6 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
The association between weather and the number of daily shootings in Chicago (2012–2016)
Background
Previous studies have linked weather to crime and aggression but have not considered the causal structure of the variables included in the model(s).
Methods
This cross-sectional study used data from 2012 to 2016 to measure the association between weather and the number of shootings in Chicago. The number of shootings per day was obtained via the Chicago Tribune (2012–2016). Daily high temperature, humidity, wind speed, difference in temperature from historical average, precipitation type and amount, were extracted via The Weather Underground. Weekend, holidays, and other non-school days were also included as possible effect measure modifiers. Causally-adjusted negative binomial regressions were used to evaluate the associations between the exposures of interest and daily number of shootings.
Results
A 10-degree (°C) higher temperature was significantly associated with 34% more shootings on weekdays, and 42% more shootings on weekends or holidays. A 10-degree higher temperature than average was also associated with 33.8% higher rate of shootings.
Conclusion
In recent years, shootings in Chicago were more likely to happen on warm days and especially during the weekend or holidays. This finding is in-line with studies that have linked crime to higher temperature and also suggests that shootings may be related to when individuals are outside and more likely to encounter violence. Interventions that keep people inside, such as air-conditioning and summer programs for students, might be effective in reducing the number of shootings in Chicago. We believe using a causal structure is useful for understanding the link between weather and shootings
Recommended from our members
A comparison and analysis of seven gun law permissiveness scales
Background
Due to the differences in the way gun law permissiveness scales were created and speculation about the politically motivated underpinnings of the various scales, there have been questions about their reliability.
Methods
We compared seven gun law permissiveness scales, varying by type and sources, for an enhanced understanding of the extent to which choice of a gun law permissiveness scale could affect studies related to gun violence outcomes in the United States. Specifically, we evaluated seven different scales: two rankings, two counts, and three scores, arising from a range of sources. We calculated Spearman correlation coefficients for each pair of scales compared. Cronbach’s standardized alpha and Guttman’s lambda were calculated to evaluate the relative reliability of the scales, and we re-calculated Cronbach’s alpha after systematically omitting each scale to assess whether the omitted scale contributed to lower internal consistency between scales. Factor analysis was used to determine single factor loadings and estimates. We also assessed associations between permissiveness of gun laws and total firearm deaths and suicides in multivariable regression analyses.
Results
All pairs of scales were highly correlated (average Spearman’s correlation coefficient r = 0.77) and had high relative reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.968, Guttman’s lambda = 0.975). All scales load onto a single factor. The choice of scale did not meaningfully change the parameter estimates for the associations between permissiveness of gun laws and gun deaths and suicides.
Conclusion
Gun law permissiveness scales are highly correlated despite any perceived political agenda, and the choice of gun law permissiveness scale has little effect on study conclusions related to gun violence outcomes
Recommended from our members
A comparison and analysis of seven gun law permissiveness scales.
Background
Due to the differences in the way gun law permissiveness scales were created and speculation about the politically motivated underpinnings of the various scales, there have been questions about their reliability.
Methods
We compared seven gun law permissiveness scales, varying by type and sources, for an enhanced understanding of the extent to which choice of a gun law permissiveness scale could affect studies related to gun violence outcomes in the United States. Specifically, we evaluated seven different scales: two rankings, two counts, and three scores, arising from a range of sources. We calculated Spearman correlation coefficients for each pair of scales compared. Cronbach’s standardized alpha and Guttman’s lambda were calculated to evaluate the relative reliability of the scales, and we re-calculated Cronbach’s alpha after systematically omitting each scale to assess whether the omitted scale contributed to lower internal consistency between scales. Factor analysis was used to determine single factor loadings and estimates. We also assessed associations between permissiveness of gun laws and total firearm deaths and suicides in multivariable regression analyses.
Results
All pairs of scales were highly correlated (average Spearman’s correlation coefficient r = 0.77) and had high relative reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.968, Guttman’s lambda = 0.975). All scales load onto a single factor. The choice of scale did not meaningfully change the parameter estimates for the associations between permissiveness of gun laws and gun deaths and suicides.
Conclusion
Gun law permissiveness scales are highly correlated despite any perceived political agenda, and the choice of gun law permissiveness scale has little effect on study conclusions related to gun violence outcomes
289: The effect of chronic hypertension on deterioration of umbilical artery Dopplers in fetal growth restriction
Views of democracy and society and support for political violence in the USA: findings from a nationally representative survey
Abstract Background Current conditions in the USA suggest an increasing risk for political violence. Little is known about the prevalence of beliefs that might lead to political violence, about support for and personal willingness to engage in political violence, and about how those measures vary with individual characteristics, lethality of violence, political objectives that violence might advance, or specific populations as targets. Methods This cross-sectional US nationally representative survey was conducted on May 13 to June 2, 2022, of adult members of the Ipsos KnowledgePanel. Outcomes are weighted, population-representative proportions of respondents endorsing selected beliefs about American democracy and society and violence to advance political objectives. Results The analytic sample included 8620 respondents; 50.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 49.3%, 51.7%) were female; and weighted mean (± standard deviation) age was 48.4 (± 18.0) years. Nearly 1 in 5 (18.9%, 95% CI 18.0%, 19.9%) agreed strongly or very strongly that “having a strong leader for America is more important than having a democracy”; 16.2% (95% CI 15.3%, 17.1%) agreed strongly or very strongly that “in America, native-born white people are being replaced by immigrants,” and 13.7% (95% CI 12.9%, 14.6%) agreed strongly or very strongly that “in the next few years, there will be civil war in the United States.” One-third of respondents (32.8%, 95% CI 31.7%, 33.9%) considered violence to be usually or always justified to advance at least 1 of 17 specific political objectives. Among all respondents, 7.7% (95% CI 7.0%, 8.4%) thought it very or extremely likely that within the next few years, in a situation where they believe political violence is justified, “I will be armed with a gun”; 1.1% (95% CI 0.9%, 1.4%) thought it very or extremely likely that “I will shoot someone with a gun.” Support for political violence and for the use of firearms in such violence frequently declined with increasing age, education, and income. Conclusions Small but concerning proportions of the population consider violence, including lethal violence, to be usually or always justified to advance political objectives. Prevention efforts should proceed urgently based on the best evidence available