Cited by 225Crime Patterns and InterventionsCriminal Justice and PenologyPolicing Practices and Perceptions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Classification of Techniques for Controlling Situational Precipitators of Crime

Wortley, Richard·2001·Security Journal

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1057/palgrave.sj.8340098

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 80 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 225

Metadata

Authors
Wortley, R.
Affiliations
Griffith University (AU)
Corresponding author
Wortley, Richard
Venue
Security Journal
Published
2001-10
Volume
14
Issue
4
Pages
63-82
ISSN
  • 0955-1662 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-4645
OpenAlex
W2058290272
Cited by
224
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Security Journal (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
Keywords
situational crime prevention, offender decision-making

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review