SECU0058 – Component 2 (70%): coursework
Lasky et al. (2017) discuss shoplifters’ perceptions of anti-shoplifting security measures and shoplifters’ techniques for outmaneuvering them. This information can be very useful to researchers developing agent-based models about retail theft.
The purpose of this component is to make recommendations for introducing crime reduction measures in the shoplifting model developed in the module.
Part 1 (no word limit). Review the security measures and their prevention mechanisms discussed by Lasky et al. (2017).
a) Describe the measures and their mechanisms in an Excel table. The data (i.e., verbatim quotes extracted from the paper) and synthesised information should be recorded in the table.
b) Indicate the situational crime prevention principle(s) involved in each security measure, e.g., increasing the effort… (Clarke, 1995 p.19, Cornish & Clarke, 2003, Clarke & Petrossian, 2010).
Part 2 (2500 words max). In the next development phase of our shoplifting model, we would like to introduce a range of security measures. Draw on your review of the security measures in part 1 to explain and show how they could be modelled. Your answer should comprise two sections:
• Section A: Give an overview of SCP-based crime reduction elements relevant to shoplifting. Introduce the main approaches that can be used to model them.
• Section B: Select and implement one or two SCP-based security measures in NetLogo that could be introduced in the shoplifting model. Explain different modelling options in detail, discuss their advantages and disadvantages, show how you implemented it (or them) in the code, and show and analyse pertinent simulation results. You should include your developed code in an appendix; the code should have explanatory comments throughout.
Note: Draw on the data recorded in the Excel table to support your answer. Prioritise depth over breadth.
AI tools may be used to assist with this assessment, particularly for refining your writing, but not for generating new content. You may also use AI to test your NetLogo code; however, you must clearly understand the code by providing detailed, meaningful comments throughout.
You must submit the table (Excel file), the report (Word doc) and the code (zipped file with all coding and supporting files – .csv, nls, .nlogo).
References
Clarke, R. (1995). Situational Crime Prevention. Crime and Justice, 19, 91-150. Retrieved
March 23, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1147596
Cornish, D. B., & Clarke, R. V. (2003). Opportunities, precipitators and criminal decisions: A
reply to Wortley’s critique of situational crime prevention. Crime prevention studies, 16, 41-
Clarke, R.V. & Petrossian. G.(2010) Shoplifting. 2nd Edition. Problem-Specific Guides
Series. Problem-Oriented Guides for Police. No. 11
Lasky, N. V., Fisher, B. S., & Jacques, S. (2017). ‘Thinking thief’ in the crime prevention arms
race: lessons learned from shoplifters. Security Journal, 30(3), 772-792.
Code Help
Marking criteria
This coursework is worth 70% of the module mark, with 30% allocated to Part 1 and 70% to Part 2.
Part 1 [30% of Component 2 mark]:
The mark for part 1 will be based on the quality and quantity of information in the Excel table. Particular attention will be given to the:
• structure of the Excel table (clarity, scope, relevance),
• information and supporting data (clarity, scope, accuracy, amount of details),
• presentation (style, typographic errors)
The Excel spreadsheet will not be considered in the word count. Marking rubric
Criteria 0-49 marks 50–59 marks 60–69 marks 70+ marks
Structure of the Excel Table
Table is poorly structured, unclear, and lacks relevance.
Table structure is somewhat clear but lacks scope and relevance to Lasky et al. (2017).
Table structure is clear, mostly relevant, with minor issues in scope or clarity.
Table is well-structured, highly relevant, and organised for easy understanding.
Information and supporting data
Lacks sufficient information and/or no supporting data from Lasky et al. (2017).
Limited supporting data, lacking sufficient clarity or detail; unclear synthesis of quotes.
Adequate supporting data with sufficient clarity; accurate synthesis of the quotes from the paper.
Comprehensive supporting data, highly relevant quotes and information synthesised effectively.
Presentation (Style, typographic errors)
Frequent typographical and formatting errors; poor style.
Several typographic errors or formatting issues, but overall presentation is acceptable.
Minimal typographic and formatting errors, clear presentation style.
Free of typographic errors, professionally presented with consistent style.
Part 2 [70% of Component 2 mark]:
The mark for part 2 will consider whether:
• the selected security measures are situational crime prevention measures,
• there is sufficient information to understand what these elements are and how they
contribute to crime reduction,
• the presentation clearly explains how to model situational crime prevention principles in
the shoplifting model,
• the answer contains accurate and pertinent arguments, including references to the
literature and the findings from question 1,
• the general presentation is appropriate, considering the word count, style and structure,
format of the references, typographic errors, etc.
Programming Help, Add QQ: 749389476
Marking rubric
Criteria 0-49 marks 50–59 marks 60–69 marks 70+ marks
Selection of security measures
Chosen security measures are not situational crime prevention (SCP) measures.
SCP measures are identified, but lack clear justification or explanation of relevance to shoplifting.
SCP measures are mostly appropriate and well-justified, with links to shoplifting crime reduction.
Selected SCP measures are highly appropriate, well-explained, and clearly linked to shoplifting crime prevention.
Explanation of crime reduction elements
No or minimal explanation of SCP crime reduction principles.
Basic explanation of SCP crime reduction elements, but lacks depth or clarity.
Detailed explanation of relevant SCP crime reduction elements, mostly clear and accurate.
Comprehensive, clear, and insightful explanation of SCP crime reduction elements.
Modelling SCP principles
No clear explanation of how SCP principles could be modelled.
Some explanation of modelling SCP principles, but lacks sufficient detail or clarity.
Clear explanation of how SCP principles could be modelled, with relevant detail.
Detailed, clear, and comprehensive explanation of modelling SCP principles, with a strong understanding of how they work in practice.
Implementation of security measures in NetLogo
No or poorly implemented security measures in NetLogo, with little or no discussion of the code.
Basic implementation in NetLogo, but lacks detailed explanation or evaluation of different options.
Clear implementation of one or two SCP- based security measures in NetLogo, with adequate discussion of modelling options.
Highly detailed and insightful implementation in NetLogo, with comprehensive discussion of different modelling options, advantages, and disadvantages.
Analysis of simulation results
No simulation results provided or results are irrelevant to the modelled security measures.
Basic simulation results provided, but lacks in-depth analysis or clear relevance to the security measures implemented.
Relevant simulation results are presented and analysed, with adequate interpretation of their impact on shoplifting crime reduction.
Pertinent simulation results are thoroughly presented and analysed, offering clear insights into the effectiveness and limitations of the implemented security measures.
Code presentation and documentation
No code or code is incomplete; lacks comments.
Code is present but lacks clarity and sufficient explanatory comments.
Code is mostly complete with appropriate comments, but lacks some clarity or detail.
Code is complete, well- organised, and fully annotated with clear explanatory comments throughout.
Presentation and referencing
Unclear presentation, lacking proper referencing or numerous typographic errors.
Presentation is adequate but contains some typographic errors; inconsistent referencing.
Clear presentation with minimal typographic errors; accurate and consistent referencing.
Professional presentation with no typographic errors, consistently formatted references.
Code Help, Add WeChat: cstutorcs