Data quality and due process in large interorganizational record systems

ABSTRACT

As societies have become more dependent on information systems to conduct and record transactions between organizations and individuals, interorganizational computer systems have become a widely used method of coordinating the actions of independent organizations. This article examines the quality of data in one important interorganizational system—the criminal-record system of the United States.

REFERENCES

• 1: Burnham. D. FBI says 12,000 faulty reports on suspects are issued each day. New York Times (Aug. 25.1985).
• 2: Comptroller Genera1 of the United States. General Accounting Office. How Criminal Iustice Agencies Use Criminal Hisfoty Information. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DE.. 1974. Comptroller General of the United States. General Accounting Office. Complete and Accurate Information Needed in Social Security's Aufomalrd Name and Number Files. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.. 1982.
• 3: Doernberg. D.L.. and Ziegler, D.H. Due process versus data processing: An analysis of computerized criminal history information systems. New York Univ. Law 1. 55 (Dec. 1980).
• 4: Federal Bureau of Investigation. Uniform Crime Report for he Unifed States, 1974. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DC.. 1975.
• 5: Laudon. K. Computers and Bureaucratic Reform. Wiley, New York, 1974.
• 6: Laudon, K. Data quality in criminal history and wanted person systems. Rep.. Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress, Washington, D.C., 1980.
• 7: Laudon. K. Privacy and federal databanks. Society (Jan. 1980).
• 8: Kenneth C. Laudon, Dossier society: value choices in the design of national information systems, Columbia University Press, New York, NY, 1986
• 9: Donald A. Marchand, Politics of Privacy, Computers, and Criminal Justice Records: Controlling the Social Costs of Technological Change, Information Resources Press, Arlington, VA, 1980
• 10: Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress. Preliminary Assessment of the National Crime Inform&ion Center and the Computerized Criminal History System. Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress, Washington, DC., 1978.
• 11: Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress. An Assessment of Alternatives for a Nafionnl Computerized Criminal History System. Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress, Washington, D.C., 1982.
• 12: Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress. Interview with Fred Wood. Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress, Washington, DC., July 31, 1985. (Wood was one of the principal authors of the 1982 OTA report and follows developments at the FBI.)
• 13: Privacy Protection Study Commission. Personal Privacy in an Information Society. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC., 1977.
• 14: Project Search, Search Group. The American criminal history record. Tech. Rep. 14, Project Search, Search Group, Sacramento, Calif.. 1976.
• 15: Skolnick, J.H. lustice without Trial. Wiley, New York, 1967.
• 16: Tatum versus Rogers. 75 Civ 2782 (CBM), U.S. District Court. Southern District of New York, 1979.
• 17: United States Department of Justice. Criminal Justice Information Poficy-Privacy and the Private Employer. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice. Washington, D.C., 1981.
• 18: United States Department of Labor. A Study of the Number of Persons with Records of Arrest or Conviction in the Labor Force. U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC. 1979.
• 19: United States Senate. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights of the Committee on the ludiciary. United States Senate, 93rd Congress. Washington. D.C.. Mar. 1974.
• 20: United States Senate. Hearings Before the Special Commitlee on Aging. United States Senate, 98th Congress, Washington, DC., Nov. 29, 1983.
• 21: Vollmer. T. City agrees to new warrant methods to cut false arrests. Los Angeles Times (Aug. 22, 1984).
• 22: Westley, W. Violence and the police. Am. 1. Social. 59 (1953). 34-41.
• 23: Zimring. F.E. Research agendas, information policies, and program outcomes. In Information Policy and Crime Control Strategies, A.F. Westin. Ed. U.S. Department of /t&ice, Washington. D.C.. 1984.

INDEX TERMS

Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.3 INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL
      H.3.4 Systems and Software
          Subjects: Information networks

  J. Computer Applications
  J.1 ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PROCESSING
      Subjects: Law

  K. Computing Milieux
  K.4 COMPUTERS AND SOCIETY
  K.6 MANAGEMENT OF COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS

General Terms:
Human Factors, Legal Aspects, Management, Theory