Running head: PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 1

Concept Version

Predictive Patterns of Sex Offenders

Crime Trajectory Analysis Prior to the First Sex Offence

Diane Groothuysen (3788156)

Utrecht University

Abstract

Bachelor thesis Sociology (201100018)

Thesis supervisor: dr. J. E. H. Beijers

Course coordinator: prof. I. Maas

Special thanks to: prof. dr. A. Blokland

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 2

1.Introduction

Sex offending is a serious offence that leads to a lot of physical and psychological

damage among its victims. In the Netherlands, numbers of police-registered sexual offences

have declined from 9.000 to 2.000 per year between 2010 and 2014 (Politie.nl, 2017).

However, the number of reported sex offences is higher than the registered number (7.039 in

2014) and it may be assumed that the actual numbers of sex offences are even higher since

many offences never get reported. It is important for the wellbeing of potential victims as well

as the society as a whole to decline the number of sex offences as much as possible using

policy instruments. Dutch policies regarding sex offenders are different from regular

offenders. For example, when a person wants to apply for a certificate of conduct, the

applicant will be checked for offences he or she committed in the past 2-4 years (with some

special cases for specific jobs that can take up to 30 years). This certificate of conduct is a

necessary document for many jobs in the Netherlands. However, sex offences are treated

differently. These offences will be taken into account for the rest of the offender’s life for the

application of a certificate of conduct. This means the sex offender will have lifelong troubles

receiving the certificate of conduct. ("Terugkijktermijnen", n.d.)

This policy was made for several reasons (Boone, 2011); one of them was that policy

makers aimed at protecting the public from sex offenders by not letting them occupy a job

based on any kind of dependency. However, this policy could also entail some negative

consequences. A lot of criminological research shows that employment is negatively

associated with recidivism (Uggen & Staff, 2001). So by excluding sex offenders from

employment, policy makers could be increasing their recidivism (rates). It is therefore

important to develop accurate policy instruments that reduce sex offending and do not entail

such negative unexpected consequences. For example, policy could be made effectively if one

could find predictive patterns for sex offending, which is the main topic of the present study.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 3

In the present study, the ten-year period prior to the first sex offence will be studied, to find

out whether we can find predictive factors in crime frequency and/or type of crime. Policy

instruments could be made more accurately when we can predict when the onset of sexual

offending takes place, since the risk of the occurrence of a sex offence will be reduced when

we can predict when this offence will occur and by who. The main theme of the present study

will be the extent to which the occurrence of the first sex offence can be predicted.

First of all, it will be studied how the crime frequency of sex offenders up to their first

sex offence differs from other types of offenders. For studying the criminal trajectory prior to

the first sex offence, we can take studies and theory into account that study the difference

between the entire criminal career of sex offenders versus nonsex offenders, since we may

assume that if the entire criminal career is not distinct, this would also account for the period

up to the first sexual offence. Some studies have found that sex offenders tend to have a

specialised and persistent criminal career: they will persistently commit specialised (sex

offending in this case) crimes throughout their lives (Harris, Smallbone, Dennison & Knight,

2009; Jennings, Piquero, Zimring & Reingle, 2015). This view that sex offenders are a

distinct type of offenders and are more dangerous than other types of offenders is also the

popular view that is held in societies (Zimring, 2004). This view resonates in many policy

interventions treating sex offenders differently than nonsex offenders, such as the policy in

the Netherlands (Boone, 2011). However, a vast amount of research has also found support

for the fact that the criminal careers of sex offenders are just like the ones of other types of

offenders (Jennings, Piquero, Zimring & Reingle, 2015). Thus there is controversy in the way

that the scientific as well as the societal world views sex offenders; are they distinct of similar

to other types of offenders? Since the main subject of the present study is predicting the onset

of sexual offending, it is important to first investigate whether sex offenders differ from

nonsex offenders in their crime frequency trajectory up to this first sex offence. If they differ,
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 4

namely, this would be a predictive factor in determining who will commit a sex offence. If

they do not differ, we can look further in how type of offences can predict a subsequent sex

offence. Thus, the first part of the present study focuses on the following question;

1. To what extent do sex offenders have distinctive criminal trajectories based on crime

frequency prior to the first registered sex offence compared with age-matched nonsex

offenders?

To answer this question, sex offenders will be age-matched to nonsex offenders. Then,

the criminal trajectories (with a duration of 10 years) of a) sex offenders up to the year of their

first sex offence; will be compared with those of b) nonsex offenders up to the year that their

age-matched sex offenders commit their first sex offence. For simplication reasons, this year

is called year zero. A criminal trajectory (also called criminal career/criminal history) is the

sequence of crimes committed by an individual offender (Blumstein et al., 1986), the present

study will only look at crime frequency in comparing the trajectories. The dataset I will use is

a subsample from the Criminal Career and Life-Course Study (CCLS). This study was

conducted by the Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR).

This dataset is appropriate for the present study since it contains criminal records of about 800

sex offenders, and their criminal behaviour was followed for most of their lives. There have

been very few to zero other studies on this subject using a Dutch sample (Blokland, Nagin, &

Nieuwbeerta, 2005).

After addressing the extent to which criminal trajectories of sex offenders are distinct

from nonsex offenders, I will investigate how types of crimes could predict the occurrence of

the first sex offence while controlling for crime frequency. Research on the predictive types of
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 5

crimes for sex offenders has barely been conducted yet, so using the data I will address a

second research question;

2. To what extent do types of crime in the criminal trajectory predict the likelihood of a

subsequent sex offence?

The types of crime under scrunity are property, damage and violent crimes that are

committed during the 5 years prior to the first sex offence. The present study is unique in the

sense that little to no research has been done yet on the predictive offences of sex offenders.

The large dataset that will be used provides an opportunity to conduct this unique research.

For addressing the first research question group based trajectory modelling analysis will be

used. For the second research question a multinomial probit regression will be performed.

I will first discuss relevant theories and research on the topics. From this information,

hypotheses will be derived which will be tested with the methods mentioned above. The

results of these tests will be useful to make suggestions regarding the literature on this topic as

well as the policy for reducing sex offending. These results, implications, strengths and

limitations of the study will be discussed at the final part of the study.

2. Theoretical Framework and Literature Review

2.1 Comparing Criminal Trajectories

In explaining how crime frequency differs between different types of offenders one

can apply a general as well as a crime-specific approach (Piquero, 2000). The general

approach implies that mechanisms that cause crime can cause any type of crime, which thus

suggests that criminal trajectories based on frequency do not differ between different types of

offenders (Piquero, 2000). In this section I will discuss some general theories of crime that

will explain how crime emerges without distinguishing between types of crime. These
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 6

theories are applicable to all types of offenders and do not suggest that one crime-specific

offender is more persistent than another. On the other hand, the crime-specific approach

implies that mechanisms differ for different types of offences which thus suggests that

criminal trajectories may differ between different types of offenders. Therefore, I will also

discuss some crime specific theories. Since the criminal trajectories up to the first sex offence

will be studied, it may be assumed that if criminal trajectories of different types of offenders

are expected to be similar throughout the whole criminal career based on the theory, this

would also hold for the period up to the first sex offence in comparing sex offenders to nonsex

offenders.

The first major theory that could predict whether sex offenders differ in their criminal

career from regular offenders is Terrie Moffitt’s dual taxonomy theory (1993). The main

argument of this theory is that offenders can be classified in two types of offenders: the

adolescence-limited offender [AL] (offending only occurs during adolescence) and the life-

course-persistent offender [LCP] (offending occurs during the whole life course). She

suggests that most offenders are adolescence-limited offenders. The crime committed by this

group of offenders is caused in two ways: first of all, Moffitt argues that adolescents

experience a gap between the extent to which their body has developed into maturity and the

way society views the adolescents as mature. More specifically, the adolescent body has

already developed into maturity for a great deal while society still regards these adolescents as

children. This sense of strain will lead to antisocial behaviour (Moffitt, 1993).

The second group of offenders explained by Moffitt, life-course-persistent offenders,

show criminal behaviour throughout their whole lives due to certain characteristics of their

brain and due to social characteristics of the offender. This could be tragic events that have

happened in the offender’s life such as abuse and neglect, or because of the socioeconomic

status of the offender or deviant behaviour of the parents of the offender (Moffitt, 1993). The
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 7

theory of Moffitt can hold different interpretations in predicting how distinctive the criminal

trajectories of sex offenders are. Firstly, based on the typology of LCP offenders, a sex

offender would not have a different criminal career regarding persistence than a nonsex

offender since both sex offenders and nonsex offenders can become life-course-persistent

offenders due to the factors mentioned above. However, one could also strive for the opposite

idea: sex offenders may have a higher chance in being a life-course persistent offender since it

may be more common that people who end up committing a sex offence have tragic events

that have happened in their lives. Also, the theory of Moffit implies that serious criminals

have a higher chance of being a LCP offender. Since sex offending accounts for serious

crime, this would suggest that sex offenders would follow a more persistent criminal

trajectory than less serious offenders. However, this last argument would not hold in

comparing between various serious types of offenders, such as comparing murderers with sex

offenders.

Another general theory of crime is the self-control theory of Gottfredson and Hirschi

which explains that crime occurs when people that have low self-control come into the

opportunity to commit a crime (1990). They state that this low self-control develops during

childhood by factors such as bad parenting, and usually this self-control increases with age

because of processes such as socialization and biological maturation (Gottfredson & Hirschi,

1990). If we assume that the amount of crime that an offender commits is directly linked to

the extent to which a person has self-control, then this would account for any kind of crime. If

a person has no self-control in general, it can be assumed that this low self-control accounts

for any type of crime he or she wants to commit. Thus, based on the self-control theory we

could predict that sex offenders do not have distinctive criminal trajectories based on crime

frequency.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 8

However, there are some theories that imply that crime-specific mechanisms for

explaining criminal behaviour do exist. The routine activity theory, for example, does not

agree with the idea that crime frequency is generated by general mechanisms that cause any

type of crime instead of specific crimes (Cohen & Felson, 1979). Instead, this theory builds

on the idea that crimes happen in situational contexts where the circumstances of offending a

specific crime are ‘favourable’. Routine activity theory states that activities that happen every

day provide offenders with certain targets. Daily activities such as going to work may put

material or personal targets in accessible places for offenders (Cohen & Felson, 1979). This

theory could be interpreted in such a way that property offences are committed more

frequently than sex offences since many people leave their houses empty when they go to

work so offenders have access to the material goods of the property owners. However, the

theory could also be interpreted in such a way that sex offences can happen frequently as well

because parents may leave their children alone at home when they go to work, which may

make the children targets of child molestation. One can thus interpret this theory in different

ways for the research question under study.

Thus, there are theories that explain crime-specific behaviour as well as general-crime

behaviour which may both be used in explaining how sex offenders are or are not distinct

from nonsex offenders in their crime frequency curve up to the first sex offence. Prior

literature on this topic will now be discussed to derive a fitting prediction.

2.2 Prior Research on Comparing Criminal Trajectories

The general thoughts on sex offenders have for a long time been that they are more

specialised and persistent offenders compared with nonsex offenders (Harris, Smallbone,

Dennison & Knight, 2009; Jennings, Piquero, Zimring & Reingle, 2015). Sex offenders are

not only treated as a separate group of offenders in literature, but also by the society as a

whole and public policy (Zimring, 2004). As described in the introduction, the specialised
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 9

treatment of sex offenders in public policy of the Netherlands implies that policymakers base

policies on the assumption that sex offenders are distinct from nonsex offenders. However,

results from some recent studies showed support for the idea that criminal careers of sex

offenders are not more specialised or persistent than those of nonsex offenders (Jennings,

Piquero, Zimring & Reingle, 2015). In light addressing the extent to which sex offenders have

distinctive criminal trajectories up to their first sex offence compared with nonsex offenders

based on crime frequency, I will discuss the issue of general recidivism. General recidivism is

the extent to which an offender commits any type of crime throughout their criminal

trajectory, thus how persistent they are. We could assume that if sex offenders have

distinctive crime frequency curves up to their first sex offence, this crime frequency curve and

thus their pattern of general recidivism is also distinct from nonsex offenders throughout their

whole life span. Therefore, the results of previous research regarding the general recidivism of

sex offenders compared with nonsex offenders will now be discussed.

The available research that compares the general recidivism of sex offenders with

nonsex offenders shows mixed results, which is probably due to the differences in

methodology of the studies (Jennings et al., 2015). Caldwell has summarized available

research that mostly indicates that the general recidivism rates of sex offenders is lower than

that of nonsex offenders (2002). In addition, the results of Sipe et al. indicate that the juvenile

nonsex offenders had a higher rate of adult general recidivism (1998). Langan and Levin have

conducted a large study on recidivism of prisoners released in 1994 (2002). Their results

suggest that the general recidivism rates were not higher for sex offenders than for nonsex

offenders. More specifically, they found that, within 3 years, sexual assaulters showed a

general recidivism rate of 41%, rapist showed 46%, murderers showed 41%, and property

offenders showed 74% general recidivism rates. Another study of general recidivism of

prisoners also shows that the general recidivism of sex offenders was 25% lower than those of
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 10

nonsex offenders (Langan, Schmitt, & Durose, 2003). In addition, Sample and Bray (2003)

have shown that sex offenders are not more dangerous than other types of offenders based on

their general recidivism. In a follow up period of 5 years, they found that sex offenders

showed general recidivism rates of 45%. This recidivism rate was one of the lowest compared

with the other groups analysed in this study, only murderers (44%) and property damagers

(39%) showed lower recidivism rates. Other groups, such as robbers (75%), burglars (58%)

and nonsexual assaulters (58%) showed higher general recidivism rates than sex offenders.

Another study that used data from released prisoners in 1994 is a study directed

towards the persistence of sex offenders by Miethe et al. (2006). The results of this study

suggests that sex offenders have low levels of persistence in absolute numbers and also

compared with other types of offenders, namely violent offenders, property offenders and

public-order offenders. Zimring et al. (2007, 2009) have conducted two large birth cohort

studies to examine the sexual and nonsexual reoffending rates of juvenile sex offenders. Their

results show similar results compared with Miethe et al. (2006) and most of the other

literature discussed above, namely, sex offenders are similar to nonsex offenders in their

criminal career patterns based on frequency. If sex offenders show similar patterns to nonsex

offenders, this can also imply that the crime frequency curve up to the first sex offence is also

similar to that of age-matched nonsex offenders. However, there might be other

characteristics of the criminal trajectory of sex offenders that do differ from nonsex offenders.

For example, certain types of crime may predict a subsequent sex offence. This will be the

focus of the second part of the present study.

2.3 Predicting a Sex Offence

Since prior research on predictive patterns in criminal trajectories is limited, there is

also a lack of theoretical knowledge about how criminal histories can predict future offences.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 11

However, it is useful to explain the criminal career paradigm by itself before discussing

applicable theories for deriving hypotheses for the present study.

The criminal career paradigm emerged in the 1980s, when new policy strategies were

needed to reduce the quickly expanding crime rates in the United States (Blokland & Lussier,

2015). This paradigm focuses on individual criminal activity of an individual offender instead

of the aggregate numbers of crimes per capita. The specific definition of a criminal career

according to the Panel of Criminal Career Research is ‘the characterization of the longitudinal

sequence of crimes committed by an individual offender’ (Blumstein et al., 1986: p. 12). The

four key dimensions that characterize a criminal career are participation (who engages in

crime?), frequency (how much criminal activity do offenders show?), seriousness (how

serious are the offences that are committed) and career length (for how long is an individual

active as an offender?). The criminal career paradigm has been expanding ever since

(Blokland & Lussier, 2015).

In 2004, Soothill et al. express their disapproval to the extent to which the criminal

career paradigm had developed up until then. According to them, the criminal career

paradigm had focused more on the quantity of crime instead of the types of crimes committed.

In their paper, they suggest a new typology of criminal activity, for example by focusing more

on type of criminal activity than quantity and by examining shorter trajectories rather than a

whole life course. They propose this typology because they see a chance that previous

offences can serve as indicators that can predict a certain offence (Soothill et al., 2004).

Soothill et al. also come with a distinction between indicators and precursors of subsequent

serious offences. Indicators are offences characterize the present situation, whereas precursors

can identify how the future will unfold regarding offences and are thus related to future

behaviour (2002). Soothill et al. state that the use of criminal trajectories in predicting

offences has been neglected by criminological theory in general (2004).

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 12

Despite the fact that a theoretical framework regarding predictive patterns in criminal

careers has not developed yet, a couple of existing theories could be useful to predict a

hypothesis for the present study. First of all, Sampson and Laub explain how escalation over

the criminal career can occur (1997). This term refers to the idea that the crimes in the

criminal career increase with seriousness. One theory that explains how escalation can occur

is called cumulative disadvantage. Cumulative disadvantage is a phenomenon where criminal

acts can cause more criminal acts by the mechanism that being convicted for a crime can lead

to a decrease in social bonds. A decrease in social bonds, in turn, can enhance an increase in

the seriousness of offending behaviour. This can be explained by Hirschi’s social control

theory (1969), which suggests that a lack of social bonds to actors that prohibit antisocial

behaviour, such as family or friends, can increase criminal activity (Hirschi, 1969). To

illustrate, suppose that a conviction leads to a loss of job or a divorce. This decrease of social

bonds may deteriorate criminal behaviour because these social bonds prohibit deviant

behaviour and a decrease in social bonds results in the idea that the individual has less to

loose when he or she commits a more serious offence. It may also be that the criminal will

have a hard time coming back into the marriage market or labour market in general after this

conviction because of bad reputation caused by the conviction. This will lead more serious

criminal behaviour, and it can thus be expected that the criminal career will escalate in

seriousness because of negative side effects of each crime (Sampson & Laub, 1997). Thus,

based on this theory, we might predict that sex offences happen in a period of escalation.

However, if we would assume that committing a sex offence happens in a period of

escalation, we still do not know when during this escalation the sex offence will occur. Also,

this escalation in seriousness does not mean it will only lead to sex offending, serious

offences such as homicide could also be the result of cumulative disadvantage.

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 13

The theory of self-control brought forward by Gottfredson and Hirschi are not only

useful in explaining crime frequency, but types of crimes as well (1990). Since they state that

people that have low self-control and come into contact with illegal opportunities will commit

certain crimes. Thus another way to speculate on how predictive patterns for sex offences

look is focusing on where in the criminal career the opportunity for such a crime could take

place (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990). For example, it could be reasoned that a burglary can

bring offenders into the opportunity of committing a sex offence, since they have thresspassed

the property first. This opportunity of committing a sex offence in combination with low self-

control may result in the occurrence of a sex offence.

Building on this last argument, one could argue that people may commit a sex offence

after being convicted for specific types of other offences that are directly related to sex

offences. For example, a person that will commit a sex offence might be stalking his potential

victim first. Similarly, as mentioned above burglaries might take place at the property of the

victim before the offender commits a sex offence. Some studies support this idea and have

found types of crimes that predict other types of crimes. These studies will be discussed in the

following paragraph.

2.3 Prior Research on Predictive Offences

To my knowledge, there has been little to no studies on predictive patterns in criminal

behaviour prior to a sex offence. The present study will thus be one of the first to direct this

particular question. Despite the fact that there has been little to no research done in predicting

a sex offence based on the criminal history of the offender, there has been limited research

aimed at finding predictive patterns in the criminal careers prior to other serious offences.

Most of the research done in this topic has been done by Keith Soothill. I will now discuss his

and his colleagues’ work in chronological order.

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 14

In 2000, Soothill and Francis have conducted a study where they researched around

7000 sex offenders that were convicted for a sex offence in England and Wales in 1973. They

investigated whether these sex offenders were more likely to commit a homicide than the

general population. The answer is yes. The sex offenders had a chance of 1/400 compared

with a chance of 1/3000 for the general population to commit a subsequent homicide. This

study was the first study of Soothill where the criminal history of an individual was used to

predict a subsequent offence (Soothill & Francis, 2000).

In 2002, Soothill et al. have conducted a study where they searched for the relationship

between the criminal history of an individual and the risk to commit a subsequent serious

sexual assault of an adult female. This is thus one of the few studies that was aimed at

predicting a sex offence. The sample consisted of 1057 males under the age of 45 who were

convicted for a serious sexual assault or rape for the first time in 1995-1997. The findings

suggested that being convicted for a prison sentence for committing the crimes ‘other

wounding’, robbery, stealing in a dwelling, arson, kidnapping and cruelty to children,

increased the risk of a subsequent serious sexual assault (Soothill, Francis, Ackerley &

Fligelstone, 2002).

In 2008, Soothill et al. addressed the issue whether one can predict when a homicide

will take place in a criminal trajectory based on four preliminary serious crimes (arson,

blackmail, kidnapping and threats to kill). Specifically, they firstly examined how

specialisation of one of the four crimes and escalation may predict the homicide. Afterwards,

they looked for certain combinations and sequences of the four crimes per case, to see how

these combinations and sequences can form risk factors for the subsequent homicide. They

used large datasets of offenders that have been convicted between 1979 and 2001 in England

and Wales for one of the four focused crimes. They found that, first of all, the type of the first

serious offence was a significant predictor for the subsequent homicide. For example, a
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 15

person whose first offence was a kidnap had a 48% higher risk in committing a homicide, and

a person who started with threats to kill had a 55% higher risk of committing a homicide over

an arson offender. The results of their study also show that the offenders who offended

multiple different types of serious offences were more likely to commit a homicide than those

specialising in their first serious offence. A person who committed two distinct crimes was

nearly twice as likely to commit a subsequent homicide than a person who only committed

one type of serious offence (Soothill et al., 2008).

The literature review mentioned above shows that research aimed at finding predictive

patterns in criminal behaviour for a specific type of offence is scarce, and that there are almost

no studies that investigate predictive patterns prior to a sex offence, except for the study of

Soothill et al. (2002). However, studies aimed at predicting other serious offending, such as

the study that predicted how types of crimes increase the risk in homicide (Soothill et al.,

2008), do show results that imply crimes can be predicted using the offenders’ criminal

history. After controlling for crime frequency, the present study will use Soothill’s and

colleagues’ study as an inspiration for predicting sex offences instead of homicides, and will

hereby meet the shortcoming of information in criminological literature regarding predicting a

sexual offence. The expectations based on the literature review and theoretical framework

mentioned above are as follows;

H1: Sex offenders do not have distinctive criminal trajectories based on crime

frequency prior to their first sex offence compared with age-matched nonsex offenders

H2: Types of crimes can predict the likelihood of a subsequent sex offence

To confirm the first prediction, the trajectory groups found in the group based

trajectory modelling should constitute about the same proportion of the total sex offenders as
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 16

nonsex offenders. If this hypothesis would be false, the sex offenders would constitute an

entire trajectory on their own or be highly concentrated in one or more trajectories. To

confirm the second prediction, the multinomial probit regression should show that certain

types of crimes increase the likelihood of a subsequent sex offence. The two hypotheses shall

be tested in the next sections.

3. Data and Methods

3.1 Original Sample

The sample used to test the hypotheses is based on the Criminal Careers and Life-

Course Study (CCLS) dataset. The CCLS project was conducted by the Netherlands Institute

for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR) (Blokland, Nagin & Nieuwbeerta,

2005). The sample is a representative sample of 4% of all persons who were tried by a judge

for a serious offence in 1977 or who were decided on by a public prosecutor. The sample was

weighted by offence types to gain an accurate representation of all individuals tried in 1977.

Retrospective and prospective information such as life-course information (e.g. marriage,

fertility history and death records) and conviction data was used to describe the people in the

sample for which this information was available. Since this information was not available for

all persons in de sample, this step reduced the sample somewhat. The people in the sample

used in the present analysis were followed until 2006 or death and the sample consists of an

age range of 12 to 91. The General Documentation Registry of the Ministry of Justice Court

Documentation Service was used to be able to register the entire criminal career of the

persons in the sample. This registry provided all criminal cases of the individuals from 1977

on registered by public prosecutors. These only include crimes committed in the Netherlands.

The sample consists of 4167 individuals, from which 11 percent were female offenders

(Blokland, Nagin & Nieuwbeerta, 2005). The data is a person-year file, which means that

each case represents a year for a person.

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 17

3.2 Final Sample

Using the original sample, several restrictions and measures were made for the present

study. Since only 5 sex offenders were women, all women were deleted from the sample. A

variable was constructed to indicate who in the sample is a sex offender (everybody who

committed at least one sex offence in their criminal career) and who was a nonsex offender

(everybody who has not committed for any sex offences in their criminal career). Since the

group of sex offenders is relatively small (about 20% of the total sample), there was not made

a distinction between different type of sex offenders. Next, an age-matched group was created

of sex offenders and the nonsex offenders. This was done by creating birth cohorts and

matching multiple nonsex offender to each sex offender based on the age of the sex offender

at their first sex offence. For the present study, the criminal careers are restricted to ten years

up to the first sex offence of the sex offenders, and for the nonsex offenders up to the year

prior to at which an age-matched sex offender committed his first sex offence. For

simplification purposes, this year will be referred to as year zero. It is thus important to note

for the present study that the years represented in the criminal trajectories refer to the amount

of years prior to year zero. These years may, for each individual, refer to different calendar

years, ages, or both. The final sample used in the first analysis consisted of 3365 nonsex

offenders and 777 sex offenders (4142 in total). Since for the second analysis (multinominal

probit regression) the goal was to predict what crime one was going to commit in year zero,

the 12 people who had died before year zero were deleted from the sample and thus the

sample for the second analysis consisted of 3353 nonsex offenders and 777 sex offenders

(4130 in total).

3.3 Operationalization

There were multiple dependent and independent variables used for the analysis. The

descriptive statistics of these variables are given in Table 1.

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 18

Table 1

Descriptive statistics of used variables

Variable N Minimum Maximum Mean STDEV
First Analysis
Total convictions
in 10-year period 4142 0 101 3.10 5.62
Proportion free per year 4142 0 1 .94 .18

Second Analysis
Age at year zero 4130 13 66 24.94 9.77
Crime at year zero 4130 1 3 2.39 .78
Birth cohort 4130 1 11 8.53 2.10
Trajectory group 4130 1 5 2.44 .88
At least 1 violent offence 4130 0 1 .10 .31
At least 1 property offence 4130 0 1 .30 .46
At least 1 damage offence 4130 0 1 .11 .31

Note. 12 people died before year zero and were not taken into the second analysis

For the first analysis, crime trajectories were estimated over the period of 10 years

prior to year zero (ytosex = -10 to ytosex = -1). This was done with the variable vftotal which

was the sum of total crimes of each year. Since it should be taken into account that people

cannot commit crimes while in prison, this analysis was controlled by the variable free, which

is the proportion of freedom of each year. For the second analysis, it was tested whether types

of offences can predict a subsequent sex offence using a multinomial probit regression. The

dependent variable, delict0, is the crime they committed at year zero. This variable had three

outcomes; a sex offence, a nonsex offence or no offence. The predictors were violent, damage

and property, which are variables that indicate how many people have committed at least 1

violent- damage- or property offence within the 5-year period before year zero. This

prediction was controlled for the age people had at year zero, the birth cohort they were in and

the trajectory group they were in (thus for crime frequency). This last variable was determined

by the previous analysis (trajectory analysis).

3.4 Method
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 19

The data was analysed in several steps using STATA. First, semi parametric group-

based trajectory modelling was conducted by using the traj plugin to estimate the underlying

distinct groups of offenders that show similar patterns of conviction rate over time (Nagin,

1999). This is a method that estimates the underlying crime curves distributed over a number

of distinct groups that follow the same trajectory based on frequency. It is thus a good

procedure to check how different types of people are distributed over different crime curves.

For the analysis, the zero-inflated Poisson model was used. This is a model that makes sure

that short periods of non-offending do not result in changes in the offending trajectory. The

model used a cubic relationship for the crime curve over time based on the following formula;

log( λ ¿j ¿=β 0j + β 1j Time ¿ + β 2j Time 2¿ + β 3j Time 3¿

where λ ¿j indicates the expected number of convictions of person i at time t given his

membership in group j. The time over which the curve was estimated was the 10 years up to

year zero. Time ¿ indicates the amount of years prior to year zero at time t, for Time 2¿ this is

squared and for Time 3¿ this is cubed. β 0j , β 1j , β 2j∧¿ β 3j are the coefficients that determine the

shape of each trajectory. The denotation of j indicates that the coefficients vary across the

groups. The crime trajectories were controlled for the proportion that the offenders were in

prison.

A key step in this analysis is determining how many distinct groups can be identified

in the data. To determine this number, the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) is used. The

higher the BIC value, the better the model fits. However, in determining the right number of

distinct groups, the BIC number is not the only important criterion since the BIC number in

the used sample gets higher every time another group is added to the model. Since estimating

a trajectory model is done for simplification of the data, the maximum number of distinct

groups to be tried in the model was 6. The BIC is calculated by the following formula:

BIC = log(L) – 0.5log(n)*(j),

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 20

where n is the sample size, L the value of the maximized likelihood of the model, and

k is the number of parameters (Nagin, 1999).

After the trajectory groups are formed, individual probabilities of group membership

were determined. This posterior probability of group membership was determined with the

following equation:

^ (Y i∨ j) π^ j
P
^
P ( j|Y i ) =
∑ P^ (Y i∨k ) π^ j
j

where ^P ( k|Y i ) is the estimated probability that we can observe individual i is actual

crime curve (Y i ¿, given that this individual is a member of group j, and π^ j indicates the

estimated proportion of the population in that group j. This posterior probability of group

membership is used to be able to assign the individuals to the right crime curve. This

probability should not be lower than .70 for each trajectory in the estimated model. The

analysis described up until now will answer the first research question.

After defining how sex offenders are distributed over the different trajectory groups by

the posterior probability, this group assignment was added to the original sample data to

perform the remaining analysis for research question two. For this analysis, a multinomial

probit regression was performed using STATA, since aim of the second research question is

predicting a nominal dependent variable. The analysis was used to test whether having

committed at least one violent- damage- or property offence in the 5 years up to zero

predicted which crime was going to be committed in year zero (a sex offence, a nonsex

offence or no offence). This prediction was controlled for age at year zero, birth cohort and

the trajectory group people belonged in (thus crime frequency over time). The probit

regression was used instead of the multinomial logistic regression since the assumptions on

this latter model were violated. The syntax (SPSS as well as STATA) for the data measures

and the analyses are shown in Appendix A.

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 21

4. Results

The results of the analyses are as follows. First of all, the crime curve up to year zero

averaging all individuals in the sample is plotted in Figure 1. This figure indicates that the

mean number convictions increase gradually over time, with about 0.5 mean convictions in

the year prior to zero. However, this average crime curve may obscure underlying distinct

groups of offenders who follow similar trajectories. This possibility was addressed in the

group based trajectory analyses.

Figure 1

Average Crime Curve for Entire Sample (N=4142)

0.5

0.45

0.4
mean number of convictions per year

0.35

0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
-10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1
years to 'zero'

After conducting the group based trajectory analysis, it became clear that there were

indeed distinct underlying groups that followed similar crime curves. The response variable

was the number of convictions every year up to the year before zero. Multiple models were

tested to find which model of trajectories fitted best. I only tested up to 6 group models for the

trajectories since more than 6 groups models take away the main function of group based
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 22

trajectory modelling: simplifying the data into homogeneous groups. For each model I tested

the curves to be first order, second order and third order curves. For each model, I checked

whether the visual representation of the graph was in line with the average numbers of crimes

for each year within each group. In addition to visual criteria for finding the best fitting

model, another criterion was used; the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) score. The

higher this score, the better the model. Since for the present dataset the BIC score gets higher

and higher, visual criteria are important also. In the end, the five-group cubic model came out

to be the best fitting model. Even though the six-group model model had a better BIC score,

the individual groups were too similar in this model. The BIC score of the five-group model

was -18339.47. The visual representation of the estimated lines of the best fitting model are

represented in Figure 2. The numerical values of this graph are represented in Table 2. The

posterior probabilities for group assignment are represented in Table 3.

Table 2

Numerical Values of Parameters Estimates for the Five-group Model

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5

Intercept -0.05190 5.21644*** 1.00159*** 3.84286*** 1.62597***
Linear -1.49985*** 0.37003* 0.37769* 0.02325 -0.00016
Quadratic -0.31517*** 0.03477 0.10495** -0.12088** 0.00674
Cubic -0.01564*** 0.00073 0.00702*** -0.00915** 0.00078
free_1 -1.45072*** -7.52201*** -1.71187*** -3.77114*** -1.26216***

Note. *=p<.05; **=p<.01; ***=p<.001

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 23

Figure 2

Estimated Trajectories for Five-group cubic model

1.8

1.6
mean number of convictions per year

1.4

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
-10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1
years to 'zero'

Group 1 (3.3%) Group 2 (64.7%) Group 3 (11.5%) Group 4 (17.2%)

Group 5 (3.3%)

Table 3

Mean assignment posterior probability

Assigned group Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5

Group 1 .79 .00 .05 .04 .04
Group 2 .00 .88 .06 .10 .00
Group 3 .07 .04 .79 .09 .05
Group 4 .07 .07 .07 .76 .01
Group 5 .07 .00 .03 .01 .91

Note. All posterior probabilities of the accurate group are higher than the threshold of .7

Figure 2 shows that Group 1 and Group 5 make up a small proportion of the

population, Group 3 and 4 a larger propertion and Group 2 the largest. Group 1 shows a

constant line with little to no crime frequency in the ten years prior to zero. Group 5 seems to

do the opposite; this group of offenders show a more or less constant line of relatively a lot of
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 24

offences during the 10 years prior to zero. Group 1 shows a steep increase in crime frequency

up until 3 years prior to zero, where after they show a steep decline up until the year prior to

zero. Group 4 shows a gradual increase in crime frequency, and finally Group 3 shows an

increase, a decline and another increase during the 10 years prior to zero. Since Group 2 is the

largest group, most people in the population are expected to show little to no crime frequency

in the ten years up until zero. This fact is not very surprising, since the average age of the

offenders at year zero is relatively young (25 years old). Age and other characteristics of the

groups are discussed later.

Table 3 shows the posterior group probabilities. These are all above the threshold

of .70, which means that this trajectory model assigns the individuals to the accurate crime

curves and thus seems to be a fitting model. The group that each individual belongs to, which

became clear in this first analysis, were matched to the data to be able to conduct the second

analysis which is discussed later.

First, to be able to answer the first research question, it is explored how the sex

offenders are distributed over the trajectory groups. This distribution is indicated in Table 4.

The percentages are the percentages of the total group of (non)sex offenders.

Table 4

Distribution of sex offenders and nonsex offenders over the trajectory groups

Sex offenders (n=777) nonsex offenders (n=3353) Total population

Group 1 20 (2.6%) 95 (2.8%) 3.3%
Group 2 544 (70%) 2394 (71.4%) 64.7%
Group 3 67 (8.6%) 276 (8.2%) 11.5%
Group 4 109 (14%) 502 (15%) 17.2%
Group 5 37 (4.8%) 86 (2.6%) 3.3%

As shown in Table 4, the percentages of the total type of offenders are similar within

each group, which indicates that sex offenders do not have distinct criminal trajectories in the

ten years prior to their first sex offence compared with age-matched nonsex offenders. This
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 25

confirms the first hypothesis; a statistical significance test is not necessary since the

distribution of the sample is clear in showing an even distribution. The third column of Table

4 shows that the percentages of the distribution over the groups of two types of offenders are

in line with the distribution over the trajectories of the entire population.

Table 5

Average Age of Sex offenders and nonsex offenders within each trajectory

Average age at ‘zero’ Average birth year

Sex nonsex Sex nonsex
Group 1 28 25 1951 1953
Group 2 24 24 1948 1949
Group 3 30 30 1948 1949
Group 4 23 24 1950 1953
Group 5 32 29 1953 1952

Since only the whole sample was age-matched but not the trajectories itself, it is

informative to compare the average age of sex offenders with nonsex offenders within each

trajectory. These average ages at year zero and average birth years are given in Table 5. The

average ages at year zero and the average birth years do not differ much between the two

types of offenders, thus age does not seem to influence the notion that the crime trajectories of

sex offenders are not distinct from nonsex offenders.

Now we go to the second analysis of the present study; test whether certain types of

crimes can predict a subsequent sex offence. Therefore, we need to explore what types of

offences are committed in year 0. A distinction was made between people who committed a

sex offence, a nonsex offence or no offence at all. For this prediction, the years under scrunity

were 5 years prior to zero. It was found that the most common offences in these years were

violent offences, property offences and damage offences. Therefore, only these three types of

offences were used as predictors for a subsequent sex offence, since the other types of

offences did not have enough hits to be used in an analysis. Table 6 shows, for each

trajectory, the type of offences followed by the percentage of individuals who subsequently
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 26

are convicted of a sex offence, a nonsex offence or no offence in year zero. It thus indicates

the likelihood of subsequently committing a sex offence given that the individual has

committed at least one violence, property or damage offence in the 5 preceding years.

Table 6

Type of offences subsequent sex offence, nonsex offence and no offence

N sex offence (%) nonsex offence (%) none (%)

Group 1
At least 1 property 105 19 (18.1) 57 (54.3) 29 (27.6)
At least 1 damage 61 10 (16.4) 38 (62.3) 13 (21.3)
At least 1 violence 31 6 (41.9) 12 (38.7) 13 (41.9)
Group 2
At least 1 property 384 74 (19.3) 103 (26.8) 207 (53.9)
At least 1 damage 85 10 (11.8) 18 (21.2) 57 (67.1)
At least 1 violence 39 1 (2.6) 8 (20.5) 30 (76.9)
Group 3
At least 1 property 185 40 (21.6) 79 (42.7) 66 (35.7)
At least 1 damage 53 12 (22.6) 17 (32.1) 24 (45.3)
At least 1 violence 43 8 (18.6) 15 (34.9) 20 (46.5)
Group 4
At least 1 property 456 86 (18.9) 198 (43.4) 172 (37.7)
At least 1 damage 180 32 (17.8) 73 (40.6) 75 (41.7)
At least 1 violence 84 14 (16.7) 35 (41.7) 35 (41.7)
Group 5
At least 1 property 111 33 (29.7) 49 (44.1) 29 (26.1)
At least 1 damage 60 20 (33.3) 26 (43.3) 14 (23.3)
At least 1 violence 50 19 (38) 22 (44) 9 (18)

Based on Table 6, a multinomial probit regression was conducted using STATA. The

dependent variable was type of crime committed in year zero, which could be a sex offence, a

nonsex offence or no offence. The predictors were having committed at least 1 violence, 1

damage or 1 property offence in the 5 years up to zero. The analyses were controlled for age

at year zero, birth cohort and the trajectory that people belonged in. The results of the

analyses are displayed in Table 7.

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 27

Table 7

Parameter Estimates for Multinominal Probit Regression (N=4130)

Wald Chi² (18) 435***

Log likelihood -3759.8085

Crime at zero Coeff. SE z-score

Sex offence Intercept -.559* .238 -2.34
Damage .011 .119 0.09
Property .343*** .088 3.92
Violent .090 .114 0.79
Group1 .360 .229 1.57
Group3 .211 .128 1.65
Group4 .115 .113 1.02
Group5 .879*** .214 4.10
Age -.011* .004 -2.54
Cohort -.029 .019 -1.53
Nonsex offence Intercept -2.108*** .271 -7.78
Damage .127 .109 1.17
Property .649*** .083 7.77
Violent .045 .107 0.42
Group1 .961*** .202 4.77
Group3 .522*** .122 4.29
Group4 .481*** .105 4.58
Group5 .911*** .205 4.44
Age -.009 .005 -1.85
Cohort .129*** .021 6.10

Note. The reference category is ‘no offence’

*=p<.05; **=p<.01; ***=p<.001

The results of the multinominal probit regression that are displayed in Table 7 can be

interpreted as follows. First of all, the overall fitted model has a Log likelihood of -3759.8085

and is statistically significant (Wald Chi² (18) = 435, p<.001) which means that the overall

predicted model tested here is better than a model with no predictors. Now let us proceed to

the individual coefficients. As displayed in Table 7, only property has a significant effect.

Thus, keeping trajectory group, age, and birthcohort constant, having committed at least 1

property crime during the 5 preceding years increases the predicted probability of committing

a subsequent sex offence versus not committing any offence (B=.343, z=3.92, p<.001). This

result suggests that hypothesis 2 is confirmed (H2: Types of crimes can predict the likelihood
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 28

of a subsequent sex offence). However, this confirmation should be interpreted with caution;

having committed at least 1 property crime namely also increases the predicted probability of

a nonsex offence (B=.649, z=7.77, p<.001). Thus, while hypothesis 2 can be confirmed thanks

to the increase of predicted likelihood after a property offence, we can not say anything about

the difference in likelihood of a subsequent sex offence versus a subsequent nonsex offence.

Having committed at least 1 property offence namely increases the likelihood of a subsequent

sex offence as well as a subsequent nonsex offence versus no offence in year zero.

To be able to say a little more about the likelihood of subsequent offences, the actual

predicted probabilities can be computed using STATA. Therefore, the predicted probability of

a subsequent sex offence for a person who has committed at least 1 property offence (person

A) is compared with a person who has not committed a property offence in the 5 preceding

years (person B). The same is done for predicting the probability of a subsequent nonsex

offence. The other predictors are held constant for this comparison (both persons are in

trajectory group 2 and have not committed a violent or damage offence). These predicted

probabilities are computed using F, which is the cumulative distribution function of the

standard normal.

Predicted probability of a subsequent sex offence;

F (-.559 + property *.343 + age*-.011 + cohort * -.029)

F (-.559 + 1*.343 + 25*-.011 + 9*-.029) =

F (-0.752) = .22602553 [Person A]

F (-.559 + property *.343 + age*-.011 + cohort * -.029)

F (-.559 + 0*.343 + 25*-.011 + 9*-.029) =

F (-1.095) = .13675832 [Person B]

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 29

Predicted probability of a subsequent nonsex offence;

F (-2.108 + property * .649 + age*-.009 + cohort * .129)

F (-2.108 + 1*.649 + 25*-.009 + 9*.129) =-225 + 1.161 – 2.108

F (-0.523) = .30048713 [Person A]

F (-2.108 + property * .649 + age*-.009 + cohort * .129)

F (-2.108 + 0*.649 + 25*-.009 + 9*.129) =

F (-1.172) = .12059853 [Person B]

Thus, for a person who has committed at least 1 property offence in the 5 preceding

years (Person A), the predicted probability of a subsequent sex offence is .23, while the

predicted probability of a subsequent nonsex offence is .30. For a person who has not

committed a property offence in the 5 preceding years (Person B), the predicted probability of

a subsequent sex offence is .14, while the predicted probability of a subsequent nonsex

offence is .12.

After having more insight in the actual predicted probabilities, it may still be said that

the the likelihood of a subsequent sex offence can be predicted by the type of crime.

However, this is not to say that this prediction can be made more easily for sex offenders, nor

that a subsequent sex offence is more likely than a subsequent nonsex offence after

committing a property crime.

5. Conclusion and Discussion

In investigating the extent to which the first sex offence can be predicted, the

following conclusions can be made. First of all, the criminal trajectories based on crime

frequency up to the year of the first sex offence does not differ between sex offenders and
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 30

age-matched nonsex offenders. This confirms the first hypothesis. This implies that the

occurrence of a sex offence can not be predicted based on crime frequency. However, this

does confirm that the popular view that sex offenders are distinct and more dangerous in their

persistence, which exists within society and among policy makers (Zimgring, 2004), is not

based on accurate information. Instead, sex offenders seem to be similar to nonsex offenders

based on their crime frequency curve up to their first sex offence. Even though only the 10

years up to zero were under scrunity, it is likely that this confirmation accounts for the entire

criminal career, however this is not certain.

By confirming the idea that sex offenders have similar crime frequency patterns as

nonsex offenders, we could use this information for the second research question, which

addressed the extent to which types of crimes can predict a subsequent sex offence. While

controlling for this crime frequency, it was found committing at least 1 property offence in the

5 years under scrunity, increased the predicted probability of committing a subsequent sex

offence in year zero versus not committing any offence. This confirms the second hypothesis.

However, this confirmation does not go without saying that it does not say anything about

comparing sex offenders with nonsex offenders; even though a property offence increases the

predicted probability of a subsequent sex offence, it does also increase the predicted

probability of a subsequent nonsex offence. Thus, also in the second part of the study sex

offenders do not seem to be special when comparing them with nonsex offenders.

[terugkoppeling probleemstelling/theory/bestaande literatuur]

5.1 Policy Implications

5.2 Limiations and Research Suggestions

- nog vergelijken nonsex offence ses offence in predicted probability

- grotere sample voor meer specifieke delicten

- niet alleen naar eerste sex offence kijken, maar naar alle sex offences
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 31

- kijken naar combinaties van delicten

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 32

References

Berg, C.J.W. van den (2015). From Boys to Men: Explaining Juvenile Sex Offenders'

Criminal Careers (Ph.D.). Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Blokland, A., Nagin, D., & Nieuwbeerta, P. (2005). Life Span Offending Trajectories of a

Dutch Conviction Cohort*. Criminology, 43(4), 919-954. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-

9125.2005.00029.x

Blokland, A., & Geest, V. (2015). Life-Course Transitions and Desistance in Sex Offenders

(ZEDENBOEK)

Blokland, A., & Lussier, P. (2015). The Criminal Career Paradigm and Its Relevance to

Stuyding Sex Offenders (ZEDENBOEK).

Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., Roth, J., Y Visher, C. (1986). Criminal Careers and Career

Criminals. Washington, DC: National Acadamy Press.

Boone, M. (2011). Judicial Rehabilitation in the Netherlands: Balancing between safety and

privacy. European Journal of Probabion, 3(1), 63-78.

Caldwell, M. F. (2002). What We Do Not Know About Juvenile Sexual Reoffence Risk.

Child Maltreatment, 7(4), p. 291-302.

Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine

Activity Approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), p. 588-608.

Gottfredson, M., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford

University Press.

Harris, D. A., Smallbone, S., Dennison, S., & Knight, R. A. (2009). Specialisation and

versatility in sexual offenders referred for civil commitment. Journal of Criminal Justice,

37, 37–44

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Hirschi, T., & Gottfredson, M. (1995). Control theory and the life‐course perspective. Studies
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 33

on Crime and Crime Prevention, 4, 131–142.

Jennings, Piquero, Zimring, Reingle. (2015): Assessing the continuity of sex offending over

the life course. Sex Offenders, 129-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118314630.ch6

Jones, B. & Nagin, D. (2013). A Note on a Stata Plugin for Estimating Group-based

Trajectory Models. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(4), 608-613.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124113503141

Langan, P. A., & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994. Federal

Sentencing Reporter, 15(1): 58-65.

Langan, P., Schmitt, E., & Durose, M. (2003). Recidivism of sex offenders released from

prison in 1994. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Levenson, J. S., Brannon, Y. N., Fortney, T., & Baker, J. (2007). Public perceptions about sex

offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy,

7, 1–25.

Liu, J., Francis, B., Soothill, K. (2008). Kidnapping offenders: Their risk of escalation to

repeat offending and other serious crime. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry &

Psychology, 19(2): 164-179.

Lussier, P., & Cortoni, F. (2008). The development of antisocial behavior and sexual aggres-

sion: Theoretical, empirical, and clinical implications. In B. K. Schwartz (Ed.), The sex

offender: Offender evaluation and program strategies, Vol. 6 (pp. 2/1 ‐ 2–26). Kingston,

NJ: Civic Research Institute.

Lussier, P., LeBlanc, M., & Proulx, J. (2005). The generality of criminal behaviour: A

confirmatory factor analysis of the criminal activity of sex offenders in adulthood. Journal

of Criminal Justice, 33, 177−189.

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 34

Miethe, T., Olson, J., & Mitchell, O. (2006). Specialisation and persistence in the arrest

histories of sex offenders: A comparative analysis of alternative measures and offence

types. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43, 204−229.

Moffitt, T. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A

developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100(4), 674-701.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.100.4.674

Nagin, D. (1999). Analyzing developmental trajectories: A semiparametric, group-based

approach. Psychological Methods, 4(2), 139-157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//1082-

989x.4.2.139

Nagin, D. & Odgers, C. (2010). Group-Based Trajectory Modeling in Clinical Research.

Annual Review Of Clinical Psychology, 6(1), 109-138.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131413

Nieuwbeerta, P., Blokland, A., Piquero, A., & Sweeten, G. (2011). A Life-Course Analysis of

Offence Specialisation Across Age: Introducing a New Method for Studying Individual

Specialisation Over the Life Course. Crime & Delinquency, 57(1), 3-28.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128710376336

Piquero, A. (2000). Frequency, Specialisation, and Violence in Offending Careers. Journal of

Research in Crime and Delinquency, 37, 392-418.

Politie.nl (2015). Klassieke Zedenmisdrijven Dalen, Online Zedendelicten Nemen Toe.

Retrieved 10-04-2017 via https://www.politie.nl/nieuws/2015/april/7/misdaadmeter-

zedenmisdrijven.html

Politie.nl (2017). Publicaties en Cijfers. Retieved 10-04-2017 via

https://www.politie.nl/themas/thema/publicaties-en-cijfers.html

Rubenstein, M., Yeager, C. A., Goodstein, C., & Lewis, D. O. (1993). Sexually assaultive

male juveniles: a follow up. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 150(2): 262-265.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 35

Sample, L., & Bray, M. (2003). Are Sex Offenders Dangerous? Criminology and Public

Policy, 3(1): 59-82.

Sampson, Rl, & Laub, J. (1993). Crime in the Making. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University

Press.

Sampson, Robert J. and John H. Laub. 2003. Life-course desisters? Trajectories of crime

among delinquent boys followed to age 70. Criminology 41(3): 555-592.

Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1995). Understanding variability in lives through time:

Contribution of life‐course criminology. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 4,

143–158.

Sipe, R., Jensen, E. L., & Everett, R. S. (1998). Adolescent sexual offenders grown up:

Recidivism in young adulthood. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 25: 109-124.

Soothill, K., Francis, B. (2000). Does sex offending lead to homicide? The Journal of

Forensic Psychiatry, 11(1): 49-61.

Soothill, K., Francis, B., Sanderson, B., & Ackerley, E. (2000). Sex offenders: Specialists,

generalists, or both? A 32‐year criminological study. British Journal of Criminology, 40,

56–67.

Soothill, K., Francis, B., Ackerley, E., & Fligelstone, R. (2002). Murder and serious sexual

assault: what criminal histories can reveal about future serious offending. Policing and

Reducing Crime Unit: Police Research Series.

Soothill, K., Francis, B, Fligelstone, R. (2004). Identifying Patterns and Pathways of

Offending Behaviour: A new Approach to Typologies of Crime. European Journal of

Criminology, 1(1): 47-87.

Soothil, K., Francis, B., Liu, J. (2008). Does Serious Offending Lead to Homicide? Exploring

the Interrelationships and Sequencing of Serious Crime. The British Journal of

Criminology, 48(8): 522-537.

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 36

Terugkijktermijnen. Justis.nl. Retrieved 15 February 2017, from

https://www.justis.nl/producten/vog/vog-aanvragen/naar-welke-gegevens-wordt-gekeken/

terugkijktermijnen.aspx

Uggen, C., & Staff, J. (2001). Work as a Turning Point for Criminal Offenders. Corrections

Management Quarterly, 5(4), 1-16.

Zimring, F. E. (2004). An American travesty: Legal responses to adolescent sexual offending.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Zimring, F. E., Piquero, A. R., & Jennings, W. G. (2007). Sexual Delinquency in Racine:

Does Early Sex Offending Predict Later Sex Offending in Youth and Young Adulthood?

Criminology & Public Policy, 6(3), 507-534.

Zimring, F. E., Jennings, W. G., Piquero, A. R., & Hays, S. (2009). Investigating the

Continuity of Sex Offending: Evidence from the Second Philadelphia Birth Cohort. Justice

Quarterly, 26(1), 58-76.

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 37

Appendix A: Syntax data restrictions - analyses

1. SPSS

* Encoding: UTF-8.
get file ='F:\Final\SOperson_yearFINAL.sav'.
*variabele die aangeeft hoeveeel unieke personen in de data zitten.
compute person = 0.
if (idnew = lag(idnew)) person = 1.
exe.
freq var person.
*variabele die voor elk jaar aangeeft of er sprake is van een sexual offence.
compute sexoffence = rape + sexass + sexab + flash.
exe.
*age sex offence.
if (sexoffence ge 1) agesex = age.
exe.
*variabele die voor elke respondent het aantal zeden delicten weergeeft en onsetage sex
offence.
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/sexoffences = sum(sexoffence) / onsetagesex = min(agesex).
*variabele die per respondent weergeeft of die respondent een zedendader is.
recode sexoffences (0=0) (1 thru hi = 1) into sexoffender.
exe.
*variabele die per respondent weergeeft of die respondent een zedendader is.
recode sexoffences (0=0) (1 thru hi = 1) into sexoffender.
exe.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var sexoffender onsetagesex sexoffences.
*slechts 5 sex offenders zijn vrouw.
temporary.
select if (sexoffender = 1) and (person = 0).
freq var geslp.
*daarom analyses alleen op mannen.
select if geslp = 1.
exe.
*alleen mannen.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var sexoffender onsetagesex sexoffences.
temporary.
select if (sexoffender = 1) and (person = 0).
freq var gebjp.
temporary.
select if (sexoffender ne 1) and (person = 0).
freq var gebjp.
*geboortejaar in 5-jaar categorieen.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 38

recode gebjp (1960 thru 1964 = 11)

(1955 thru 1959 = 10)
(1950 thru 1954 = 9)
(1945 thru 1949 = 8)
(1940 thru 1944 = 7)
(1935 thru 1939 = 6)
(1930 thru 1934 = 5)
(1925 thru 1929 = 4)
(1920 thru 1924 = 3)
(1915 thru 1919 = 2)
(1910 thru 1914 = 1) into gebjp_c.
*aantal sex offenders per geboortecohort.
temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1.
freq var gebjp_c.
temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 0.
freq var gebjp_c.
*voor elk geboortecohort aantal verschillende onset age sex.
temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 1.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in geboortecohort 1 zitten 2 sex offenders, respectievelijk met onset leeftijd sex van 26 en
62.
*de helft van het corresponderende cohort nonsex offenders krijgt onsetagesex 26, de andere
62.
*zo kunnen zij als controle personen dienen voor de sex offenders uit dit cohort.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 1) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*geeft aantal controle personen.
*dit aantal opdelen in aantal relevante onsetagecategorieen.
if (hulp lt 5) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp ge 5) onsetagecon = 62.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.
temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 2.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 2 zitten 10 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 2) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 39

EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*geeft aantal controle personen.
*dit aantal opdelen in aantal relevante onsetagecategorieen.
if (hulp le 3) onsetagecon = 18.
if (hulp gt 3 and hulp le 6) onsetagecon = 19.
if (hulp gt 6 and hulp le 9) onsetagecon = 20.
if (hulp gt 9 and hulp le 12) onsetagecon = 21.
if (hulp gt 12 and hulp le 15) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 15 and hulp le 18) onsetagecon = 40.
if (hulp gt 18 and hulp le 21) onsetagecon = 45.
if (hulp gt 21 and hulp le 24) onsetagecon = 59.
if (hulp gt 24 and hulp le 27) onsetagecon = 59.
*onsetagesex 59 komt twee keer voor in dit cohort.
if (hulp gt 27 and hulp le 30) onsetagecon = 62.
*je houdt nog 4 controle personen over in dit cohort.
*die verdelen over de hoogste onsetagesex categorieen ivm grootste kans op uitval door
overlijden.
if (hulp = 31) onsetagecon = 45.
if (hulp = 32) onsetagecon = 59.
if (hulp = 33) onsetagecon = 59.
if (hulp = 34) onsetagecon = 62.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.

temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 3.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 3 zitten 15 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 3) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*geeft aantal controle personen.
*dit aantal opdelen in aantal relevante onsetagecategorieen.
if (hulp le 4) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 4 and hulp le 8) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp gt 8 and hulp le 12) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp gt 12 and hulp le 16) onsetagecon = 35.
if (hulp gt 16 and hulp le 20) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp gt 20 and hulp le 24) onsetagecon = 42.
if (hulp gt 24 and hulp le 28) onsetagecon = 43.
if (hulp gt 28 and hulp le 32) onsetagecon = 45.
if (hulp gt 32 and hulp le 36) onsetagecon = 47.
if (hulp gt 36 and hulp le 40) onsetagecon = 49.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 40

if (hulp gt 40 and hulp le 44) onsetagecon = 52.

if (hulp gt 44 and hulp le 48) onsetagecon = 53.
*onsetagesex 53 komt twee keer voor in dit cohort.
if (hulp gt 48 and hulp le 52) onsetagecon = 53.
if (hulp gt 52 and hulp le 56) onsetagecon = 54.
if (hulp gt 56 and hulp le 60) onsetagecon = 55.
*nog 12 over.
if (hulp = 61) onsetagecon = 35.
if (hulp = 62) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp = 63) onsetagecon = 42.
if (hulp = 64) onsetagecon = 43.
if (hulp = 65) onsetagecon = 45.
if (hulp = 66) onsetagecon = 47.
if (hulp = 67) onsetagecon = 49.
if (hulp = 68) onsetagecon = 52.
if (hulp gt 68 and hulp le 70) onsetagecon = 53.
if (hulp = 71) onsetagecon = 54.
if (hulp = 72) onsetagecon = 55.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.

temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 4.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 4 zitten 23 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 4) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*geeft aantal controle personen.
*dit aantal opdelen in aantal relevante onsetagecategorieen.
if (hulp le 4) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp gt 4 and hulp le 16) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 16 and hulp le 20) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 20 and hulp le 24) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp gt 24 and hulp le 28) onsetagecon = 28.
if (hulp gt 28 and hulp le 32) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp gt 32 and hulp le 36) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp gt 36 and hulp le 40) onsetagecon = 32.
if (hulp gt 40 and hulp le 44) onsetagecon = 44.
if (hulp gt 44 and hulp le 48) onsetagecon = 47.
if (hulp gt 48 and hulp le 56) onsetagecon = 48.
if (hulp gt 56 and hulp le 64) onsetagecon = 49.
if (hulp gt 64 and hulp le 80) onsetagecon = 50.
if (hulp gt 80 and hulp le 92) onsetagecon = 51.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 41

*nu zijn er nog 7 over.

if (hulp = 93) onsetagecon = 32.
if (hulp = 94) onsetagecon = 44.
if (hulp = 95) onsetagecon = 47.
if (hulp = 96) onsetagecon = 48.
if (hulp = 97) onsetagecon = 49.
if (hulp = 98) onsetagecon = 50.
if (hulp = 99) onsetagecon = 51.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.

temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 5.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 5 zitten 33 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 5) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*138 controle personen verdelen over 33 sex offenders, dus eerst 4 per groep.
if (hulp le 4) onsetagecon = 14.
if (hulp gt 4 and hulp le 8) onsetagecon = 16.
if (hulp gt 8 and hulp le 12) onsetagecon = 19.
if (hulp gt 12 and hulp le 24) onsetagecon = 21.
if (hulp gt 24 and hulp le 32) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp gt 32 and hulp le 40) onsetagecon = 24.
if (hulp gt 40 and hulp le 44) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 44 and hulp le 48) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp gt 48 and hulp le 60) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp gt 60 and hulp le 64) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp gt 64 and hulp le 68) onsetagecon = 32.
if (hulp gt 68 and hulp le 76) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp gt 76 and hulp le 80) onsetagecon = 34.
if (hulp gt 80 and hulp le 84) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp gt 84 and hulp le 88) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp gt 88 and hulp le 92) onsetagecon = 38.
if (hulp gt 92 and hulp le 104) onsetagecon = 43.
if (hulp gt 104 and hulp le 108) onsetagecon = 44.
if (hulp gt 108 and hulp le 124) onsetagecon = 45.
if (hulp gt 124 and hulp le 132) onsetagecon = 46.
*nu zijn er nog 6 over.
if (hulp = 133) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp = 134) onsetagecon = 38.
if (hulp = 135) onsetagecon = 43.
if (hulp = 136) onsetagecon = 44.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 42

if (hulp = 137) onsetagecon = 45.

if (hulp = 138) onsetagecon = 46.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.

temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 6.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 6 zitten 50 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 6) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*187 controle personen verdelen over 50 sex offenders, dus eerst 3 per groep.
if (hulp le 9) onsetagecon = 16.
if (hulp gt 9 and hulp le 12) onsetagecon = 18.
if (hulp gt 12 and hulp le 18) onsetagecon = 20.
if (hulp gt 18 and hulp le 33) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp gt 33 and hulp le 36) onsetagecon = 23.
if (hulp gt 36 and hulp le 42) onsetagecon = 24.
if (hulp gt 42 and hulp le 51) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 51 and hulp le 63) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 63 and hulp le 66) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp gt 66 and hulp le 69) onsetagecon = 28.
if (hulp gt 69 and hulp le 72) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp gt 72 and hulp le 78) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp gt 78 and hulp le 81) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp gt 81 and hulp le 84) onsetagecon = 35.
if (hulp gt 84 and hulp le 87) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp gt 87 and hulp le 99) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp gt 99 and hulp le 108) onsetagecon = 38.
if (hulp gt 108 and hulp le 120) onsetagecon = 39.
if (hulp gt 120 and hulp le 135) onsetagecon = 40.
if (hulp gt 135 and hulp le 138) onsetagecon = 41.
if (hulp gt 138 and hulp le 144) onsetagecon = 57.
if (hulp gt 144 and hulp le 147) onsetagecon = 62.
if (hulp gt 147 and hulp le 150) onsetagecon = 66.
*nu zijn er nog 37 over.
if (hulp gt 150 and hulp le 152) onsetagecon = 24.
if (hulp gt 152 and hulp le 155) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 155 and hulp le 159) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp = 160) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp = 161) onsetagecon = 28.
if (hulp = 162) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp gt 162 and hulp le 164) onsetagecon = 31.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 43

if (hulp = 165) onsetagecon = 33.

if (hulp = 166) onsetagecon = 35.
if (hulp = 167) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp gt 167 and hulp le 171) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp gt 171 and hulp le 174) onsetagecon = 38.
if (hulp gt 174 and hulp le 178) onsetagecon = 39.
if (hulp gt 178 and hulp le 183) onsetagecon = 40.
if (hulp = 184) onsetagecon = 41.
if (hulp gt 184 and hulp le 186) onsetagecon = 57.
if (hulp = 187) onsetagecon = 62.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.

temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 7.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 7 zitten 87 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 7) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*285 controle personen verdelen over 87 sex offenders, dus eerst 3 per groep.
if (hulp le 9) onsetagecon = 14.
if (hulp gt 9 and hulp le 15) onsetagecon = 15.
if (hulp gt 15 and hulp le 21) onsetagecon = 16.
if (hulp gt 21 and hulp le 30) onsetagecon = 17.
if (hulp gt 30 and hulp le 39) onsetagecon = 18.
if (hulp gt 39 and hulp le 51) onsetagecon = 19.
if (hulp gt 51 and hulp le 60) onsetagecon = 20.
if (hulp gt 60 and hulp le 72) onsetagecon = 21.
if (hulp gt 72 and hulp le 84) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp gt 84 and hulp le 90) onsetagecon = 23.
if (hulp gt 90 and hulp le 102) onsetagecon = 24.
if (hulp gt 102 and hulp le 123) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 123 and hulp le 129) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 129 and hulp le 135) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp gt 135 and hulp le 138) onsetagecon = 28.
if (hulp gt 138 and hulp le 144) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp gt 144 and hulp le 153) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp gt 153 and hulp le 159) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp gt 159 and hulp le 174) onsetagecon = 32.
if (hulp gt 174 and hulp le 195) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp gt 195 and hulp le 219) onsetagecon = 34.
if (hulp gt 219 and hulp le 225) onsetagecon = 35.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 44

if (hulp gt 225 and hulp le 249) onsetagecon = 36.

if (hulp gt 249 and hulp le 252) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp gt 252 and hulp le 258) onsetagecon = 42.
if (hulp gt 258 and hulp le 261) onsetagecon = 54.
*nu zijn er nog 24 over.
if (hulp gt 261 and hulp le 263) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp gt 263 and hulp le 271) onsetagecon = 34.
if (hulp gt 271 and hulp le 273) onsetagecon = 35.
if (hulp gt 273 and hulp le 281) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp = 282) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp gt 282 and hulp le 284) onsetagecon = 42.
if (hulp = 285) onsetagecon = 54.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.

temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 8.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 8 zitten 130 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 8) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*436 controle personen verdelen over 130 sex offenders, dus eerst 3 per groep.
if (hulp le 3) onsetagecon = 12.
if (hulp gt 3 and hulp le 6) onsetagecon = 13.
if (hulp gt 6 and hulp le 9) onsetagecon = 14.
if (hulp gt 9 and hulp le 24) onsetagecon = 15.
if (hulp gt 24 and hulp le 45) onsetagecon = 16.
if (hulp gt 45 and hulp le 87) onsetagecon = 17.
if (hulp gt 87 and hulp le 108) onsetagecon = 18.
if (hulp gt 108 and hulp le 123) onsetagecon = 19.
if (hulp gt 123 and hulp le 129) onsetagecon = 20.
if (hulp gt 129 and hulp le 153) onsetagecon = 21.
if (hulp gt 153 and hulp le 159) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp gt 159 and hulp le 180) onsetagecon = 23.
if (hulp gt 180 and hulp le 189) onsetagecon = 24.
if (hulp gt 189 and hulp le 195) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 195 and hulp le 207) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 207 and hulp le 228) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp gt 228 and hulp le 267) onsetagecon = 28.
if (hulp gt 267 and hulp le 303) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp gt 303 and hulp le 321) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp gt 321 and hulp le 345) onsetagecon = 31.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 45

if (hulp gt 345 and hulp le 348) onsetagecon = 32.

if (hulp gt 348 and hulp le 354) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp gt 354 and hulp le 357) onsetagecon = 34.
if (hulp gt 357 and hulp le 360) onsetagecon = 40.
if (hulp gt 360 and hulp le 366) onsetagecon = 41.
if (hulp gt 366 and hulp le 369) onsetagecon = 44.
if (hulp gt 369 and hulp le 372) onsetagecon = 48.
if (hulp gt 372 and hulp le 378) onsetagecon = 50.
if (hulp gt 378 and hulp le 381) onsetagecon = 53.
if (hulp gt 381 and hulp le 390) onsetagecon = 56.
*nu zijn er nog 46 over.
if (hulp gt 390 and hulp le 395) onsetagecon = 28.
if (hulp gt 395 and hulp le 407) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp gt 407 and hulp le 413) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp gt 413 and hulp le 421) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp = 422) onsetagecon = 32.
if (hulp gt 422 and hulp le 424) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp = 425) onsetagecon = 34.
if (hulp = 426) onsetagecon = 40.
if (hulp gt 426 and hulp le 428) onsetagecon = 41.
if (hulp = 429) onsetagecon = 44.
if (hulp = 430) onsetagecon = 48.
if (hulp gt 430 and hulp le 432) onsetagecon = 50.
if (hulp = 433) onsetagecon = 53.
if (hulp gt 433 and hulp le 436) onsetagecon = 56.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.

temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 9.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 9 zitten 157 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 9) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*675 controle personen verdelen over 157 sex offenders, dus eerst 4 per groep.
if (hulp le 4) onsetagecon = 12.
if (hulp gt 4 and hulp le 8) onsetagecon = 13.
if (hulp gt 8 and hulp le 24) onsetagecon = 14.
if (hulp gt 24 and hulp le 52) onsetagecon = 15.
if (hulp gt 52 and hulp le 68) onsetagecon = 16.
if (hulp gt 68 and hulp le 100) onsetagecon = 17.
if (hulp gt 100 and hulp le 144) onsetagecon = 18.
if (hulp gt 144 and hulp le 172) onsetagecon = 19.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 46

if (hulp gt 172 and hulp le 188) onsetagecon = 20.

if (hulp gt 188 and hulp le 224) onsetagecon = 21.
if (hulp gt 224 and hulp le 272) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp gt 272 and hulp le 336) onsetagecon = 23.
if (hulp gt 336 and hulp le 420) onsetagecon = 24.
if (hulp gt 420 and hulp le 472) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 472 and hulp le 512) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 512 and hulp le 548) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp gt 548 and hulp le 552) onsetagecon = 28.
if (hulp gt 552 and hulp le 556) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp gt 556 and hulp le 560) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp gt 560 and hulp le 564) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp gt 564 and hulp le 568) onsetagecon = 32.
if (hulp gt 568 and hulp le 576) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp gt 576 and hulp le 580) onsetagecon = 34.
if (hulp gt 580 and hulp le 588) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp gt 588 and hulp le 592) onsetagecon = 39.
if (hulp gt 592 and hulp le 596) onsetagecon = 40.
if (hulp gt 596 and hulp le 600) onsetagecon = 41.
if (hulp gt 600 and hulp le 604) onsetagecon = 42.
if (hulp gt 604 and hulp le 612) onsetagecon = 43.
if (hulp gt 612 and hulp le 616) onsetagecon = 45.
if (hulp gt 616 and hulp le 620) onsetagecon = 47.
if (hulp gt 620 and hulp le 624) onsetagecon = 52.
if (hulp gt 624 and hulp le 628) onsetagecon = 55.
*nu zijn er nog 47 over.
if (hulp gt 628 and hulp le 636) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 636 and hulp le 646) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 646 and hulp le 655) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp = 656) onsetagecon = 28.
if (hulp = 657) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp = 658) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp = 659) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp = 660) onsetagecon = 32.
if (hulp gt 660 and hulp le 662) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp = 663) onsetagecon = 34.
if (hulp gt 663 and hulp le 665) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp = 666) onsetagecon = 39.
if (hulp = 667) onsetagecon = 40.
if (hulp = 668) onsetagecon = 41.
if (hulp = 669) onsetagecon = 42.
if (hulp gt 669 and hulp le 671) onsetagecon = 43.
if (hulp = 672) onsetagecon = 45.
if (hulp = 673) onsetagecon = 47.
if (hulp = 674) onsetagecon = 52.
if (hulp = 675) onsetagecon = 55.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 47

freq var onsetagecon.

temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 10.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 10 zitten 174 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 10) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*995 controle personen verdelen over 174 sex offenders, dus eerst 5 per groep.
if (hulp le 5) onsetagecon = 13.
if (hulp gt 5 and hulp le 20) onsetagecon = 14.
if (hulp gt 20 and hulp le 55) onsetagecon = 15.
if (hulp gt 55 and hulp le 105) onsetagecon = 16.
if (hulp gt 105 and hulp le 185) onsetagecon = 17.
if (hulp gt 185 and hulp le 355) onsetagecon = 18.
if (hulp gt 355 and hulp le 470) onsetagecon = 19.
if (hulp gt 470 and hulp le 560) onsetagecon = 20.
if (hulp gt 560 and hulp le 645) onsetagecon = 21.
if (hulp gt 645 and hulp le 690) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp gt 690 and hulp le 710) onsetagecon = 23.
if (hulp gt 710 and hulp le 730) onsetagecon = 24.
if (hulp gt 730 and hulp le 755) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 755 and hulp le 775) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 775 and hulp le 780) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp gt 780 and hulp le 785) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp gt 785 and hulp le 790) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp gt 790 and hulp le 795) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp gt 795 and hulp le 800) onsetagecon = 32.
if (hulp gt 800 and hulp le 805) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp gt 805 and hulp le 815) onsetagecon = 34.
if (hulp gt 815 and hulp le 830) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp gt 830 and hulp le 835) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp gt 835 and hulp le 845) onsetagecon = 38.
if (hulp gt 845 and hulp le 850) onsetagecon = 39.
if (hulp gt 850 and hulp le 855) onsetagecon = 42.
if (hulp gt 855 and hulp le 865) onsetagecon = 43.
if (hulp gt 865 and hulp le 870) onsetagecon = 45.
*nu zijn er nog 125 over.
if (hulp gt 870 and hulp le 892) onsetagecon = 18.
if (hulp gt 892 and hulp le 915) onsetagecon = 19.
if (hulp gt 915 and hulp le 933) onsetagecon = 20.
if (hulp gt 933 and hulp le 950) onsetagecon = 21.
if (hulp gt 950 and hulp le 959) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp gt 959 and hulp le 963) onsetagecon = 23.
if (hulp gt 963 and hulp le 967) onsetagecon = 24.
if (hulp gt 967 and hulp le 972) onsetagecon = 25.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 48

if (hulp gt 972 and hulp le 976) onsetagecon = 26.

if (hulp = 977) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp = 978) onsetagecon = 29.
if (hulp = 979) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp = 980) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp = 981) onsetagecon = 32.
if (hulp = 982) onsetagecon = 33.
if (hulp gt 982 and hulp le 984) onsetagecon = 34.
if (hulp gt 984 and hulp le 987) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp = 988) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp gt 988 and hulp le 990) onsetagecon = 38.
if (hulp = 991) onsetagecon = 39.
if (hulp = 992) onsetagecon = 42.
if (hulp gt 992 and hulp le 994) onsetagecon = 43.
if (hulp = 995) onsetagecon = 45.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.

temporary.
select if person = 0 and sexoffender = 1 and gebjp_c = 11.
freq var onsetagesex.
*in cohort 11 zitten 99 sex offenders.
if (person = 0 and sexoffender = 0 and gebjp_c = 11) hulp = 1.
exe.
sort cases by hulp (d) idnew.
if (hulp = 1) and (lag(hulp) ge 1) hulp = lag(hulp)+1.
EXECUTE.
freq var hulp.
*457 controle personen verdelen over 99 sex offenders, dus eerst 4 per groep.
if (hulp le 4) onsetagecon = 12.
if (hulp gt 4 and hulp le 8) onsetagecon = 13.
if (hulp gt 8 and hulp le 28) onsetagecon = 14.
if (hulp gt 28 and hulp le 124) onsetagecon = 15.
if (hulp gt 124 and hulp le 268) onsetagecon = 16.
if (hulp gt 268 and hulp le 340) onsetagecon = 17.
if (hulp gt 340 and hulp le 344) onsetagecon = 18.
if (hulp gt 344 and hulp le 348) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp gt 348 and hulp le 352) onsetagecon = 23.
if (hulp gt 352 and hulp le 356) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp gt 356 and hulp le 360) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 360 and hulp le 372) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp gt 372 and hulp le 376) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp gt 376 and hulp le 380) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp gt 380 and hulp le 384) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp gt 384 and hulp le 388) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp gt 388 and hulp le 392) onsetagecon = 38.
if (hulp gt 392 and hulp le 396) onsetagecon = 44.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 49

*nu zijn er nog 61 over.

if (hulp gt 396 and hulp le 425) onsetagecon = 16.
if (hulp gt 425 and hulp le 443) onsetagecon = 17.
if (hulp = 444) onsetagecon = 18.
if (hulp = 445) onsetagecon = 22.
if (hulp = 446) onsetagecon = 23.
if (hulp = 447) onsetagecon = 25.
if (hulp = 448) onsetagecon = 26.
if (hulp gt 448 and hulp le 451) onsetagecon = 27.
if (hulp = 452) onsetagecon = 30.
if (hulp = 453) onsetagecon = 31.
if (hulp = 454) onsetagecon = 36.
if (hulp = 455) onsetagecon = 37.
if (hulp = 456) onsetagecon = 38.
if (hulp = 457) onsetagecon = 44.
exe.
delete var hulp.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon.

*Uiteindelijk is het totaal van onsetagecon 3386, dit is een minder dan de aantal nonsex
offenders maar dat is omdat hij buiten de cohort categorien dus het is geen probleem.

sort cases by idnew age.

*variabele die voor elke respondent de controle onsetleeftijd weergeeft.
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/onsetagecon = max(onsetagecon) .
if (sexoffender = 0) onsetagesex = onsetagecon.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagesex.
temporary.
select if person = 0.
freq var onsetagecon sexoffender onsetagesex.
*aanmaken variabele year to sex offence.
compute ytosex = age-onsetagesex.
exe.
freq var ytosex.
*alleen jaren voorafgaand aan jaar sex offence meenemen.
SELECT IF ((ytosex < 0) & (ytosex >= -10)).
exe.
SORT CASES BY idnew(A) ytosex(D).
exe.
EXECUTE.
save outfile= 'F:\Final\SOyearFINAL.sav' .
exe.
get file= 'F:\Final\SOyearFINAL.sav' .
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 50

exe.
CASESTOVARS
/ID=idnew
/GROUPBY=VARIABLE.
save outfile= 'F:\Final\SOyearFINAL1.sav'
/ keep = idnew vftot.1 to vftot.10 free.1 to free.10 ytosex.1 to ytosex.10.
exe.
get file= 'F:\Final\SOyearFINAL1.sav'.
exe.
SAVE TRANSLATE OUTFILE='F:\Final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta'
/TYPE=STATA
/VERSION=11
/EDITION=SE
/MAP
/REPLACE.
*geeft foutmeldingen mbt variabele namen.
*die kun je negeren.
*in STATA gekeken of vftot.1-vftot.10 extreme waarden lijken te hebben, dat is neit het
geval, dus ik ga er niet van uit dat er outliers zijn die de analyse in de weg zitten.

*TRAJECTANALYSE UITVOEREN (zie STATA syntax).

*resultaten traject analyse.
*vanuit STATA, group probabilities opslaan als .cvs bestand.
*vervolgens in excel alle punten vervangen door comma's.
*daarna excel bestand in lezen in spss.
*koppelen group probabilities aan SPSS file.
*Eerst een SPSS file maken die nog wel ytosex=0 erbij heeft (want die had ik er uitgefilterd
en het gaat om wat er wordt gepleegd in het jaar ytosex=0.
*Deze SPSS file maak ik even hier buitenom en die noem ik SOyearFINAL2.
get file= 'F:\Final\SOyearFINAL2.sav'.
exe.
sort cases by idnew year.
MATCH FILES /FILE='F:\Final\SOyearFINAL2.sav'
/TABLE='F:\Final\SOtrajecten3.sav'
/BY idnew.
EXECUTE.
SAVE OUTFILE = 'F:\Final\SOyearFINALMATCHED.sav'.
GET FILE = 'F:\Final\SOyearFINALMATCHED.sav'.
*Nu ga ik zorgen dat ik de beschrijvende statistieken kan gaan invullen.
GET
FILE='F:\Final\SOyearFINALMATCHED.sav'.
*hier zitten dus alle jaren tot en MET het sexoffence of nonsex offence of het nonoffence.
*Alleen nu zie ik allemaal missings bij de probabilities, hoe kan dat?
freq group.
*het zijn er maar 14 missing, misschien omdat hun onsetagesex 12 was?
freq onsetagesex.

*Ja, dat klopt. Dus mensen die onsetagesex 12 hebben moeten er uit.
select if onsetagesex > 12.
freq group.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 51

*Nu moet ik per groep kijken hoeveel mensen een sexoffence, nonsexoffence of nonoffence
plegen in jaar 0.
*Daarvoor moet ik eerst een variabele aanmaken die per case aangeeft welk delict ze plegen
in het jaar 0.
IF (ytosex = 0 & sexoffence > 0) delict0=1.
IF (ytosex = 0 & sexoffence = 0 & vftot > 0) delict0=2.
IF (ytosex = 0 & sexoffence = 0 & vftot = 0) delict0=3.
EXECUTE.
freq delict0.
compute persona = 0.
if (idnew = lag(idnew)) persona = 1.
exe.
freq var persona.
temporary.
select if persona=0.
freq var delict0.
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/delict0 = max(delict0) .
temporary.
select if delict0=sysmis & ytosex=0.
freq persona.
*hierbij is 1 sexoffence, 2 nonsex offence en 3 nonoffence.
TEMPORARY.
select if group = 1 and persona= 0.
freq delict0.
TEMPORARY.
select if group = 2 and persona=0..
freq delict0.
TEMPORARY.
select if group = 3 and persona=0..
freq delict0.
TEMPORARY.
select if group = 4 and persona=0..
freq delict0.
TEMPORARY.
select if group = 5 and persona=0..
freq delict0.
*Nu zou ik binnen elke trajectory (alleen die 10 jaar) het aantal sex, nonsex en non offenders
moeten hebben.
*Ik rond in de tabel op hele getallen af.

temporary.
select if group = 1 & delict0 = 2 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 1 & delict0 = 3 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 52

temporary.
select if group = 2 & delict0 = 1 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 2 & delict0 = 2 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 2 & delict0 = 3 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 3 & delict0 = 1 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 3 & delict0 = 2 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 3 & delict0 = 3 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 4 & delict0 = 1 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 4 & delict0 = 2 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 4 & delict0 = 3 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 5 & delict0 = 1 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 5 & delict0 = 2 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.

temporary.
select if group = 5 & delict0 = 3 and persona=0.
DESCRIPTIVES age gebjp.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 53

*Nu moet ik per traject gaan kijken naar het percentage sex offenders/nonsex/none offenders
dat in de 5 jaar voorafgaand tenminste een property-violence etc hebben gepleegd.

IF ((ytosex = - 1 & vfviol > 0) | (ytosex = - 2 & vfviol > 0) | (ytosex = - 3 & vfviol > 0) |
(ytosex = - 4 & vfviol > 0) | (ytosex = - 5 & vfviol > 0)) violent=1.
EXECUTE.
IF ((ytosex = - 1 & vfprop > 0) | (ytosex = - 2 & vfprop > 0) | (ytosex = - 3 & vfprop > 0) |
(ytosex = - 4 & vfprop > 0) | (ytosex = - 5 & vfprop > 0)) property=1.
EXECUTE.
IF ((ytosex = - 1 & vfdam > 0) | (ytosex = - 2 & vfdam > 0) | (ytosex = - 3 & vfdam > 0) |
(ytosex = - 4 & vfdam > 0) | (ytosex = - 5 & vfdam > 0)) damage=1.
EXECUTE.
IF ((ytosex = - 1 & vfovsr > 0) | (ytosex = - 2 & vfovsr > 0) | (ytosex = - 3 & vfovsr > 0) |
(ytosex = - 4 & vfovsr > 0) | (ytosex = - 5 & vfovsr > 0)) othercriminallaw=1.
EXECUTE.
IF ((ytosex = - 1 & vfdrugs > 0) | (ytosex = - 2 & vfdrugs > 0) | (ytosex = - 3 & vfdrugs >
0) |
(ytosex = - 4 & vfdrugs > 0) | (ytosex = - 5 & vfdrugs > 0)) drugs=1.
EXECUTE.
IF ((ytosex = - 1 & vfguns > 0) | (ytosex = - 2 & vfguns > 0) | (ytosex = - 3 & vfguns > 0) |
(ytosex = - 4 & vfguns > 0) | (ytosex = - 5 & vfguns > 0)) guns=1.
EXECUTE.
IF ((ytosex = - 1 & vftraf > 0) | (ytosex = - 2 & vftraf > 0) | (ytosex = - 3 & vftraf > 0) |
(ytosex = - 4 & vftraf > 0) | (ytosex = - 5 & vftraf > 0)) traffic=1.
EXECUTE.
IF ((ytosex = - 1 & vfoth > 0) | (ytosex = - 2 & vfoth > 0) | (ytosex = - 3 & vfoth > 0) |
(ytosex = - 4 & vfoth > 0) | (ytosex = - 5 & vfoth > 0)) othernoncriminallaw=1.
EXECUTE.

compute person = 0.
if (ytosex=0) person = 1.
exe.
freq var person.
*oke dus bij ieder unieke persoon is person=1.
freq violent.
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/violent = max(violent) .
temporary.
select if person=1.
freq violent.
temporary.
select if person=1.
DESCRIPTIVES violent.
*volgensmij klopt het zo, dus nu voor alle nieuwe variabelen.

AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 54

/property = max(property) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/damage = max(damage) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/othercriminallaw = max(othercriminallaw) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/drugs = max(drugs) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/guns = max(guns) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/traffic = max(traffic) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/othernoncriminallaw = max(othernoncriminallaw) .

*Percentage SO/NSO/NO per traject dat in de 5 jaar voorafgaan ten minste 1 violence delict
heeft gepleegd.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 1.
freq violent.

temporary.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 55

select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 2.

freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 3.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 1.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 2.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 3.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 1.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 2.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 3.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 1.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 2.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 3.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 56

freq violent.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq violent.

*Percentage SO/NSO/NO per traject dat in de 5 jaar voorafgaan ten minste 1 property delict
heeft gepleegd.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 1.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 2.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 3.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 1.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 2.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 3.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 1.
freq property.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 57

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 2.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 3.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 1.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 2.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 3.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq property.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq property.

*Percentage SO/NSO/NO per traject dat in de 5 jaar voorafgaan ten minste 1 damage delict
heeft gepleegd.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 1.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 58

freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 2.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 3.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 1.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 2.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 3.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 1.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 2.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 3.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 1.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 2.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 3.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq damage.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 59

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq damage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq damage.

*Percentage SO/NSO/NO per traject dat in de 5 jaar voorafgaan ten minste 1

othercriminallaw delict heeft gepleegd.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 1.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 2.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 3.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 1.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 2.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 3.
freq othercriminallaw.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 60

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 1.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 2.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 3.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 1.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 2.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 3.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq othercriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq othercriminallaw.

*Percentage SO/NSO/NO per traject dat in de 5 jaar voorafgaan ten minste 1 drugs delict
heeft gepleegd.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq drugs.

temporary.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 61

select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 3.

freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 1.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 2.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 3.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 1.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 2.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 3.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 1.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 2.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 3.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 1.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 2.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 3.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 62

freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq drugs.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq drugs.

*Percentage SO/NSO/NO per traject dat in de 5 jaar voorafgaan ten minste 1 guns delict heeft
gepleegd.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 1.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 2.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 3.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 1.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 2.
freq guns.

temporary.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 63

select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 3.

freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 1.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 2.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 3.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 1.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 2.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 3.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq guns.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq guns.

*Percentage SO/NSO/NO per traject dat in de 5 jaar voorafgaan ten minste 1 traffic delict
heeft gepleegd.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 2.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 64

freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 1.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 2.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 3.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 1.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 2.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 3.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 1.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 2.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 3.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 1.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 2.
freq traffic.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 65

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 3.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq traffic.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq traffic.

*Percentage SO/NSO/NO per traject dat in de 5 jaar voorafgaan ten minste 1

othernoncriminallaw delict heeft gepleegd.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 1.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 2.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2 & delict0 = 3.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 1.
freq othernoncriminallaw.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 66

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 2.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3 & delict0 = 3.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 1.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 2.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4 & delict0 = 3.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 1.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 2.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5 & delict0 = 3.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3.
freq othernoncriminallaw.

*Volgende stap is kijken hoeveel SO/NSO/NO in de afgelopen jaar alleen een violence, alleen
een property, alleen een damage, of een combinatie van die drie hebben gedaan.

IF (violent = 1 & damage = 0 & property = 0) violentonly=1.

EXECUTE.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 67

IF (violent = 0 & damage = 1 & property = 0) damageonly=1.

EXECUTE.
IF (violent = 0 & damage = 0 & property = 1) propertyonly=1.
EXECUTE.
IF (violent = 1 & damage = 0 & property = 1) violentproperty=1.
EXECUTE.
IF (violent = 1 & damage = 1 & property = 0) violentdamage=1.
EXECUTE.
IF (violent = 0 & damage = 1 & property = 1) damageproperty=1.
EXECUTE.
IF (violent = 1 & damage = 1 & property = 1) violentpropertydamage=1.
EXECUTE.

AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/violentonly = max(violentonly) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/damageonly = max(damageonly) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/propertyonly = max(propertyonly) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/violentproperty = max(violentproperty) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/violentdamage = max(violentdamage) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/damageproperty = max(damageproperty) .
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/violentpropertydamage = max(violentpropertydamage) .

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 1.
freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty
violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1 & group = 1.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 68

freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty

violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 2.
freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty
violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1 & group = 2.
freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty
violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 3.
freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty
violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1 & group = 3.
freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty
violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 4.
freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty
violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1 & group = 4.
freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty
violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & group = 5.
freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty
violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 1 & group = 5.
freq violentonly damageonly propertyonly violentproperty violentdamage damageproperty
violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2 & group = 1.
freq violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3 & group = 1.
freq violentpropertydamage.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 69

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2 & group = 2.
freq violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3 & group = 2.
freq violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2 & group = 3.
freq violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3 & group = 3.
freq violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2 & group = 4.
freq violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3 & group = 4.
freq violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 2 & group = 5.
freq violentpropertydamage.

temporary.
select if person = 1 & delict0 = 3 & group = 5.
freq violentpropertydamage.

*NA AL DEZE ANALYSES BLIJKT DAT ER NIET GENOEG HITS ZIJN OM

COMBINATIES ETC TE DOEN, DUS IK GEBRUIK ALLEEN DE VARIABELEN
VIOLENT, DAMAGE EN PROPERTY GEBRUIKEN (DUS AT LEAST 1
VIOLENCE/PROPERTY/DAMAGE DELICT IN AFGELOPEN 5 JAAR)

*Nu ga ik naar de volgende stap; een multinominale logistische regressie.

*Hiervoor ga ik regressies uitvoeren die de kans op SO/NO/NSO berekenen wanneer iemand
at least een violence/property of damage offence hebben gepleegd in afgelopen 5 jaar.
*Dus dependent var = delict 0 (met 3 uitkomsten, vandaar de multinominale logistische
regressie).
*indep var is violent damage en property.
*controle variabele is cohort en age at agetosex = 0.
*controle variabele is ook group, daar aparte dummies voor maken omdat het categoriale
variabelen zijn (dit bleek na regressies per traject uit voeren bleek dat er niet genoeg hits
waren dus het moest als controle variabele.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 70

*daarnaast bleek dat er een probit utigevoerd moest worden omdat assumpties waren violated
in de normale multinominale logistische regressie, er is dus een stata bestand aangemaakt
want dit moest in STATA.

TEMPORARY.
select if person = 1.
save outfile= 'F:\Final\LOGREGSAMEN.sav'
/keep = delict0 age gebjp_c violent damage property group.
exe.

get file = 'F:\Final\LOGREGSAMEN.sav'.

RECODE violent damage property (SYSMIS=0).
EXECUTE.

get file = 'F:\Final\LOGREGSAMEN.sav'.

recode group (1=1) (else=0) into group1.
recode group (3=1) (else=0) into group3.
recode group (4=1) (else=0) into group4.
recode group (5=1) (else=0) into group5.

SAVE TRANSLATE OUTFILE='F:\Final\PROBIT.dta'

/TYPE=STATA
/VERSION=11
/EDITION=SE
/MAP
/REPLACE.
*Nu gaat de analyse in STATA verder.

*Hieronder nog een syntax die ik had gedraaid voor nog wat descriptives tabellen.

GET
FILE='F:\Final\SOyearFINALMATCHED.sav'.
DATASET NAME DataSet9 WINDOW=FRONT.
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/totalconvictions = sum(vftot).
select if onsetagesex > 12.
freq group.

*Nu moet ik per groep kijken hoeveel mensen een sexoffence, nonsexoffence of nonoffence
plegen in jaar 0.
*Daarvoor moet ik eerst een variabele aanmaken die per case aangeeft welk delict ze plegen
in het jaar 0.

IF (ytosex = 0 & sexoffence > 0) delict0=1.

IF (ytosex = 0 & sexoffence = 0 & vftot > 0) delict0=2.
IF (ytosex = 0 & sexoffence = 0 & vftot = 0) delict0=3.
EXECUTE.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 71

freq delict0.

compute persona = 0.
if (idnew = lag(idnew)) persona = 1.
exe.
freq var persona.
temporary.
select if persona=0.
freq var totalconvictions.

select if persona=0.
des totalconvictions.
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/proportionfreeperyear = sum(free).

temporary.
select if persona=0.
des proportionfreeperyear.

AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/delict0 = max(delict0) .

temporary.
select if ytosex = 0.
freq totalconvictions.
freq totalconvictions.

temporary.
select if ytosex=0.
des ytosex vftot free age gebjp.

get file = 'F:\Final\LOGREGSAMEN.sav'.

des violent property damage group delict0 age gebjp_c.

GET
FILE='F:\Final\SOyearFINALMATCHED.sav'.
DATASET NAME DataSet9 WINDOW=FRONT.
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/totalconvictions = sum(vftot).
select if onsetagesex > 12.
freq group.

*Nu moet ik per groep kijken hoeveel mensen een sexoffence, nonsexoffence of nonoffence
plegen in jaar 0.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 72

*Daarvoor moet ik eerst een variabele aanmaken die per case aangeeft welk delict ze plegen
in het jaar 0.

IF (ytosex = 0 & sexoffence > 0) delict0=1.

IF (ytosex = 0 & sexoffence = 0 & vftot > 0) delict0=2.
IF (ytosex = 0 & sexoffence = 0 & vftot = 0) delict0=3.
EXECUTE.
freq delict0.

compute persona = 0.
if (idnew = lag(idnew)) persona = 1.
exe.
freq var persona.
temporary.
select if persona=0.
freq var totalconvictions.

select if persona=0.
des totalconvictions.
AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/proportionfreeperyear = sum(free).

temporary.
select if persona=0.
des proportionfreeperyear.

AGGREGATE
/OUTFILE=* MODE=ADDVARIABLES OVERWRITEVARS=yes
/BREAK=idnew
/delict0 = max(delict0) .

temporary.
select if ytosex = 0.
freq totalconvictions.
freq totalconvictions.
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 73

2. STATA

net from http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/bjones/traj

net install traj, force
help traj

*P&W 2014.

*single trajectory, no splines.

*delinquency frequency, zip model.

*Het beste model blijkt het 5 keer derde order model, deze staat hier bovenaan, de rest wat ik
heb geprobeerd staat er onder.

use "\\Client\F$\Final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"
traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
format idnew %15.0f
format _traj_ProbG* %15.13f
format _traj_Group %4.0f
outsheet idnew _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "\\Client\F$\Final\SOtrajecten3.cvs"
export delimited _traj_ProbG* idnew using "\\Client\F$\Final\SOtrajecten4.txt",
novarnames replace datafmt
outfile idnew _traj_ProbG* using "\\Client\F$\Final\SOtrajecten3.txt"
clear

export delimited _traj_ProbG* idnew using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\

SOtrajecten4.txt", novarnames replace datafmt
type data.txt

*nog even een average age crime curve voor entire sample
use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"
traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(1)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "\\Client\E$\Final Sample\
SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 74

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)

order(1)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(1 1)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(1 1 1)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(1 1 1 1)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(1 1 1 1 1)
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 75

trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci

sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(1 1 1 1 1 1)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(2)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(2 2)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(2 2 2)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 76

by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*

sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(2 2 2 2)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(2 2 2 2 2)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(2 2 2 2 2 2)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 77

matrix list e(plot1)

*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 78

*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\

Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

*Nu even vanaf mijn memory stick werken, wel vanaf zelfde bestand.

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 2 3 2 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 2 2 2 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 2 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 79

*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\

Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 2)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

*die groep 5 ziet er nog steeds niet goed uit, misschien met startwaarden werken?

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(2 2 2 2 2)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(1 1 1 1 1)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 1)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 80

*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\

Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 1 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 2 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

*Het lijkt toch alsof er outliers zijn, bij groep 5. Misschien eerst kijken of ik met startwaardes
dit kan oplossen, anders moet ik outliers gaan bekijken

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

*hij pakt nooit de bovenste groep, lijkt dus echt aan outliers te liggen. Ik ga het proberen met
een nieuw databestand zonder outliers
*Als je tot 10 convictions per jaar doet wordt wel de helft van het bestand verwijderd, maar
ga het voor de zekerheid proberen

use "\\Client\F$\Final Sample\SOyear5aOUTLIERS.dta"

PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 81

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)

order(3 3 3 3 2 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

*probabilities veel te laag en hij pakt de bovenste lijn alweer niet, lijkt dus niet te werken om
de outliers weg te halen, nog een paar proberen

use "\\Client\F$\Final Sample\SOyear5aOUTLIERS.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

*probabilities goed maar hij pakt de bovenste lijn weer niet. ik ga weer terug naar de originele
data en toch het probleem anders oplossen.
*beste model tot nu toe 333323

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 2 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 82

*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\

Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

*startwaardes van 333323 gebruiken om 333333 te schatten

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

matrix strt = (1.72, 0.24, 0.07, 0.77, 0.26, 0.08, -0.32, -1.76, -0.38, 5.23, 0.38, 0.03, 0, 0, 0,
3.85, 0.05, -0.11, 4.21, 11.5, 2.94, 63.83, 0.5, 17.11)
traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 3 3) start (strt)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

*moet blijkbaar 36 startwaardes hebben. Oke dit lukt voor nu niet met die
startwaardes. En misschien 5 groepen toch beter gezien het plaatje, de onderste paar lijken
namelijk veel op elkaar Startwaardes lijken ook niet nodig want hij pakt nergens de bovenste
lijn, dat is het enige probleem wat ik nog heb

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 3 3 3 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 83

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(2 2 2 2 2)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(2 2 3 2 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

use "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\Data Diane\final\SOyearFINALSTATA.dta"

traj, var(vftot_1-vftot_10) indep(ytosex_1-ytosex_10) tcov(free_1-free_10) model(zip)
order(3 2 3 2 3)
trajplot, xtitle(ytosex) ytitle(totcase) ci
sort _traj_Group
by _traj_Group: summarize _traj_ProbG*
sort idnew
matrix list e(plot1)
*outfile idnummer _traj_ProbG* _traj_Group using "G:\TH3\CCLS 2\CCLS data\
Data Diane\SOtrajecten.txt"
clear

*COMMAND VOOR DE REGRESSIE

use "\\Client\F$\Final\PROBIT.dta"
mprobit delict0 damage property violent group1 group3 group4 group5 age gebjp_c

*predicted probabilities berekenen

display normal(0)
display normal(-0.752)

display normal(0)
display normal(-1.095)
PREDICTIVE PATTERNS OF SEX OFFENDERS 84

display normal(0)
display normal(-0.523)

display normal(0)
display normal(-1.172)