ 1.5 design factor that our additional calculations has derived has been used to update Table A4.1 for the 2008/09, 2009/10 and 2010/11 surveys.
To provide any feedback on the SCJS, or to request further information, please use the following contact details:
Telephone: 0131 244 3012
SCJS Project Team
Area 2G North