Tagging and Graffiti - Victoria University of Wellington

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Tagging and Graffiti: attitudes and experiences of New Zealanders not possible. An additional problem with this way of recruiting offenders was how to disentangle their graffiti and tagging from other offending behaviour. It was considered unlikely that those who had been formally processed by the criminal justice system (CJS) would have been convicted for graffiti and tagging alone. Graffiti and tagging for this group may be intertwined with other offending behaviours that had no relation to graffiti writing. Therefore a different approach to recruiting participants was adopted. Utilising the extensive contacts of the MYD 1 a variety of groups of young people were accessed for focus group discussions. In conducting the focus groups problems became apparent in distinguishing those who had been involved in graffiti and tagging and those who had not. In discussing illegal behaviour with young people a direct approach focussing on their own behaviour was not deemed appropriate as this would cause respondents to ‘shut down’ and little data would be forthcoming. The approach taken was to ask for the opinions of focus group respondents around a series of issues relating to graffiti and tagging. Seven of the focus groups contained respondents who were directly involved in graffiti and tagging. 2 The other 13 groups contained respondents who may have been involved in graffiti and tagging (some respondents from these groups referred to their own illegal activities), and those who were not directly involved in graffiti and tagging. Researching this issue is particularly problematic because it is embedded in youth culture through hip hop music and style. Consequently the majority of the respondents had detailed knowledge about graffiti and tagging and used slang terms such as ‘bomb’ and ‘wackie’. They also often referred to knowledge of peer group behaviour as well as their own graffiti and tagging behaviour. The research team also conducted a number of informal interviews with key informants, such as police staff, community workers and local government officers with a particular interest in graffiti and tagging. Many of these respondents were identified by the Ministry of Justice and are engaged in the STOP strategy. These interviews were not recorded but have helped to shape understanding of the issues. The research was conducted with the approval of Victoria University Wellington’s ethics committee (reference # 16374). All those who participated in the focus groups completed consent forms, signed by parents or guardians for those aged under 16 years. The online survey asked for no information that would enable respondents to be identified and participation was taken as indication of consent. 1 The help of Sen Thong and Lorraine Gittings has been invaluable in this part of the research project. 2 The respondents from these groups were identified by police and community agencies as having been involved in graffiti and tagging. Others were involved in graffiti writing through their attachment to the hip hop community. 14
Tagging and Graffiti: attitudes and experiences of New Zealanders Limitations The survey did not draw a representative sample and so it is not possible to generalise these findings to the whole population. There were several reasons why a representative sample could not be selected. Online respondents might be more likely to be involved in or interested in graffiti and this might predispose them to participate. As graffiti is an under researched topic in New Zealand the research team did not have enough information about graffiti writers as a population to undertake representative sampling techniques. As stated previously researching those involved in criminal or deviant activities has many challenges not least the recruiting of respondents. The survey respondents were a self selecting, open sample. The sample was ‘open’ as its purpose was not to represent a particular population (given the difficulties this would entail) but to keep the collection of data as unconstrained as possible. This approach was considered necessary due to the difficulty of accessing respondents for this kind of research and the uncertainty as to how successful this online approach to gathering data would be. Therefore the survey was designed to access as large a sample as possible in order to gain information in a short space of time. An additional problem in using the survey was that occasionally the responses contradicted those from the focus groups. For example, a common theme in the focus groups discussions was that graffiti writers were motivated by a desire to ‘get their name up’, to be recognised, to be a ‘celebrity’. In the survey only 24 out of 309 graffiti writers chose the category ‘to get may name up and feel like a celebrity’ in answer to the question ‘what would you say was the MAIN reason why you did it’ However the question does ask what the main reason is for engaging in graffiti. Therefore the responses from the survey suggest that ‘to get may name up and feel like a celebrity’ is not the most significant reason for engaging in graffiti writing (the survey respondents could only choose one response). As no respondents were excluded from the survey and the sample was self selecting, some of the respondents fell outside the category of ‘youth’. The survey did not specify when or how recently graffiti writing was carried out so it was unclear whether graffiti writing was contemporary behaviour or something no longer engaged in. This may account for the fact that 61 out of 773 respondents were over 25. The older age group are also likely to be those who have desisted from graffiti so their views are important when considering policy interventions. 15
Page 1 and 2: Tagging and Graffiti: attitudes and
Page 13: Tagging and Graffiti: attitudes and
Page 33 and 34: culture’, and males more likely t
Page 55 and 56: Appendix one: on-line survey 55

Tagging and Graffiti - Victoria University of Wellington

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?