A study carried out in Nottinghamshire Constabulary asked 65 police officers to identify on maps of their patrol area the locations of crime hotspots for two types of crime; motor vehicle crime, and residential burglary. Multiple entries were permitted, as well as nil returns if the officer felt that there were no areas of concentrated activity. The officers were also asked to ring the hotspot they felt was the most important.

The areas mapped by officers as being hotspots of crime were then compared to the last years’ of collected and confirmed crime incidents for the same crime types. The results showed,

• 91% of residential burglary hotspot guesses made by police officers were within the hotspot region defined by the collected crime records
• 60% of vehicle crime hotspot guesses by police officers were within the hotspot region defined by the collected vehicle crime records.

Explanations for the officers’ more inaccurate observations of vehicle crime were linked to;

• Vehicle crime was not as much a division priority as burglary, therefore as a crime type it was not as actively pursued or investigated. This meant that more was known about burglary, including its perceived location.
• There are often far greater vehicle crimes than burglary. This can lead to information overload of crimes such as vehicle crime. Many officers found it easier to recall the locations of fewer and discrete burglaries than the volume of motor vehicle incidents.
• Burglary as a crime type often involves an operational police officer visiting the scene of the crime. This helps to gather an understanding of the geographic patterns of this crime type by their personal investigating involvement. For vehicle crime, visiting the scene of the crime is not as common, therefore an informed and accurate impression of what is happening within the division is more difficult to establish.