#11662. Repeat or chronic?: examining police data accuracy across the ‘history’ classifications of missing person cases

August 2026publication date
Proposal available till 08-06-2025
4 total number of authors per manuscript0 $

The title of the journal is available only for the authors who have already paid for
Journal’s subject area:
Law;
Sociology and Political Science;
Places in the authors’ list:
place 1place 2place 3place 4
FreeFreeFreeFree
2350 $1200 $1050 $900 $
Contract №11662.1 Contract №11662.2 Contract №11662.3 Contract №11662.4
1 place - free (for sale)
2 place - free (for sale)
3 place - free (for sale)
4 place - free (for sale)

Abstract:
Going missing multiple times, which can render missing person cases as ‘repeat’ or ‘chronic,’ has been widely regarded as an issue that generates police resource strains. The main issues being that there is no proper definition for, nor is there any research on, how many times an individual is reported missing before they are assigned these classifications. These arbitrarily designated categories can have implications for police risk assessment and response. This issue can also lead to discrepancies in police missing persons data quality, inaccurate figures on the types of cases, and challenges with developing police practices and policies. This article aims to examine the ‘history’ case classifications of persons reported missing to the police, which, among other factors, serve as indicators to make judgements for risk assessment purposes. Results reveal clear distinctions in how cases should be classified. We then discuss the broader implications of the disconnection between missing person classifications and their use, and how the lack of definitions undermine the utility of categories for risk assessment in police missing persons work.
Keywords:
Missing persons; police data; policing; repeat missing persons

Contacts :
0