{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013100436681222707, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002911208151382824, 'mean_word_length': 5.642512077294686, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
SOCIAL INTERACTION AND COMMUNITY CRIME: EXAMINING THE IMPORTANCE OF NEIGHBOR NETWORKS

The social disorganization perspective assumes that social interaction among neighbors is a central element in the control of community crime. Moreover, social interaction among neighbors that occurs frequently, such as every day, is assumed to be most effective. This analysis tests that assumption by exploring the consequences of frequent and infrequent interaction. I construct 10 alternative measures of social interaction and separately examine the effect of each on the rates of three serious crimes across 60 urban neighborhoods. Findings suggest that type of interaction matters. Getting together once a year or more with neighbors has the most consistent and generally strongest effect on burglary, motor vehicle thejl, and robbery. Further this form of interaction mediates a significant proportion of the effect of ecological characteristics on community crime. Implications for community crime research are discussed. Current social disorganization research is built on the notion that welldeveloped, local network structures reduce crime. This formulation is grounded in the systemic model of community organization, which views the local community “as a complex system of friendship and kinship networks and formal and informal associational ties rooted in family life and