Table 4.
TERGM models - Different crime types
| Formation Models | Model 1a -Homicides | Model 2a -Robbery | Model 3a - Robbery and aggravated assault |
|---|---|---|---|
| Network structure | |||
| Edge | -4.07 (0.17) *** | -4.01 (0.17) *** | -3.84 (0.19) *** |
| Reciprocity | 0.05 (0.17) | 0 (0.18) | -0.02 (0.19) |
| Geometrical weighted in-degree (popularity spread) | -4.07 (0.28) *** | -4.09 (0.26) *** | -4.06 (0.27) *** |
| Receiver effects (“Work” community effects) | |||
| Violent Crime Rate | 0.48 (0.33) | 0.03 (0.01) † | 0.15 (0.1) |
| Residential stability | -0.84 (0.07) *** | -0.83 (0.07) *** | -0.82 (0.08) *** |
| Racial and ethnic diversity | -0.29 (0.05) *** | -0.29 (0.05) *** | -0.32 (0.06) *** |
| Density of local jobs | 1.29 (0.21) *** | 1.28 (0.21) *** | 1.15 (0.23) *** |
| Sender effects (“Home” community effects) | |||
| Violent Crime Rate | -0.9 (0.36) * | -0.04 (0.02) * | -0.27 (0.12) * |
| Residential stability | 0.47 (0.08) *** | 0.45 (0.08) *** | 0.45 (0.08) *** |
| Racial and ethnic diversity | 0.18 (0.06) ** | 0.14 (0.06) * | 0.14 (0.06) * |
| Density of local jobs | 0.31 (0.21) | 0.32 (0.21) | 0.25 (0.24) |
| Relational effects | |||
| Spatial proximity | 1.98 (0.15) *** | 1.98 (0.15) *** | 2.01 (0.15) *** |
| Transportation | 0.19 (0.03) *** | 0.18 (0.03) *** | 0.18 (0.03) *** |
| Dissimilarity | |||
| Violent Crime Rate | -0.37 (0.39) | -0.05 (0.02) * | -0.4 (0.13) ** |
| Residential stability | -0.29 (0.09) *** | -0.29 (0.08) *** | -0.28 (0.09) ** |
| Racial and ethnic diversity | -0.21 (0.06) *** | -0.18 (0.06) ** | -0.21 (0.06) *** |
| Density of local jobs | -0.25 (0.21) | -0.21 (0.21) | -0.14 (0.24) |
| AIC | -741410 | -741413 | -593211 |
| BIC | -741259 | -741262 | -593062 |
|
| |||
| Dissolution Models | Model 1b -Homicides | Model 2b -Robbery | Model 3b - Robbery and aggravated assault |
|
| |||
| Network structure | |||
| Edge | 0.89 (0.18) *** | 0.87 (0.2) *** | 0.74 (0.21) *** |
| Reciprocity | 0.04 (0.18) | 0.04 (0.18) | -0.06 (0.19) |
| Geometrical weighted in-degree (popularity spread) | -1.56 (0.23) *** | -1.55 (0.23) *** | -1.49 (0.24) *** |
| Receiver effects (“Work” community effects) | |||
| Violent Crime Rate | -1.15 (0.37) ** | -0.01 (0.02) | -0.01 (0.15) |
| Residential stability | -0.31 (0.08) *** | -0.36 (0.08) *** | -0.34 (0.08) *** |
| Racial and ethnic diversity | -0.18 (0.06) ** | -0.16 (0.06) * | -0.17 (0.07) * |
| Density of local jobs | 1.19 (0.2) *** | 1.2 (0.2) *** | 1.22 (0.21) *** |
| Sender effects (“Home” community effects) | |||
| Violent Crime Rate | -0.81 (0.34) * | -0.04 (0.01) ** | -0.39 (0.11) *** |
| Residential stability | -0.01 (0.09) | -0.04 (0.09) | -0.11 (0.1) |
| Racial and ethnic diversity | 0.2 (0.06) *** | 0.15 (0.06) * | 0.13 (0.06) * |
| Density of local jobs | -0.09 (0.17) | -0.04 (0.17) | 0.02 (0.18) |
| Relational effects | |||
| Spatial proximity | 0.69 (0.14) *** | 0.69 (0.15) *** | 0.77 (0.16) *** |
| Transportation | 0.11 (0.03) *** | 0.11 (0.03) *** | 0.12 (0.03) *** |
| Dissimilarity | |||
| Violent Crime Rate | 0.35 (0.4) | 0 (0.02) | 0.04 (0.15) |
| Residential stability | 0.04 (0.09) | 0.06 (0.09) | 0.13 (0.1) |
| Racial and ethnic diversity | -0.22 (0.07) ** | -0.2 (0.07) ** | -0.2 (0.08) ** |
| Density of local jobs | 0.06 (0.18) | 0.04 (0.18) | -0.02 (0.19) |
| AIC | 3511 | 3517 | 3208 |
| BIC | 3624 | 3630 | 3319 |
Notes: Main cells represent ERGM estimates. Standard errors in parentheses. N = 77 nodes (community areas).
***
p < .001,
**
p < .01,
*
p < .05,
†
p <.10