PERCEPTIONS OF RISK AND PRECAUTIONARY BEHAVIOUR

Nicole Schoenberger
SOC 499 Honours Essay
Submitted: April 8, 2015
Supervised by Dr. Jennifer Schulenberg

1
INTRODUCTION
Research Focus
This honours essay will examine the relationship between University of Waterloo (UW)
students perceptions of the risk of having their belongings stolen while at the Dana Porter (DP)
library on campus and their precautionary behaviour. There are likely many common behavioural
strategies used by students to minimize the risk they feel when they go to the DP library, yet theft
still persists (Steinmetz, 2012). This research hopes to contribute to the efforts by the library to
encourage such precautionary behaviour by exploring what motivates students to implement
these measures. In doing so the researcher will strive to identify and understand the feelings
associated with students perception of this particular risk. The research objective is to produce
findings that can inform and improve the effectiveness of current theft awareness prevention
programs.
This research will draw on perception, risk, and target hardening as part of precautionary
behaviour. The idea of perception refers to the way you think about or understand someone or
something (Mirriam Webster) rather than an objective reflection of facts. The focus on
perception is crucial to this research because although perception does not necessarily match
facts, it nevertheless influences how people view their environment and the people in it, and as a
result, how they act in certain situations (Brewer, et al., 2004). This desire for an in-depth look at
perception supports the use of qualitative research in order to understand the research subjects
personal feelings, perceptions and experiences rather than descriptive, numerical information
about theft.
Risk refers to the probability of an adverse future event multiplied by its magnitude
(Oltedal, Moen, Klempe, & Rundmo, 2004, p. 11). However, the difference between objective
risk and subjective risk will play a key part. Perceived, or subjective, risk concerns how an
individual understands and experiences the phenomenon (2004, p. 11), and although it does
reflect the objective risk that exists independent of an individuals knowledge and worries of the
source of the risk, it does now always do so accurately (Oltedal et.al., 2004, p. 11). Nevertheless,
the proposed research will focus on perceived risk because it is based on the subjects thoughts,
beliefs and constructs and the variation of these factors based on how his or her surroundings
influence cognition as well as behaviour and individual decisions (Oltedal et.al., 2004, pp. 11).
University campuses are subject to occurrences of crime (Tewksbury & Mustaine 2003).
One case in which this is particularly prominent in the public realm is theft related to students
bringing a variety of items to the libraries on campus typically supplies for classes and
electronics such as laptops, hard-drives, and mp3 players (Steinmetz, 2012). Prior research
suggests that the level of risk people associate with their actions, in this case, the likelihood for
students of having their belongings stolen while at the library, will be a significant and
multifaceted factor in determining their subsequent behaviour (Tonry & Farrington, 1995). For
the purposes of this research, the concept of precautionary behaviour will include any measures
that students take to reduce their perceived risk of theft, whether that method is in actuality
effective or not.
The research purpose is to understand what the general perceptions about the risk of theft
are and how these beliefs impact the prevalence and type of cautionary measures used. Much of
the past research, discussed in the literature review below, into areas of risk, perception, and
behaviour has had a broader focus, such as general campus security or risk assessments. The
proposed research seeks to take the relevant theoretical perspectives and what has previously
been found related to the correlation between perception and risk reduction behaviour, as well as
background factors influencing these perceptions, and apply it to a more targeted subject area,

2
namely the DP library. This narrow approach is appropriate given that the research is being
conducted for a SOC 499 Honours Essay. Thus, only a limited number of interviews (see
Methodology) will be conducted, and focusing on one location will enable the researcher to
examine the topic at hand with a reasonable depth of analysis. In addition to respecting the time
and resource restraints of this research, the targeted audience will make the results directly
relevant and applicable to the DP library. This makes it possible for the research to provide
tailored recommendations pertaining to how to most effectively encourage students to adopt riskreducing behaviour when it comes to theft.
This research relates to the theory of target hardening, the process of increasing the
security of a property [or other belongings] to make it more difficult to burgle [or from theft]
(Hirschfield, Newton & Rogerson, 2010, p. 321). However, it will shift the focus from deterring
criminals from committing the crime to how potential victims perceived risk translates into a
response based, in part, on the principles of target hardening. Similarly, it will incorporate the
theoretical and applied constructs from past research to inform and guide the research process.
The proposed research will also look at information about theft at the library, and what efforts are
currently made to increase student awareness of the risks and hopefully motivate them to take the
necessary precautions. Finally, interviews will be conducted with personnel from the DP library,
members of the University of Waterloo UW Police (UW Police), and students from the university,
for diverse perspectives on this issue.
Justification and Importance
The researchers interest in this topic stems from her concern about the continuing
problem of personal theft on the UW campus and a desire to help make libraries and similar
spaces on campus areas a low-stress and low-risk environment. It may be the case that students
are aware that there is a risk to leaving their belongings unattended, but that the library is a
location where students stay long enough to encounter circumstances, such as needing a
washroom break or looking for a book that may appear low-risk enough to persuade them to
leave their valuables unattended. Although incidents of thefts are reported and investigated by the
UW Police, the onus is nevertheless on students to watch their belongings, making this research
into understanding their relevant behaviours very pertinent.
It may be tempting to place responsibility solely on students choosing to leave their
belongings unattended despite being aware of the potential risk. However, this claim ignores the
complexity of the relationship between perceived risk and precautionary behaviour. By focusing
on this relationship, it may be possible to better understand how students perceive risk, whether
and how this varies, and what factors affect their perceptions; what they do to minimize the
perceived risks; and how this influences their perceived risk. Although still focusing on students,
this research hopes to better understand students reasoning in these situations, which in turn may
help inform future theft prevention initiatives.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Connecting the proposed research to a broader literature basis allows its key concepts,
namely perceived risk, preventative action and the correlation between the two, to be understood
unconstrained by the limits of the circumstantial data collected for this study. To this end the
researcher will provide an overview of what has previously been studied. The literature reviewed
addresses both the theoretical and applied aspects, both of which are necessary to establish a
foundation for the proposed research.

Perception and Behaviour

When considering the issue of theft of personal belongings in university campus libraries,
one should first review and develop an understanding of the underlying theoretical concepts.
These concepts include the nature of perceptions relationship with behaviour and what
influences ones responses to risk. The relationship between perception and behaviour is bidirectional in terms of risk and its effect on behaviour for organizations (Deloitte, n.d.).
Managing risk depends on how one assesses and perceives both external environmental and
internal factors, such as previous experiences, memories, and knowledge (Deloitte, n.d.).
The bi-directionality between perceived risk and behaviour suggests that if people engage
in precautionary behaviour because of perceived risk, it in turn lowers that perceived risk
(Deloitte, n.d.). This new level of perceived risk will then again affect behaviour, but the nature
of the effect becomes more complex and harder to predict, not necessarily that they will take less
precautionary measures because the level of risk is seen as less, but rather that they may continue
or even further strengthen their precautionary behaviour because they feel like their original
precautionary measures paid off.
Key assumptions in research in this area include factors such as perception of high risk
increasing the likelihood of precaution adoption and that changing ones behaviour will lead to
changes in ones risk perception (Weinstein & Nicolich, 1993, p. 236). This is logical since
individuals have presumably always responded to perceived risks by altering their behavior to
reduce the risks (Tonry & Farrington, 1995, p. 8). Two main questions come from this premise:
1) Do peoples perceptions of their personal risk correctly reflect the extent to which they take
precautions or engage in risk-increasing behaviors? and 2) Do perceptions of high personal risk
cause people to adopt precautions to reduce that risk? (Weinstein & Nicolich, 1993, p. 235).
These considerations can be used to address the link between perception and behaviour,
particularly when aimed at the minimization of risk.
Weinstein and Nicolich (1993) examined correlations between perceptions and behaviour
related to risk and how researchers may incorrectly interpret these relationships, given the
dynamic relationship between these concepts. To examine this, they used a mathematical model
of precaution adoptionallowing a bidirectional relationship, focusing specifically on the
various possible correlations and any changes to them over time (1993, p. 235). They found that
perceived risk was causally correlated to subsequent behaviour changes but more indicative of
risk perception accuracy [than the] effects of perceptions on behavior (Weinstein & Nicolich,
1993, p. 244). They point out that interventions that [help people] acknowledge their risk
[encourage] safer behaviour (p. 244). However, their study was based on the risk-behaviour
relationship in relation to AIDS (Weinstein & Nicolich, 1993), which potentially limits the
applicability of their findings to other areas.
A recent significant contribution to the area of perception is that the threat of
victimization consists of three components; the emotive component (fear of crime), the cognitive
component (perceived risk), and the behavioral component (constrained behaviors) (Rader,
2004, p. 689). This three-fold conceptualization allows for a more in-depth understanding of
potential responses to threats. When testing this reconceptualized model, the perceived risk was
not associated with avoidance or defensive (i.e. constrained) behaviours although they were
related through fear of crime (Rader, May, Goodrum, 2007).
These findings were challenged by Wortman (2010), who used Rader, et al.s (2007)
theoretical model and studied perceived risk, fear of victimization, and avoidance and defensive
behaviours, using a sample drawn from the 2004 Canada General Social Survey. Following a

4
logistic regression Wortman (2010) found that perceived risk, fear of victimization and
avoidance behavior were significant predictors of defensive behaviour; perceived risk was the
weakest of these, although still statistically significant (p<.01) where individuals who saw
themselves as at risk were 2.54 times more likely to engage in defensive behaviour than those
who do not (p. 51-52). Overall, perceived risk was the most significant predicting factor for
avoidance behaviours, intended to avoid potential victimization, while defensive behaviour, to
discourage certain crimes from occurring, was predicted by avoidance behaviour (Wortman,
2010, pp. 52, 18).
Brewer and colleagues (2004) investigated three hypotheses regarding the reciprocal
relationship between risk perception and preventative behaviours:
(a) the behavior motivation hypothesis (perceptions of personal risk cause people to
take protective action), (b) the risk reappraisal hypothesis (when people take
actions thought to be effective, they lower their risk perceptions), and (c) the
accuracy hypothesis (risk perceptions accurately reflect risk behavior) (p. 125).
A longitudinal study was conducted using interviews to test these hypotheses in regards to Lyme
disease and vaccinations for it. Their findings supported all three hypotheses, and additionally
concluded that once having engaged in these protective behaviours, people will reduce their risk
judgments (Brewer et.al., 2004).
Routine Activity Theory
The link between perception and behaviour supports a turn to routine activity theory,
developed by Cohen and Felson (1979) to analyze trends and cycles in crime rates in the 1960s
and 1970s. They analyzed direct-contact predatory crime, where someone definitely and
intentionally takes or damages the person or property of another (1979, p. 589). They argued
that there must be a convergence in space and time of motivated or potential offenders, suitable
targets, and an absence of capable guardianship (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2003, p. 302).
Variation in ones routine activity will cause these elements to fluctuate and thereby affect the
risk of being victimized (Cohen & Felson, 1979). In terms of guardianship, the most effective
guardianship activities are accomplished on the individual level, not on official or institutional
levels (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2003, p. 303). Individual level guardianship activities are those
that people engage in themselves, rather than crime prevention programs instituted by university
or other officials. The significance of individuals in avoiding risk further reinforces the
importance of individual perception of risk.
Tewksburys and Mustaines (2003) review of previous findings suggested that people
who perceive their surroundings as being unsafe are more likely to use self-protection, though
actual vulnerability more significantly predicts guardianship than indirect measures of perceived
safety (p. 316). Looking at lifestyle characteristics of college and university students who use
guardianship measures they found physical proximity to potential offenders to be a very
influential aspect over the use of guardianship and that feeling fearful is not less significant as a
predictor of guardianship (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2003, p. 316). Their inclusion of lifestyle
characteristics provided a more comprehensive overview of guardianship than merely focusing
on guardianship itself.
This theory is well suited to property crime, the intentional and unlawful removal of
property belonging to another person, especially the concept of guardianship (Bennet, 1991, pp.
151). Instrumental crimes, committed for economic gain and typically rational, were associated
positively with attractiveness and accessibility of the target, the latter acting as a mediator to the
former. Bennet (1991) applied routine activities theory to a macro-structural model of 52 nations

5
spanning a 25-year period (1960-1984) (pp. 147). He found that informal controls by which
belongings are protected through surveillance and intervention are proven effective guardian
activities (p. 149). Personal behaviour (individual level informal social control) is the most
effective means of guardianship (Bennet, 1991; Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2003).
Perceived risk influences voluntary routine activities but not compulsory activities
[meaning people may] adapt daily activities under their control [emphasis in original] to explicit
calculations of perceived environmental dangers and other vulnerabilities (Rengifo & Bolton,
2012, p. 113). Thus, people will change the activities that they can in order to respond to the
perceived risk. Going to the library for studying, research, or other reasons falls under voluntary
activities, suggesting that in these situations students will rely on their perceptions of the risk of
theft as a factor to inform their decision regarding precautionary measures. Robinson (1997)
evaluated York Universitys campus using concepts of Crime Prevention Through Environmental
Design (CPTED) and found that campuses are choice targets for crime because they have both many
potential targets and offenders, and a general lack of institutional guardianship.
Rengifo and Bolton (2012) focused on individual level factors in their study of routine
activities, specifically its relation to perceived risk of crime and other forms of fear of crime
that is, emotional (worry), cognitive (risk of victimization) and environmental (perception of
disorder) (p. 105). Based on their distinction between voluntary and compulsory activities they
found that voluntary activities are [quite] fluid and that the link between greater perceptions of
risk of crime [and] more frequent voluntary routine activities suggest that respondents
normalize exposure to threatening environments (p. 113). Given that perception of risk
influences peoples voluntary routine activities, they will likely try to change their physical
environment as well. Exposure to environmental characteristics, as well as to potential offenders,
is a highly significant factor in terms of influencing self-protective measures (Tewksbury &
Mustaine, 2003). The role of environmental considerations in the relationship between ideas of
risk or safety and precautionary behaviour makes it a key element of target hardening.
Target Hardening
Target hardening is closely linked to crime prevention, as it serves primarily to provide a
set of practices useful for preventing crime through making environmental changes; that is,
changes to ones physical surroundings in order to deter crime by making it harder for potential
offenders to commit the crime (Hirschfield et. al., 2010; Newton et. al., 2008). This conception of
crime prevention is based on a proactive approach that takes place before crimes are committed
through the use of preventative measures (Robinson, 1997). In general, there are two main
tactics: risk avoidance and risk management (Skogan, 1981). These are similar to Raders (2007)
avoidance and defensive behaviours (2007). The former limits a persons exposure to potential
offenders while the latter is aimed at reducing the chances of victimization when one is exposed
to these potential offenders (Skogan, 1981, p. 730). He also points to the difference between
activities performed once and those performed repetitively (1981). Using these techniques allows
individuals to control the environment around them, to a certain extent, while simultaneously
minimizing the likelihood of crime (Robinson, 1997).
Hirschfield, Newton, and Rogerson (2010) used tenets of target hardening to analyze the
problem of domestic burglary in Liverpool by focusing on individual properties rather than larger
units of analysis, they came to the conclusion that properties that were target-hardened
experienced fewer burglaries than those not target-hardened, supporting the effectiveness of
targeting individual properties. Skogan (1981) adopted a more theoretical approach based on
behaviour and victimization. Since most crime occurs in places other than ones home, he argues

6
that researchers must focus on an inclusive conception of victimization and also argues that
research should focus on the relationship between individual differences in [peoples] routine
behavior and exposure to risk [and] their chances of being victimized (1981, p. 728).
Target hardening is part of a larger approach to situational crime prevention which is
meant to reduce both the opportunities and rewards for crime [through] surveillance, target
hardening, and environmental management (Lee, 2010, p. 263-64). It involves creating,
maintaining and manipulating ones environment to target and reduce crime (Geason &Wilson,
1988). While these principles may be applied to most types of crime, it is especially relevant for
theft (Geason & Wilson, 1988). Theft is typically instrumental in nature and more likely to be
affected by reducing the attractiveness and accessibility of potential targets than expressive
crimes such as assault (Bennet, 1991, p. 148).
Johnson, Bowers, Gamman, Mamerow, and Warnej (2010) examined the problem of theft
at cafs and bars locations that are similar in nature to libraries. At the very least, both kinds of
social places have areas with computers where people may have valuables and electronics
exposed to potential offenders. These researchers argued that cafs and bar areas are so attractive
because they offer so many opportunities for theft due to the number of people there for extended
periods of time, the distractions present in the movement of people, noise, social interaction, and
other factors, a general lack of cohesion between the people there and the transitory nature of
people there meaning strangers and offenders are likely to go unnoticed, the value in the
possessions people there have, and the anonymity for potential offenders (Johnson et.al., 2010, p.
11-12). All these factors are also present in a library setting.
Situational Crime Prevention
One way of developing crime prevention strategies is through the intersection of
criminological theory and criminal justice policy, as shown by the success of situational crime
prevention (SCP) techniques in managing crime (Lee, 2010, p. 263). SCP adopts an approach that
focuses on crime prevention by manipulating criminal opportunities through surveillance, target
hardening, and environmental management rather than targeting criminal predispositions
(Lee, 2010, p. 264). This is a result placing more importance on the situational context of
criminal events [than] understanding the principal causes of criminal predispositions (Lee, 2010,
p. 264). SCP strategies used at the individual level fall under target hardening, with making the
objects of crime less vulnerable (Clarke, 1983, p. 225; Geason & Wilson, 1988). Although
disposition is an important role in crime, there must also be a vulnerable target and an
appropriate opportunity (Clarke, 1983, p. 229). At the DP library, personal belongings out in the
open present both a tempting target and opportunity.
Tonry and Farrington (1995) identified four major prevention strategies: law
enforcement, and developmental, community, and situational prevention (p. 2). Of these,
situational prevention is most important here, as it refers to interventions designed to prevent the
occurrence of crimes, especially by reducing opportunities and increasing risks and typically
quite useful because it has immediate benefits (Tonry & Farrington, 1995, p. 2). Also important is
the idea that criminal motivation is often related to immediate opportunities rather than being
deeply rooted in individual and societal constructs (Lee, 2010, p. 263-64). While the initial
decision to offend may be caused by these latter factors, the choice of a specific target is
frequently situationally determined (Geason & Wilson, 1988).
Rational choice theory, on which situational crime prevention is based as well, presents a
view of offenders as rational decision makers who base their decision to commit a crime on an
analyses of the risks and expected profits (Geason & Wilson, 1988). Although they operate with

7
limited rationality, whereby they do not fully consider the risks associated with actions,
situational factors affect cost and benefit calculations because they are immediate indicators of
potential gains and risks (Clarke, 1983). Thus, limiting opportunities for crime and access to
targets would reduce the likelihood of crime. When looking at research on surveillance in public
areas, Clarke (1983) found that this technique resulted in reduced rates of crime
Another beneficial technique is that of environmental management, where one removes
targets of crime from the environment [or] disguise[s] opportunities for crime or make[s]
temptations less blatant (Clarke, 1983, p. 243). Depending on what behaviour students at the DP
library engage in to protect their belongings from theft, both surveillance and removal may play a
significant part of their overall protective measures. Despite the benefits of situational prevention
techniques, merely reminding people of risks of which they may already be aware seem largely
ineffective, at least when measured in terms of behavioral change (Clarke, 1983, p. 248).
Current signage in the DP library aims to do just this, but by better understanding how students
perceive the situation and in turn behave, one will be able to better create and implement crime
prevention programs.
Gaps in Research and Connections to Proposed Research
The topic studied in the currently proposed research is more narrowly focused than much
of the past research in related areas (Bennet, 1991; Brewer et.al., 2004; Geason & Wilson, 1988;
Hirschfield et.al., 2010; Rader et.al., 2007; Rengifo & Bolton, 2012; Robinson, 1997; Tawksbury
& Mustaine, 2003; Tonry & Farrington, 1995; Weinstein & Nicolich, 1993;Wortman, 2010). The
main issue is that the available literature relates to the underlying assumptions and related
premises, but very little focusses specifically on the risk-behaviour relationship in a setting like
that of the proposed research.
In order to attempt changing peoples practices, one must examine how external and
internal motivators influence their behavioural responses to risk (Deloitte, n.d.). In the proposed
research, the researcher will respect this complexity of the bi-directional relationship between
ones perception of risk and the extent to which one adopts precautionary measures as
demonstrated by the results of Deloittes (n.d.) study. Respecting this concept entails the
researcher asking participants how their perceptions of risk are formed so that the researcher may
consider their motivators. These motivators are the factors affecting the bi-directional relationship
between risk perception and precautionary behaviour and are understood by the researcher as
those influences that allow an individual to act upon their perceived risk of theft and use it to
inform their decision making in regards to mitigating that perceived risk. Since everyones
experiences are different, the factors that affect how students view the risk of theft will vary, as
well as what kinds of measures they feel are most effective.
As Bennet (1991) points out in regards to target hardening, accessibility is a key factor in
making targets attractive to potential offenders. Accessibility of valuables will play an important
role in the proposed research, as this both informs the researcher of students perceived risk and
serves as a measurable indicator of possible precautions students may take in order to minimize
the accessibility and thus desirability of their belongings. The proposed studys emphasis will be
on understanding the behaviour that results from a correlation between perceived risk and
preventative actions taken rather than on understanding the exact nature of that correlation
(Clarke, 1983; Lee, 2010; Skogan, 1981; Tonry & Farrington, 1995). The proposed research will
also be relying on the importance of opportunity (as a foundation for using precautionary
measures to protect ones belongings while at the library. If one can minimize immediate
opportunity, one can also decrease the likelihood of having ones belongings stolen.

8
Furthermore, the researchs focus on perceived risk and constrained behaviour
incorporates two of the main concepts in Raders framework of victimization (2004). Her
conceptualization demonstrates the interdependent nature of these concepts which must be taken
into consideration when researching this, or any, area one cannot simply isolate one variable
without considering the effect of other factors (Rader, 2004). Notwithstanding an appreciation of
this interdependency, it is reasonable in this research to emphasize these two factors as the degree
of fear experienced will be minimal in the case of nonviolent, non-confrontational theft which is
the subject of this research. Despite Rader and her colleagues (2007) findings that perceived risk
is not associated with constrained behaviour, the proposed research is based on an assumption
that there is such an association, which is supported by Wortmans (2010) findings.
Although meant solely as a way to address the reduction of likelihood of crime, routine
activities theorys importance to the proposed research comes from its emphasis on identifying
victimization risks and suitable targets for crime (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2003, p. 302). The
activities students engage in routinely, including their behaviour while at the DP library, affect
both their perceptions of risk and consequential behaviour. While Tewksburys and Mustaines
(2003) research did not focus on personal theft, it nevertheless has findings that can be applied to
the currently proposed research. Their finding of the importance of individual guardianship
activities is important to the proposed research since its goal is to better understand how
individuals, rather than the libraries or other institutions, act to reduce the likelihood of having
their belongings stolen. The actual effectiveness of risk reduction techniques will not be as
important as whether or not they are deemed effective by the students employing them.
The literature reviewed provides an understanding of the relationship between perceived
risk and behaviour and some potential motivators that affect this relationship. Other than
Johnsons and his colleagues 2010 study and several studies aimed at university settings or
students (Robinson, 1997; Tewksbury & Mustaine 2003), most of the research in this area is
based on geographically larger areas of study, such as neighborhoods. Indeed, some focus on the
perceived risk-behaviour is in relation to health, such as AIDS and Lyme disease, but
nevertheless offer valuable insights into this relationship (Brewer et.al., 2004; Weinstein &
Nicolich, 1993). Brewers and his colleagues hypotheses regarding the relationship between risk
perception and preventative behaviours, although based on health rather than crime prevention
(2004), are important considerations for the proposed research. All three relate to areas addressed
in the proposed researchs research questions perceptions of risk lead to protective behaviour,
precautionary measures lead to lower perceptions of risk, and to a lesser extent, that behaviour
reflects perceptions of risk (Brewer et.al., 2004).
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The proposed research will draw on past findings and research designs for support and
guidance. However, it will adopt a much narrower focus, only gathering data from the DP library
at the University of Waterloo rather than a wide-scale approach used in much of the other
research examined in the literature review. Overall, it intends to examine what factors go into
formulating students perception of risk of theft while at the library and what effect this has on
their behaviour in relation to this risk. It will be guided by the following central question: What
is the relationship between the risk of theft at the University of Waterloo Dana Porter
library and the precautionary measures students take? This overarching question will be
broken into the following research questions to help provide a more in-depth understanding of the
primary relationship being explored.

9
1. How do students at UW perceive the safety of their valuables from theft when they are at
the DP library?
2. What factors influence how students at UW perceive this risk?
3. What types of behavioural measures are most commonly used by students?
4. How do these measures affect the students perception of the risk of theft?
METHODOLOGY
To examine perceptions of risk and students behaviour, the researcher adopted a
qualitative approach. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with the UW Police,
administrative staff from the DP library, and UW students. These interviews addressed their
perceptions of risk and the students corresponding behaviour. More specifically, the researcher
looked at students perceptions of risk, how these perceptions are formed, the situational
variability of these perceptions, the precautionary measures used by the students, and how these
behaviours affect their feelings of perceived risk.
General Approach
Quantitative research emphasizes quantification in the collection and analysis of data
[with] a view of social reality as an external, objective reality (Bryman, 2008, p. 22).
Conversely, qualitative methods place their emphasis on peoples ways of organizing, relating
to, and interacting with the world, and see social reality as created and interpreted by individuals
rather than something objective to be discovered (Bryman, 2008; Guest, Namey & Mitchell,
2013, p. 1). Since perception is a subjective construct, a qualitative approach was more
appropriate to address the research questions by allowing the researcher to gain detailed accounts
of how the students interact with, and explain their surroundings. This required the students to
have the opportunity to describe relevant situations and their reactions to them. Rather than
looking for universal laws to describe an objective reality, the focus was on understanding the
students understanding of reality. Qualitative research allowed for these unique, individualized
explanations that quantitative approaches would not provide, given that the latter are rooted in
objectivism and positivism (Bryman, 2008). The proposed research was only be conducted at the
DP library on the University of Waterloo campus so that the research remained feasible given the
time constraints for completing a SOC 499 Honours Essay.
Measurement
The research relied heavily on student participants understanding of the risk of theft of
personal belongings while at the DP library. By perception of risk, or perceived risk, the
researcher referred to the level of risk that students feel in regards to the potential of having their
belongings stolen. Precautionary behaviour or measures referred to the way that students respond
to the perceived risk of theft, mainly to reduce the level of risk they feel. Although these
measures may not be effective in minimizing the actual level of risk, the researchers interest was
in how these two concepts relate to one another. The primary focus was on how perceived risk
affects students behaviour, but this relationship was understood to be reciprocal, meaning that
the precautionary measures taken may also have an impact on perceptions of risk.
Sampling and Participants
The interviews targeted three groups: library administrators, UW Police, and UW
students. Although the main focus was on the students, the other groups were included in order to

10
gain a more holistic understanding of the problem of theft at the library and students responses to
that issue. As the primary group of interest, students were targeted because they are the primary
patrons of the DP library. Although it is not only students that go to the library, the fact that DP is
located on the UW campus supported the focus on this demographic group. Conducting several
interviews with students provided multiple accounts of the relationship between perceived risk
and precautionary behaviour. The information from these interviews was supplemented with the
perspectives from the DP library staff and UW Police. Participants were selected using nonprobability sampling. Convenience sampling was used because the findings of the proposed
research are not meant to be generalizable and relied on a small sample size not intended to be
representative of the larger population of students (Bryman, 2008, p. 183; Guest, Namey &
Mitchell, 2013). The researcher interviewed three UW students and one person each from the
UW Police and DP library staff.
The interviews took place during the start of the Winter 2015 university term. The
recruitment occurred at the beginning of the term so that the researcher was able to collect and
analyze the data by the end of the term. Both the DP library and UW Police were contacted
directly by the researcher to ask for an interview with representatives (Appendix A). To recruit
students, the researcher placed recruitment flyers (Appendix B) approved by the UWs Office of
Research Ethics and permitted by the DP library administration, containing a brief description of
the research and the researchers contact information, in the librarys caf area. More flyers were
placed in the Student Life Centre (SLC), after approval from the universitys Turnkey Desk. As
only three students were required, the researcher conducted interviews with the first three who
responded and voluntarily consented to be interviewed.
Data Collection
The questions in the interviews addressed both main concepts, as well as the ways in
which they relate to each other. They asked students to think about and provide information about
how they perceive the risk of theft and then about their behaviours to reduce this risk this
information is based on the participants subjective judgment. A representative from the DP
library and the UW Police was also interviewed. However, rather than measuring their perceived
risk and precautionary behaviour, these interviews were intended to gather information about the
problem of theft at the library and current efforts to combat it from their respective viewpoints.
Semi-structured interviews were well suited to this research because they provided the
advantages of having a set structure to follow but also the possibility to probe into responses [to]
obtain more detailed descriptions and explanations of experiences, behaviours, and beliefs
(Guest, Namey & Mitchell, 2013, p. 21). As unanticipated topics may arise during interviews that
may be further explored, the use of open-ended questions allow interviewees to respond using
their own words rather than being constrained by fixed responses (Guest, Namey & Mitchell,
2013). More structured interviews limit this exploration and are better suited to research that
seeks to compare things or to areas that are already well understood (Guest, Namey & Mitchell,
2013, p. 136). A semi-structured interview structure was well suited for this research because the
relationship between perceived risk and precautionary behaviour in a campus library has not been
well examined previously and this approach allowed the researcher to explore the concepts being
studied.
In terms of the interview questions, the participants were asked questions from distinct
thematic areas, although there were some overlap. The interview questions were based on the
research questions (listed at the end of the Literature Review). The interview questions can be
found in Appendices C-E. The interview questions for the representatives from the DP library

11
(Appendix C) and UW Police (Appendix D) were meant to contextualize theft at the DP library,
current efforts to combat it, and students interview (Appendix E) responses. The interviews with
the students were between 20-25 minutes and took place in one of DP Librarys Group Study
Rooms, as this location offers privacy and convenience for the interviewee. One student
interview was conducted in the students residence for her convenience. The interview with the
representative from the DP library was shorter, around 15-20 minutes, as these questions did not
probe as deeply into personal experiences the students did. The interview with the representative
from the UW Police was conducted via email. All interviews, except for the one done over email,
were audio-recorded so that they could be transcribed participants were made aware of this
before giving their consent (Appendices F and G).
The interview questions with the representative from the DP library (Appendix C) focused
primarily on background information about theft of personal belongings at the library and
existing anti-theft measures, such as signs encouraging their patrons to keep close watch of their
valuables. Interview questions 1-2 were based on the issue of theft at the library and efforts to
minimize the likelihood of this occurring, while questions 3-5 addressed the librarys engagement
with students to minimize the risk of theft through measures taken by the students. The
representative from the UW Police was asked about the rates of theft specifically at the DP
library, factors significant in contributing to instances of theft, and the effectiveness of various
precautionary techniques (Appendix D). For this interview, questions 1-3 related to information
about theft at DP library and the factors that contribute to its occurrence, and questions 4 and 5
were aimed at the UW Polices recommendations for precautionary measures for students.
The three interviews with students were the most in-depth and collected data pertinent to
all of the research questions (Appendix E). Students were asked to describe how they perceive
the risk of having their personal belongings, such as valuable electronics, stolen while at the DP
library and what factors have contributed to this view. They were also asked about what kind of
behavioural precautionary measures they engage in to reduce that risk, and in what ways.
Additionally, they were asked what effect this behaviour has on their perception of the risk.
Questions 1-3 for the student interviews addressed the first research question, questions 4 and 5
related to the second research question, questions 6 and 7 addressed the third research question,
and question 8 was linked to the fourth research question.
Data Analysis
The interviews were transcribed and the material coded based on the concepts underlying
the research questions. As the interviews for each student consisted of the same questions, this
approach to coding allowed the research to form meaningful categories. For the interviews with
representatives from the DP library and UW Police the researcher went through the transcribed
material and draw out the relevant background information about theft at the campus and library.
The interviews with students were coded thematically in Microsoft Word using the comment
function based on the concepts targeted in the research questions perceptions of risk and
precautionary behaviour, as well as the interplay between them (Appendix H). When discussing
the findings, the researcher described the context and circumstances of the issue with the
information from the DP library staff and UW Police, then went through the students responses
and experiences to come to an understanding of the relationship between the main concepts.
Ethics
The proposal for this study was submitted for ethics approval to University of Waterloo
Office of Research Ethics. No harm to the participants was expected. The interview questions did

12
not pose any physical, psychological, or other risks to the participants. The topic being studied
did not deal directly with sensitive areas, although talking about past experiences or measures
taken may be uncomfortable for the interviewees. Before starting the interviews the researcher
gave all participants a Letter of Information (Appendices F and G) that outlined the purpose of
the study, what was being looked at, the role of the participants, and emphasized that they may
withdraw from the study at any time during the interview, in which case the data collected to that
point would have been destroyed.
Prior to conducting the interview, the researcher ensured informed consent by providing
information about the concepts being studied and the data collection and analysis procedures, and
for the dissemination of findings. All participants were given time to read the Letter of
Information fully and given the opportunity to ask questions. After this they signed a Informed
Consent Form (Appendix I) that re-stated the ethical considerations and provisions for
confidentiality, anonymity, and voluntary participation. As the researcher is an undergraduate
student at UW, with similar authority as the participants, there was no undue influence over the
potential participants. No deception was used as part of this study, as this was not necessary. The
contextual information concerning this research was not anticipated to influence the participants
responses and thus was disclosed prior to consent. The participants also received a Feedback
Letter (Appendix J) detailing the purpose of the study and giving them the researchers and
supervisors contact information in case of questions or concerns after the interview.
Several measures were taken to ensure confidentiality of the data collected. The signed
Informed Consent Forms were kept separate from the other data in the researchers locked room
to prevent any unauthorized person from being able to associate an Informed Consent Form with
its respective interview information. Anonymity was protected, to the extent possible, for the UW
Police and DP library interview categories, as each representative was drawn from a rather small
population. These interviewees will be identified by their titles in the Findings and Discussion for
ease of comprehension. The audio-recordings of the interviews and the transcribed interviews
were stored on an encrypted USB flash drive and the data was only handled by the primary
researcher. As a SOC 499 Honours Essay, this study was conducted only by the researcher
without the aid of outside transcribers or coders. All data will be retained for a period of one year
and then destroyed.
FINDINGS
The findings from all five interviews create a narrative of the issue at hand, covering the
background of the issue and current countermeasures, and provide insight into students
understanding of the risk and the methods by which they attempt to reduce the risk themselves.
The researcher interviewed a Special Constable (S/Cst) from the UW Police and the Head of
Circulation Services (HCS) at the DP library for background information about theft at the library
and current efforts to combat it from their respective perspectives. In the three interviews with
UW students, they shared their experiences in relation to being in the library, their feelings
regarding the risk of theft, and what measures they use to mitigate it. After transcribing the
individual interviews, the researcher coded each based on the main themes and outlined each
participants responses based upon their applicability to the two main areas of interest,
perceptions of risk and precautionary behaviour. Due to the small sample size, this approach
allowed for a more in-depth understanding of the participants experiences.
Background Information: UW Police

13
In order to better understand students perceptions in regards to the risk of their
belongings being stolen while at the DP library, one must understand the context of the issue at
hand. The S/Cst from the UW Police provided information about the background of theft at the
DP library and the UW Polices efforts to combat this problem. Of the 707 criminal incidents on
campus to which the UW Police responded in 2013, 52.4%, or 371 incidents, were property
thefts, with a large number of these occurring at the two main campus libraries, DP and Davis
Centre. As can be seen in Table 1.0, there was a spike in the rate of thefts in the Fall 2013 term,
from Sept. 2013 - Dec. 2013, with 23 thefts. Aside from this, the rates have been relatively low,
except for the periods of Sept. 2011 Dec. 2011, during which 39 thefts were reported, and Jan.
2012 Apr. 2012, which witnessed 22 thefts. More generally, the last three years have seen fairly
low rates of theft, with none in the Winter 2014 term up to the date of the interview. In terms of
the objects stolen, laptops and cellphones are the most typical targets. This may be due, in part, to
students being less likely to report the theft of less valuable items, as indicated in the interviews
conducted with students. Incidents occur throughout the library, and are not localized to any
specific area within the building.
Table 1.0 Thefts at the Dana Porter and Davis Centre Library
Dates
# of Thefts Trends
Sept. 2011 Dec. 2011
39
Majority in November, continuing into December
Jan. 2012 Apr. 2012
22
No discernable trend, thefts occur regularly
May 2012 Aug. 2012
8
Majority at the end of July, none in August
Sept. 2012 Dec. 2012
10
Majority in the middle of October
Jan. 2013 Apr. 2013
14
Majority during April
May. 2013 - Aug. 2013
8
Majority during May
Sept. 2013 - Dec. 2013
23
Majority during October, continuing into December
Jan. 2014 Apr. 2014
7
Majority in end of January, beginning of March and
middle of April
May 2014 Aug. 2014
4
No obvious trend
Sept. 2014 Dec. 2014
2
One at the start of term, one at the end of term
Jan. 2015 Feb. 8, 2015
0

The S/Cst also discussed factors he has found significant in contributing to the likelihood
of theft. As violent theft in which students belongings are physically stolen are quite uncommon,
the most important factor in increasing the likelihood of belongings being stolen is whether they
are left unattended, as this presents the opportunity for a thief to steal someones articles with
ease and escape undetected. He attributes the common student perception of the low risk of theft
to a sense of community, whereby students do not feel that leaving their belongings unattended
poses a significant risk, even if the item is a valuable electronic, as they may not feel that fellow
students would steal their belongings. Although he stated that he would characterize the UW
campus as very safe, he can recall on my patrols through the libraries earlier in my career it was
not unusual to see a significant number of high value electronics left unattended throughout the
libraries [but] I can say this number has diminished over the past years. He also described many
students as surprised when told that thefts are an issue and that leaving their belongings
unattended significantly increased the risk of that happening.
Based on his experiences, he recommends three main strategies for students in relation to
this issue. Most importantly, they should either take their belongings with them or to ask someone

14
they trust, such as friend, to watch them whenever they leave their space in the library. If theft
does occur, students should report it, since property is often recovered and can only be returned to
its owner if the theft has been reported. Also, he encourages students to report suspicious
behaviour so that the UW Police can respond and investigate. In terms of ineffective measures, he
mentioned that asking strangers to watch belongings offers no guarantees, as they themselves
may take advantage of unattended belongings. Placing belongings in ones backpack is also risky,
as the thief can now just take your whole backpack.
The following six initiatives run by the UW Police are meant to increase awareness of
theft and promote the use of appropriate caution:
1) A short animated video entitled Secure It, depicting the theft of a laptop left
unattended and followed by a warning not to leave belongings unattended unless they
can be secured. The video is available on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=GBnTxdHY_s), and is shown during exam periods on UW Retail Services TV
screens.
2) A colour Stop Theft poster (Appendix K), in collaboration with the UW Libraries,
reminding people not to leave their belongings unattended, is distributed throughout
the library during exam periods and in high traffic areas across the campus.
3) The poster from the previous initiative has been included in a series of posters on
public safety displayed on FEDS poster boards since January 2015.
4) Regular public safety messaging, including theft prevention, through Student Success
Office social media.
5) Weekly crime reports in the Imprint newspaper and UW Police website to increase
awareness.
6) Regular presentations on this topic by UW Police Officers across campus.
The decline in thefts since the start of these initiatives, although not necessarily caused by them,
suggests that they have had some influence. One benefit of these initiatives is that they are quite
concise and designed for maximum visibility across campus and retention by students. This is
done in conjunction with regular patrols in the library in order to increase the visible police
presence to both students and potential thieves.
Background Information: Dana Porter Library
The researcher also interviewed the Head of Circulation Services (HCS) from Dana Porter
library, in regards to library initiatives targeting theft of student belongings and their perspectives
on students own understanding of the risk. Although the degree to which theft of student
belongings at the library is a problem may be difficult to quantify, he feels that it is definitely a
problem, as he personally sees how devastating it is for students to lose their valuables such as
laptops through his work at the library. His assessment is predicated on an assumption that all
students who lose something valuable would report it to the UW Police. Regardless of the actual
rates of theft, which may be higher, the number of reported incidents, especially from the period
two years ago, makes this a significant issue that the library is eager to minimize.
The staff at the DP library has, and continues to, address the issue of theft of student
belongings through several initiatives, as they are pretty keen on helping students help
themselves by being more aware. Several years ago they started selling Kensington locks
through the vending machines for students to secure their laptops, and simultaneously encouraged
their use through signage. Although the library has not tracked how many of these locks have
been sold, this nevertheless represents the effort invested into encouraging students to take
measures to protect their belongings. The sixth floor also has lockers for students to use while

15
they are away from the area they using. They have also worked with the organizers of Single
and Sexy (a play performed annually during Orientation by Waterloo students that addresses the
potentially new situations students may face at university) to incorporate a warning about this
issue.
There have also been substantial efforts to increase the signage programs run by the UW
Police over the last several years. In particular, the S/Cst the researcher interviewed has been
working with the library over the last two years to help them reduce the thefts in the library, with
the result of their signage becoming more proactive. The Stop Theft poster is displayed not the
digital screens and throughout the library in different places each term and then [they] take it
down and put it up again to try and keep it fresh and top of mind. A similar approach is the
librarys efforts to place signs (Appendix L) in the study carrels throughout the term in instances
where the shelving staff see unattended belongings. This serves to remind students that their
belongings are vulnerable.
When asked what measures he would like to see in place without limitations of time and
money, the HCS said one potential idea is to install some sort of locking mechanism on every
table and study carrel. The problem with such a project is that students would likely use that to
retain their spot, especially during busy times at the library. To combat that, the library staff
would need access to the locks so that, with appropriate policies, they could remove unattended
and locked laptops after a set period of time and keep it in a secure area for pickup. Such
problems exist currently as well, as students may lock down their laptops with their own locks so
they may leave for several hours and reserve their space.
Apart from the efforts of the library to reduce the risk of theft, the HCS also offered
insight into his understanding of students perception of the risk. Based on his experiences, he
feels that while some students do have a good idea of the risk of theft, others do not. He told the
researcher that he is often surprised at students lack of concern about the safety of their
belongings when leaving their seat to purchase food or use the washroom. He attributes this to
their personal experiences:
only way I can think of it is that theyve grown up in a safe environment, theyre at school
and they think its a safe environment theyre busy studying and going to get coffee and
food and its kind of like its their dorm. They treat the library like that but its not that
secure.
The three measures he recommended for students to minimize the risk to their belongings are for
them to take them with them when they go somewhere, secure them, or study with a friend so
that they will be able to watch the belongings if one has to leave for a while. Asking strangers to
watch ones belongings is not advised as there is no guarantee that that person is trustworthy or
will be able to prevent a theft from occurring. While he understands the dilemma in not wanting
to lose ones space while studying, the HCS feels that many times students do not truly
understand the real risk of theft until they are personally victimized by it.
Student Perceptions of Risk and Use of Precautionary Measures
All three student interviewees reported that the main purpose for going to the library is to
study. Felicity1 said that she enjoys going there because therere lots of people around so youre
forced to concentrate and it motivates you, but also that she usually takes her laptop and phone
along whenever she goes. Increased ability to concentrate in the library, specifically the quiet
1 Pseudonym chosen by participant

16
nature of the study carrels on the upper floors, was cited by Daria2, although she typically only
brings her notes and no electronics, while Molly3 finds it most convenient to study there during
awkward gaps between classes.
There were differences in the level of risk that the three participants perceived while at the
library, ranging from no perceived risk felt by Molly as a result of using precautionary measures;
Felicity seees theft as a definite concern while the third student interviewed, Daria, offered a
quantifiable level of risk of theft as about 80%. All three students had specific reasons for their
perceptions. While Molly does not perceive much risk to herself, she feels that situations where
people leave their belongings unattended present a significant level of risk as this creates the
opportunity for theft. She argued that this risk is exacerbated at times when the library is busier,
in opposition to Felicity who felt that the off-season poses a higher risk to students. Darias
specific level of risk is mainly predicated on situations where she brings her laptop to the library
to study. Despite this, she mentioned that she feels that a large number of students hold the view
that theres a smaller risk because were all students here so theres more a sense of community
maybe. Theres a level of trust where you know people.
The interviewees also offered information about the reasons that may motivate people to
steal. These factors stem in part from the way the participants view the issue of theft, as a way of
understanding the issue in a deeper and more complex way than merely addressing how they feel
about the level of risk. Felicity generally feels that some people would see stealing as an
adventure to see if they could get away with it, but more frequently, it comes down to taking
advantage of a present opportunity. The cost of university is also a factor, as it is expensive and
a lot of people struggle to pay for everything, like tuition, rent, food, books. Daria similarly
cited this as a factor, saying that its mainly that if there are things out in the open then people
would have more opportunity to steal it. However, Molly brought in the argument that while
people may face financial strain, she believes that some people just have different morals.
Although perceptions of risk are important for this research, so is how these perceptions
have changed through the students time at the university. With more time spent at the university,
ones understanding increases, and in Felicitys opinion become more accurate. During her first
year she did not really believe that people would do this, as the risk of theft was quite low in the
town she grew up in. It was only during the second term of her first year, when she started going
to the library to study, that she saw the warning signs, including the Stop Theft poster, there
and heard people discussing their experiences of theft. The signs in the library and the study
carrels were also quite influential for Daria, as they served as a warning for her and have caused
her to be more careful in watching her belongings since starting university.
To offset these increasing perceptions of risk is Mollys response that her view has not
changed significantly during her time at university, although this may be because her high school
was super sketchy and things would get stolen all the time so nothing really surprises [her]. The
perceived level of risk also depends on the value of the belongings left unguarded a wallet or
laptop would be a more attractive target and thus more important to keep safe. Despite this, the
interviewees reported often seeing people leave their laptop at the desk while they go, while they
stated that they do not feel that that would necessarily lead to theft when there are a lot of other
people around because theyll know that its not your [the person taking it] laptop and they
might say something.
2 Pseudonym chosen by participant
3 Pseudonym chosen by participant

17
The similarities in the student participants perceptions of risk were continued in their
employment of precautionary measures, though nuances still exist. Responses about their use of
such measures were closely tied to the effect of those measures on their perception of risk. The
most common strategy was addressing their concern over the threat of theft by taking everything
along rather than leaving their belongings unattended if leaving to get something to drink or to
use the washroom. By taking all the precautions they reasonably can, taking everything with
them whenever they goes somewhere, they feels that they do not have to worry about the threat
of theft and rushing back to their spot. It is because of this that they feel there is a minimal risk of
theft this was typically mentioned right while outlining their use of precautions. One said that
after one of her friends had her own laptop stolen at another university, she is always careful to
bring everything along. I dont like to take the risk, especially when she brings her laptop to
study.
Although there appeared to be a consensus on the utility of this precaution, the
interviewees also admitted to sometimes leaving some of their belongings for short periods of
time. Doing so was justified by its necessity to saving ones spot during busy times such as
midterm season or during exams, or the belief that its probably not that [interviewees
emphasis] bad if you go for shorter times than for longer periods. Felicity stated that while she
knows that many people will ask someone else at the library to watch their things if they have to
go somewhere, she is not overly fond of that strategy because they might be the ones to take your
belongings. This latter strategy was deemed as more of a psychological measure because youve
kind of made a connection with them because youve already talked to them, even though they
arent necessary trustworthy.
There was however also a divide between the perceived effectiveness of doing this
depending on who the person ones asks to watch ones belongings is. While asking friends to
watch ones belongings was seen to be a good way to reduce risk of theft, asking strangers to do
so does not do much to reduce the risk of theft as reducing anxiety; I think its more of a mental
thing where people feel [interviewees emphasis] like their belongings are less likely to be stolen
than if no-one is looking after them. Despite this, taking ones belongings along was nevertheless
seen as the better precaution; if you have it in your hands the entire time, it wont get stolen, an
attitude based on minimizing the opportunity for theft. These precautionary measures have not so
much been taught, as growing naturally out of students perceptions of risk and being informed
by experiences and hearing of others victimization.
Surprisingly, all three of the students interviewed had a lot to say about the signage at the
library as a factor in how they feel about the risk of theft. In terms of the effect they have on
perception and behaviour, they alert people to the possibility of having things stolen. In regards to
the signs at the library warning people, they have really noticed them over the last two years or
so, seeing them as a red flag indicating that this is a problem at the library. Felicity attributed
much of her awareness to the extensive signage at the library: I have noticed there are a bunch
of little slips in the cubicles and then the bigger Stop Theft signs put all over. Theyre very
vocal about warning you. The signs placed in the study carrels (Appendix L) are beneficial, as it
very concretely draws students attention to the issue of theft by informing them that if it were a
thief rather than the staff member who had spotted the unattended belongings they would not be
gone. Despite this, not everyone found them to be very influential. One of the respondents did say
that they have not changed her views because she already took such measures before seeing
them.
Given the correlation between the precautionary techniques used and reduction in
perceived risk, it is only logical that the students interviewed plan to continue using their current

18
stratifies. A commonality in the responses is that taking ones belongings along if leaving ones
spot at the library eliminates or severely reduces the risk of theft. All student interviewees agreed
that they keep doing so while at university because they have not had anything stolen yet.
Although Daria understands that people may not want to pack up everything when they go,
especially during busy times when they might not find another spot, she personally plans to keep
doing this because it eliminates it altogether. It makes me feel more confident, it eliminates the
fear. This illustrates the importance of perceived risk in leading students to adopt precautionary
measures.
DISCUSSION
Relationship to Research Questions
Based on the findings from these five interviews, it is clear that the issue of theft, although it is
significantly lower than the high rates two years ago, continues to be an area of concern and
interest. Both the UW Police and the DP library have undertaken several attempts to increase
student awareness of theft and how they can reduce the risk. The students interviewed indicated
that they are aware of the risk they face and do their best to minimize it by taking their
belongings with them if they have to leave the spot they are at in the library. To answer the
question of what the relationship between the risk of theft at the DP library and the precautionary
measures students take is, the findings suggest that perceptions of risk form the basis of decisions
on how to handle situations where students must leave their spot in the library.
The main reported reason for going to the library to study is certainly not the only reason
to go to the library, but it does increase the chances of students bringing items such as their
laptops and staying for longer periods of time during which they leave periodically, as opposed to
coming in to search for books or check their email. All of the student interviewees indicated a
relatively low risk of theft, although this was linked to their use of precautionary measures. While
growing up with different experiences and views on the risk of theft, they have all become more
aware of the risk of theft during their time at the university, helped by the initiatives run by the
UW Police and DP library. The students are typically very careful to take everything with them
because of this.
For factors increasing the likelihood of theft, the value of belongings and length of time
were both listed as variables that interact with the risk of merely leaving things unattended. While
there was no consensus on whether busy times at the library presented higher or lower risk, there
was agreement that the opportunity for theft greatly increases the chances of it happening. The
fact that two of the three students interviewed said that their perceived risk of theft has increased
since they have started university, suggests that there is a need to address student awareness of
this issue early on. Interesting too was that there appeared to be a more nuanced understanding of
the reasons why people engage in theft, implying that students do think about this issue more
deeply than just whether it occurs.
Much of the currently low risk of becoming a victim of theft at the library felt by students
is due to the precautionary measures to use all those interviewed reported that their current
reported perceptions where due to their usage of such measures. Most common, done by all three,
was to take everything along when they have to get up and leave this measure was also deemed
as the best way to prevent theft by the S/Cst and HCS. Both Daria and Molly also indicated that
they sometime ask a friend to watch their things. However, none said they ever leave their things
alone, an encouraging finding given that this will decrease the likelihood they will have anything
stolen because it reduces the opportunity. This commonality suggests that they have made a link

19
between exposure and victimization, supported by the assertion that they were not really taught to
do this by anyone, but rather than this behaviour comes naturally as a way to minimize the
chance of losing precious belongings.
Both the S/Cst. and HSC mentioned being surprised at many students apparent lack of
awareness of the risk of theft. While the finding that taking ones belongings along when going
somewhere is seen as a good measure to protect them from being stolen was expected, the student
respondents went beyond this to say that doing this is, at least for them, the logical thing to do.
Felicity said she did not learn to do that from any particular person, but that it just seems like the
logical thing to do to. Molly especially often referred to doing this as basically common sense,
saying that if you just take your stuff with you and are smart about things youre not gonna get
your stuff stolen. The false sense of security many students hold as a result of seeing the
campus, and specifically the DP library, as a risk free community makes them vulnerable to theft.
From these student interviews, one can see that this limited understanding of the risk may not be
as widespread as it may appear to be.
One interesting finding not directly tied to the relationship between perceived risk and
behaviour was the impact of personal or sentimental content that may be lost. The HCS at the DP
library pointed out that for many students, the devastation of losing their schoolwork and
personal content often outweighs the loss of the laptop or whatever it is that they lost. Although
none of the students interviewed have had their laptop or anything of similar value stolen,
personal content played a significant part in their perceptions. Daria stated that its not just
school work, theres also sentimental stuff like picture that you cant get back. Molly voiced a
similar concern, saying that often-times its the content too thats more valuable. If someone
stole my entire notes Id be devastated. You spend a lot of time on that and you cant replace that
stuff like a laptop. Given the value of both physical belongings and the non-tangible and equally
valuable processions, the importance of minimizing theft is once again clear.
As mentioned above, taking belongings along when leaving ones spot is a common
strategy, and one that indicates a strong reciprocal relationship between perceived risk and
precautionary measures. The measures taken by the students have a strong effect on their
perception of risk, not surprising given that they explicitly stated that it is because of the
perceived risk that they engage in these precautions. Thus, it is also not surprising that they plan
to continue using these measures. Stepping back to take a look at the larger context in which
these students operate, managing risk while at the DP library is only one aspect of their lives, but
an extremely important one nonetheless.
Findings in Context of Existing Research
Much of the past research on the area of perceived risk, use of precautionary behaviour,
and the relationship between them has been rather theoretical (Skogan, 1981), aimed at
understanding peoples engaging in high risk behaviour (Weinstein & Nicolich, 1993) or in
relation to health (Brewer et.al., 2004). A significant part has looked at similar areas to that in the
current research, but typically in larger settings, while the current data offers a more targeted
approach. As discussed preciously, it applies broader existing idea and concepts and examined
them within a quote focused context one university campus library. While part of this was due
to the constraints of the research, it also allowed the researcher to study a localized setting and to
focus on the reciprocal relationship between perceptions of risk and precautionary behaviour and
how students experiences have shaped their motivations and behaviour.
Like Robinson (1997), the current research focused on a university, although it took a
more targeted approach than Robinsons examination of the entire York Universitys campus.

20
While Robinson argued that the multitude of targets and potential offenders, combined with a
lack of guardianship make campuses vulnerable, the current research suggests that within that
context, libraries present an even higher-risk environment for theft, an argument supported by the
significant portion of the property crimes on campus that occur there, as reported by the S/Cst.
The HCS stated that what makes the library attractive for potential thieves is the number of
people and often chaotic social elements; if you think you can blend in a get away with it. The
campus is a good target, different places on campus, not just the library, but, yeah. If youre
carrying a knapsack no one thinks anything of it; you could have four other peoples laptops in
it.
As discussed and explored by Wortman (2004), perceived risk and constrained behaviour,
seen in use of precautionary measures, are difficult to study in isolation. Students perceived risk
was associated with their use of avoidance behaviours, or precautionary measures, meant to avoid
victimization the students interviewed take their belongings with them if they must leave their
spot in the DP library to this end. In fact, when first asked about their perceived risk of theft, all
students said mentioned that the low levels they experienced was due to the precautions they
took. Further linking the research findings to Wortmans, and by extension Raders, own research,
is the idea of fear of crime. Although the students did not report actively being afraid of the
possibility of theft, their responses indicate that using precautionary measures reduces both the
likelihood of theft as well as the eliminating the fear. Very clear is that perception and
behaviour, as suggested by Deloitte (n.d.), exist within a bi-directional relationship. Students
use precautionary measures as a response to their perceived risk, which in turn lowers that risk to
the perceived effectiveness of those measures, expressing the risk appraisal hypothesis (Brewer
et.al., 2004)
The factor of target accessibility discussed in the literature review was also seen as
something that greatly increases the likelihood of theft. The S/Cst stated that the risk associated
with leaving ones belongings unattended exists because it presents the opportunity for a thief to
steal someones articles with ease and escape undetected. The students also mentioned
minimizing the opportunity for theft as a key motivator for them to take precautionary measures;
some people will just take advantage of the opportunity if its there. Individual guardianship
(Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2003) of belongings is important here, as the UW Police and DP library
run initiatives are designed to increase awareness and student use of individual guardianship, and
all three students interviewed stated that this is a key way to prevent ones belongings from being
stolen. Tewksburys and Mustaines (2003) notion of a necessary convergence in space and time
of motivated or potential offenders, suitable targets, and an absence of capable guardianship (p.
302) was targeted through the interview questions and supported, at least theoretically, in the
findings.
The main activities targeted for examination are those of individual guardianship as
opposed to those on an institutional level (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2003). Although the UW
Police and DP Library do support guardianship through their initiatives, it ultimately comes down
to students to protect their belongings, as going to the library falls under the category of
voluntary routine activity doing so is under their control (Rengifo & Bolton, 2012). The actual
effectiveness of the precautionary measures students use is not as important as whether or not
they are seen as effective. The students interviewed reported that they do indeed view them in
this manner which is the reason for relying on them, but the S/Cst and HCS also pronounced
these measures effective at reducing the changes of theft.
The initiatives that are targeted at helping students realize the very real risk and to take
appropriate action are fundamentally based on the idea of minimizing the immediate opportunity

21
for theft (Lee, 2010) reducing exposure will subsequently theft, as there must be a a vulnerable
target and an appropriate opportunity (Clarke, 1983, p. 229). Taking ones belongings along,
asking a friend to watch these belongings, or even using the lockers provided by the DP library
takes away both elements. This overall approach is quite proactive, similar to target hardening,
but only part of the larger plan which includes reactively dealing with any thefts that do occur. Of
these two approaches, the proactive one was deemed more effective by the S/Cst, as it facilitates
prevention.
CONCLUSIONS
The questions this research sought to address were answered, at least in a preliminary
fashion, and offering an understanding of theft of student belongings at the library, both as to how
this is a problem and is being addressed, and how students relate to this issue. The findings can
also be examined in relation to the conclusions from previous studies, as they appear to support
one another. However, it is also important to consider the limitations of the current research and
the implications of the findings for the issue as it exists currently, as well as for policy and future
research.
Limitations
The main limitation on the findings from this research is that only three students were
interviewed, an unavoidable situation given the time and resource constraints of the research as
part of an Honours Essay. All three were female and upper year students, but this is not
necessarily problematic as the researcher is more interested personal accounts than representative
findings that may be generalized to the entire student body. To do this, a much larger sample
would be needed this will also permit potential comparisons between other university libraries,
both in Waterloo and other cities. Despite this, the findings from the interviews offer an
interesting view into students understandings and conduct, especially given that theft continues
to be a problem, although steps have been taken to minimize that trend with a promising decrease
in number of thefts. The small number of interviews is not as problematic for the background
information from the UW Police and library representative, as each were able to give a
comprehensive overview of their respective views on the issue and current initiatives. While
conducting the student interviews, the researcher also found that the answers to early questions
were often linked with answers to following questions this did not affect the quality of the data
as much as raise considerations on how to construct potentially more effective interview
questions.
Implications
The findings from this research indicate that theft of student belongings at the DP library
is important to consider to because it is a legitimate and current problem. Although the rates of
theft per term are lower at the present time, it continues to be a threat. The students interviewed
demonstrated an awareness of the risk and willingness to take counter-measures, but the frequent
observation of unattended belongings and unaware students by the S/Cst and HCS suggests that
is still a range in regards to this issue. While some students have an exceptional understanding of
theft and how to reduce the likelihood of it happening to them and others do now, there will many
who fall in between these two extremes. Even in the data collected several mentions of observed
ineffective measures points to existence of this middle range, such as relying on strangers to
watch ones belongings.

22
For policy, the findings from this research support a continued effort on the part of the
UW Police and DP library to target student awareness. Understanding what motivates people to
look after their belongings is important because that can then be used to change or improve
initiatives, to target both students new to the university and those who have at the university for
some time. The signs currently at the library are having the intended effect on students and their
understanding of the risk, although this cannot be automatically generalized to the entire student
population. However, its acknowledgement by the students interviewed suggests that it may have
a larger impact on students than some of the other initiatives outlined by the S/Cst and HCS.
Thus, it may be more strategic to concentrate resources on this type of initiative as it offers more
influence over students awareness and precautionary behaviour. Although this research
preliminarily supports such a shift in policy, additional research into the effects of the various
initiatives would provide more concrete conclusions.
Future Research
Despite the promising results in terms of student use of precautionary measures to guard
their belongings, the discrepancy between what the students interviewed reported in regards to
their behaviour, and the S/Cst.s and HCSs experiences seeing unattended belongings and talking
to students seemingly unaware of the risk warrants further investigation. As suggested above
when outlining limitations, further research should attempt to recruit more student participants, in
order to open the possibility for a wider range of accounts and student experiences. When doing
so, adopting quantitative methods, or even a mixed methods methodology, may prove beneficial
in so far that a large amount of data may be gathered about the issue, although caution should be
exercised here as this may simultaneously limit the range and depth of data available. The
attention given to the warning signage at the library by students in their interviews also supports a
closer examination of the relationship between these signs and the precautionary behaviour of
students, as well as the effectiveness of various initiatives in comparison to one another.
Regardless of the methodology and specific focus in future research, it is important to understand
that simply because the rates of theft have been low over the last two years, efforts to increase
awareness, and student efforts must continue in order to maintain this.

23
References
Bennett, R.R. (1991). Routine Activities: A Cross-National Assessment of a Criminological
Perspective. Social Forces, 70(1), 147-163.
Brewer, N., Weinstein, N., Cuite, C., & Herrington, J. (2004). Risk Perceptions and Their
Relation to Risk Behavior. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 27(2), 125-130.
Bryman, A. (2008). Social Research Methods (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Clarke, R.V. (1983). Situational Crime Prevention: Its Theoretical Basis and Practical Scope.
Crime and Justice, 4, 225-256.
Cohen, L.E. and Felson, M. (1979). Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity
Approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588-608.
Geason, S. and Wilson, P.R. (1988). Crime Prevention: Theory and Practice. Canberra,
Australia. Australian Institute of Criminology.
Guest, G., Namey, E., & Mitchell, M. (2013). Collecting Qualitative Data: A Field Manual for
Applied Research. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Hirschfield, A., Newton, A., & Rogerson, M. (2010). Linking Burglary and Target Hardening at
the Property Level: New Insights Into Victimization and Burglary Protection. Criminal
Justice Policy Review, 21(3), 319337.
Johnson, S. D., Bowers, K. J., Gamman, L., Mamerow, L., & Warne, A. (2010). Thefts of
customers personal property in cafs and bars. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
Lee, D. (2010). Understanding and Applying Situational Crime Prevention Strategies. Criminal
Justice Policy Review, 21(3), 263268.
Newton, A., Rogerson, R., & Hirschfield, A. (2008). Relating Target Hardening to Burglary Risk
Experiences from Liverpool. Papers from the British Criminology Conference, 8, 153
174.
Oltedal, S., Moen, B.-E., Klempe, H., and Rundmo, T. (2004). Explaining risk perception: An
evaluation of cultural theory. Rotunde no. 85. Trondheim: Norwegian University of
Science and Technology.
Perception. 2014. In Mirriam Webster.com. Retrieved September 16, from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/perception
Rader, Nicole E. (2004). The Threat of Victimization: A Theoretical Reconceptualization of Fear
of Crime. Sociological Spectrum 24(6), 689-704.

24
Rader, Nicole E., David C. May, and Sarah Goodrum. (2007). An Empirical Assessment of the
Threat of Victimization Considering Fear of Crime, Perceived Risk, Avoidance, and
Defensive Behaviours." Sociological Spectrum, 27(5), 497-98.
Rengifo, Andres F., and Amanda Bolton. (2012). Routine Activities and Fear of Crime:
Specifying Individual-level Mechanisms. European Journal of Criminology, 9(99), 11213.
Robinson, P.E.M. (1997). Places of Crime & Designing for Prevention: A Study of York
University Campus. Unpublished masters thesis, York University, North York, Ontario.
Safety Institute of Australia Ltd. (n.d.). From Risk Perception to Safe Behaviour. Deloitte Risk
Enterprise Services.
Skogan, W. (1981). Assessing the Behavioral Context of Victimization. The Journal of Criminal
Law and Criminology, 72(2), 727-742.
Steinmetz, N.M. (2012). Fear of Criminal Victimization in Relation to Specific Location on a
College Campus. Unpublished masters thesis, University of Louisville, Louisville,
Kentucky.
Tewksbury, Richard, and Elizabeth E. Mustaine. (2003). College Students Lifestyles And
Self-protective Behaviours. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 30(3), 302-327.
Tonry, M. and Farrington, D. (1995). Strategic Approaches to Crime Prevention. Crime and
Justice, 19, 1-20.
Weinstein, N.D. and Nicolich, M. (1993). Correct and Incorrect Interpretations of Correlations
Between Risk Perceptions and Risk Behaviors. Health Psychology, 12(3), 235-245.
Wortman, Shauna. (2010). Empirically Assessing the Threat of Victimization: How
Victimization and Gender Mediate the Relationship between Perceived Risk, Fear of
Victimization and Constrained Behaviour. MA Thesis, University of Manitoba,
Winnipeg. 9-66.

25
Appendix A Recruitment Letter

Dear ________________,

I am a 4th year Sociology student completing my SOC 499 Honours Essay under the supervision
of Dr. Jennifer Schulenberg. I am writing to ask for your participation in a research study I am
conducting on the relationship between perceived risk of theft among University of Waterloo
students while at the Dana Porter library on campus and the precautionary behaviour they engage
in. I will be using interviews to understand students experiences with this topic, and the
knowledge of the University of Waterloo UW Police and administrators from the Dana Porter
library in this area.

If you agree to participate in this study, you will take part in one interview. I will ask you about
your knowledge and experiences relating to theft of students personal belongings at the Dana
Porter library. I expect the interview to take about 15-20 minutes of your time. With your consent,
the interview will be audio-recorded. The interview would take place in January to early February
2015 at a location on the University of Waterloo campus that is convenient for you. Please note
that you may require permission from your supervisor to participate. If this is the case, your
actual decision to participate will not be disclosed to ensure confidentiality.
If you agree to be interviewed, the information you give will only be used for my SOC 499
Honours Essay. All information will be kept strictly confidential and stored in a secure and
locked location at my residence the recording will be destroyed after the completion of this
research. You will not be asked to give identifying details, and if any are given during the
interview, they will not be included in the transcript. I do not expect there to be any risks to you
as a participant of this research. Your participation in this interview is completely voluntary. You
may end the interview at any point without penalty. If you wish to end the interview, any
information you have already given me will not be used for my research and will be destroyed
immediately.

If you have any questions or concerns about this research, please feel free to contact me or my
supervisor Dr. Jennifer Schulenberg.
Student Researcher: Nicole Schoenberger (naschoen@uwaterloo.ca)
Faculty Supervisor: Dr. Jennifer Schulenberg (jlschule@uwaterloo.ca)
(519) 888-4567 ext. 38639

26
Department of Sociology & Legal Studies
This study has been reviewed by, and received ethics clearance through a University of Waterloo
Research Ethics Committee.

Sincerely,
Nicole Schoenberger
Appendix B Recruitment Flyer

Department of Sociology
University of Waterloo

Participants needed for Research on

Perceptions of Risk and Precautionary Behaviour
I am looking for volunteers to take part in a study on the relationship between
perceived risk of theft and precautionary behaviour.
As a participant you would be asked to take part in ONE interview answering
questions about your feelings of risk while at the Dana Porter library and
what precautionary behaviour you engage in.
The interview will take approximately 20-25 minutes of your time.
To participate you must be a student at the University of Waterloo and have
been at the Dana Porter library at least twice for at least one hour each time.
For more information about this study, or to volunteer for this study, please
contact Nicole Schoenberger at naschoen@uwaterloo.ca.

27

This study has been reviewed by, and received ethics clearance through a
University of Waterloo Research Ethics Committee.

28
Appendix C Interview Questions for Representative from the Dana Porter Library
1. To what degree is theft of students belongings while at the library a problem?
2. What, if any, are some things the library as an institution and its staff are doing to
minimize the risk of such theft for students?
a. How is [effort described] designed to do so?
b. Why are these particular measures being used?
3. If there were no limits, what measures would you like to see taken to prevent theft?
4. Do you feel that students typically have accurate perceptions of the risk of theft?
a. Why do you think that students feel this way about the risk?
5. What measures does the library recommend students take to safeguard their belongings?

29
Appendix D Interview Questions for Representative from the UW Police
1. To what extent is theft of personal belongings (electronics, textbooks, other belongings
etc.) at the Dana Porter library a problem?
a. Over the course of a university term, what is the average number of such
instances?
b. Has this rate varied significantly over time?
2. What items are typically stolen?
a. Which areas in the library are more targeted for theft?
3. What factors, in your experience, are significant in contributing to the likelihood of theft?
a. Do you feel that students typically have accurate perceptions of the risk of theft?
4. Based on your experience, what measures would you recommend to students as effective
to minimize the risk of having their belongings stolen?
a. What measures would you consider ineffective at preventing theft?
5. From your perspective, how can awareness about theft and use of appropriate caution be
promoted?

30
Appendix E Interview Questions for Students
1. What are the main reasons you go to the DP library?
2. When at the DP library, how do you typically feel about the risk of having your
belongings (anything you bring along to the library, including electronics) stolen?
3. In what situations do you feel that theft is more likely?
a. In your opinion, what is it about [situation mentioned; repeat for each situation]
that makes it more risky?
4. What makes you feel this way about the risk?
a. How has your perception of the risk of theft changed over the time youve been at
the University of Waterloo?
5. What other factors do you feel are important in whether someone would steal something
belonging to you?
6. What do you think are the chances you will become a victim of theft at the library?
a. How does this affect your behaviour while at the DP library?
7. What types of techniques do you use to reduce the likelihood of having your belongings
stolen?
a. What is it about [technique used] that reduces the likelihood of having your
belongings stolen?
b. Where/how did you learn about [technique described]?
c. What effect have the signs at the library, telling students to watch their belongings,
had on the techniques you use?
8. How does/do using the technique(s) youve described minimize your perceived risk of
having your belongings stolen?
a. Which techniques are most helpful in reducing your perceived risk of theft?
b. Looking forward, which techniques are you likely to continue using?

31
Appendix F Letter of Information for Students

LETTER OF INFORMATION
Perceptions of Risk and Precautionary Behaviour
Student Researcher: Nicole Schoenberger (naschoen@uwaterloo.ca)
Faculty Supervisor: Dr. Jennifer Schulenberg (jlschule@uwaterloo.ca)
(519) 888-4567 ext. 38639
Department of Sociology & Legal Studies
The purpose of this study is to look at the relationship between the perceived risk of theft among
students while at the Dana Porter (DP) Library and their use of precautionary behaviours. I will
be using interviews to understand students experiences with this topic, and the knowledge of the
University of Waterloo UW Police and administrators from the DP library in this area.
If you agree to participate in this study, you will take part in one interview. I ask you about your
perceptions the risk of theft poses at the DP library and your use of precautionary behaviour
(things you do to keep your belongings safe). I expect the interview to take about 20-25 minutes
of your time. With your consent, the interview will be audio-recorded.
If you agree to be interviewed, the information you give will only be used for my SOC 499
Honours Essay. All information will be kept strictly confidential and stored in password protected
files the audio recording will be safely destroyed one year after the completion of the honours
course this research is part of. You will not be asked to give identifying details, and if any are
given during the interview, they will not be included in the transcript.
I do not expect there to be any risks to you as a participant of this research. However, if you have
any concerns during the interview, please let me know. Your participation in this interview is
completely voluntary. You may skip any questions that you prefer not to answer. You may also
end the interview at any point without penalty. If you wish to end the interview, any information
you have already given me will not be used for my research and will be destroyed immediately.
If you have any questions or concerns during the interview, or if you would like me to clarify
anything, please let me know and I will answer to the best of my ability. If you have any
questions or concerns after the interview, you can contact me at naschoen@uwaterloo.ca or my
supervisor Dr. Jennifer Schulenberg (jlschule@uwaterloo.ca).
This project has been reviewed and received ethics clearance through a University of Waterloo
Research Ethics Committee. If you have concerns or questions about your involvement in the
project you may contact the Office of Research Ethics Director, Dr. Maureen Nummelin, at 519888-4567, Ext. 36005 or maureen.nummelin@uwaterloo.ca.

32
Sincerely,
Nicole Schoenberger

33
Appendix G Letter of Information for DP Library and UW Police Representatives

LETTER OF INFORMATION
Perceptions of Risk and Precautionary Behaviour
Student Researcher: Nicole Schoenberger (naschoen@uwaterloo.ca)
Faculty Supervisor: Dr. Jennifer Schulenberg (jlschule@uwaterloo.ca)
(519) 888-4567 ext. 38639
Department of Sociology & Legal Studies
The purpose of this study is to look at the relationship between the perceived risk of theft among
students while at the Dana Porter (DP) Library and their use of precautionary behaviours. I will
be using interviews to understand students experiences with this topic, and the knowledge of the
University of Waterloo UW Police and administrators from the DP library in this area.
If you agree to participate in this study, you will take part in one interview. I will ask you about
your knowledge and experiences relating to theft of students personal belongings at the DP
library. I expect the interview to take about 15-20 minutes of your time. With your consent, the
interview will be audio-recorded.
If you agree to be interviewed, the information you give will only be used for my SOC 499
Honours Essay. All information will be kept strictly confidential and stored in password protected
files the audio recording will be safely destroyed one year after the completion of the honours
course this research is part of. You will not be asked to give identifying details, and if any are
given during the interview, they will not be included in the transcript. Your decision on whether
to participate or not will not be shared with your supervisors or employers. Any information or
comments given by you will likewise be kept confidential. However, given the limited size of
your workplace it may be possible for someone to determine your identity.
I do not expect there to be any risks to you as a participant of this research. However, if you have
any concerns during the interview, please let me know. Your participation in this interview is
completely voluntary. You may skip any questions that you prefer not to answer. You may also
end the interview at any point without penalty. If you wish to end the interview, any information
you have already given me will not be used for my research and will be destroyed immediately.
If you have any questions or concerns during the interview, or if you would like me to clarify
anything, please let me know and I will answer to the best of my ability. If you have any
questions or concerns after the interview, you can contact me at naschoen@uwaterloo.ca or my
supervisor Dr. Jennifer Schulenberg (jlschule@uwaterloo.ca).
This project has been reviewed and received ethics clearance through a University of Waterloo
Research Ethics Committee. If you have concerns or questions about your involvement in the
project you may contact the Office of Research Ethics Director, Dr. Maureen Nummelin, at 519888-4567, Ext. 36005 or maureen.nummelin@uwaterloo.ca.

34
Sincerely,
Nicole Schoenberger

35

Appendix H List of Codes for Student Interviews

Why go to DP study
Why go to DP quiet with no distractions
Reasons for theft opportunity
Reasons for theft desperation
Reasons for theft kleptomania
Reasons for theft adventure
Low perceived risk
Moderate perceived risk
Consistent perceived risk
Perceptions of risk increased over time
Less risk if leave for shorter periods
Higher perceived risk when busy
Higher perceived risk when not busy
Aware of risks from past
Leave belongings to save seat
Stop Theft signs
Warning signs in library
Lower anxiety about having belongings stolen
Sense of community and trust
Sentimental items and belongings
Opportunities/exposure increase risk
Techniques take belongings along
Techniques friends watch stuff
Techniques asking others to watch stuff
Techniques dont lower actual risk
Techniques ineffective
Techniques logical/common sense
Techniques minimizing opportunity for theft
Will continue using technique
Technique lowers perceived risk

36
Appendix I Informed Consent Form

INFORMED CONSENT FORM

Perceptions of Risk and Precautionary Behaviour
By signing this consent form, you are not waiving your legal rights or releasing the
investigator(s) or involved institution(s) from their legal and professional responsibilities.

I have read the information presented in the information letter about a study being conducted by
Nicole Schoenberger of the Department of Sociology at the University of Waterloo. I have had
the opportunity to ask any questions related to this study, to receive satisfactory answers to my
questions, and any additional details I wanted.

I am aware that I have the option of allowing my interview to be audio recorded to ensure an
accurate recording of my responses.

I am also aware that excerpts from the interview may be included in the thesis and/or publications
to come from this research, with the understanding that the quotations will be anonymous.

I was informed that I may withdraw my consent at any time without penalty by advising the
researcher.

This project has been reviewed by, and received ethics clearance through a University of
Waterloo Research Ethics Committee. I was informed that if I have any comments or concerns
resulting from my participation in this study, I may contact the Director, Office of Research
Ethics at 519-888-4567 ext. 36005.

With full knowledge of all foregoing, I agree, of my own free will, to participate in this study.
YES

NO

I agree to have my interview audio-recorded.

37
YES

NO

I agree to the use of anonymous quotations in any thesis or publication that comes of this
research.
YES

NO

Participant Name: __________________________

Signature: ________________________
(check if you would like to receive a copy of the research findings)
Email address: ___________________________
Witness Name: __________________________
Signature: ________________________

38
Appendix J Feedback Letter

FEEDBACK LETTER
Perceptions of Risk and Precautionary Behaviour
Student Researcher: Nicole Schoenberger (naschoen@uwaterloo.ca)
Faculty Supervisor: Dr. Jennifer Schulenberg (jlschule@uwaterloo.ca)
(519) 888-4567 ext. 38639
Department of Sociology & Legal Studies
Thank you for taking the time to participate in this study. Your participation is invaluable to
gaining an understanding of the relationship between perceived risk of theft and precautionary
behaviour taken by students when at the Dana Porter library on the University of Waterloo
campus.
Your responses, combined with those of other participants, will help the researcher and those who
read the associated research paper understand how students perceptions of risk influence what
students may do to prevent their belongings from being stolen (i.e. what precautionary measures
students are using). The generalized findings from this honours essay will be used to make
suggestions for theft awareness programs at the Dana Porter library to help students protect their
belongings effectively.
The information you provided will be kept strictly confidential and stored in password protected
files the audio recording will be safely destroyed one year after the completion of the honours
course this research is part of. Any identifying details given during the interview will not be
included in the transcript. The information you provided will only be used for my SOC 499
Honours Essay.
If you would like more information about the study or if you would like to receive a summary of
the findings, please inform the researcher and provide your email address. If you have any
questions or concerns after the interview, please feel free to contact me at
naschoen@uwaterloo.ca.

This project has been reviewed and received ethics clearance through a University of Waterloo
Research Ethics Committee. If you have concerns or questions about your involvement in the
project you may contact the Office of Research Ethics Director, Dr. Maureen Nummelin, at 519888-4567, Ext. 36005 or maureen.nummelin@uwaterloo.ca.

39
Sincerely,

Nicole Schoenberger

40

Appendix K Stop Theft poster

41

Appendix L Warning Sign from DP Library