Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

DOI 10.1007/s12117-011-9131-3

Listening to the wire: criteria and techniques

for the quantitative analysis of phone intercepts
Paolo Campana & Federico Varese

Published online: 26 April 2011

# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Abstract This paper focuses on phone conversations wiretapped by the police. It

discusses issues of validity and reliability of this type of data and it proposes the use
of a combination of data analysis techniques. In order to utilize wiretapped
conversations in a valid manner, individuals under surveillance must talk freely on
the phone, the coverage of the group must be reasonably wide, and a large enough
sample of conversations must be available. As for the analysis, we propose the use
of a set of techniques: content analysis, correspondence analysis, descriptive network
analysis and longitudinal stochastic actor-oriented models. Each technique highlights
a different aspect of the criminal network. Systematic analysis of phone conversations
can yield valid inferences on the nature and activities of criminal groups and enrich the
understanding of the ties within a criminal network. If followed, the procedures
discussed here should facilitate comparisons across groups.
Keywords Criminal groups . Wire tapped conversations . Content analysis . Social
network analysis

Introduction
In 2001, Coles (2001) argued that criminologists were failing to adopt social
network analysis (SNA) techniques for the study of criminal groups, and as a result
they were hindering their ability to understand underworld phenomena fully,
particularly organised crime groups. Ten years after Coles article, the picture seems
Authors are listed in alphabetical order.
P. Campana (*)
Extra Legal Governance Institute, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford,
Manor Road Building, Manor Road, Oxford OX1 3UQ, UK
e-mail: paolo.campana@sociology.ox.ac.uk
F. Varese
Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, Manor Road Building, Manor Road, Oxford,
OX1 3UQ, UK
e-mail: federico.varese@sociology.ox.ac.uk

14

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

to have changed dramatically. SNA has become increasingly popular among

scholars, generating a considerable research output (see, e.g, Natarajan 2000 and
2006; Morselli 2005 and 2009; Bruinsma and Bernasco 2004; McNally and Alston
2006; von Lampe 2009); and it has also been adopted by a number of law
enforcement agencies across the world (such as Europol).1 SNA provides a set of
data analysis techniques particularly apt at capturing and representing the informal
relations within illegal groups. This paper aims to draw the attention of practitioners
of SNA to a particularly rich type of data, namely phone conversations wiretapped
by the police. It discusses issues of validity and reliability of this type of data and it
proposes the use of a combination of data analysis techniquesnamely SNA,
content analysis and correspondence analysis. To our knowledge, this specific
combination of techniques has never been proposed before, nor have the limits and
potential of phone conversations wiretapped been thoroughly discussed. Most of the
research hitherto carried out relies solely on SNA techniques, disregarding the
content of a given tie. The joint use of SNA and content analysis has been pioneered
by Mangai Natarajan (2000 and 2006), but has not yet received the attention that it
deserves. Our paper expands on Natarajans important contribution in two ways: (a)
it proposes the use of correspondence analysis to analyse jointly features of actors
and conversations; and (b) it addresses often neglected questions related to the
evolution of networks over time (assessed through a stochastic actor-oriented
model). An informed use of phone conversations and the combination of these
techniques allow scholars to go beyond SNA and acquire a deeper understanding of
the nature of the ties observed in the network.
In the next Section, we discuss the type of data and issues of validity and
reliability. We then proceed by discussing data analysis techniques. The last Section
concludes the paper.

Data and issues of validity & reliability

A significant source of information for the researcher interested in studying criminal
groups is court records. Different kinds of court records may be examined, such as
sentences, arrest warrants, socio-economic data gathered by the police during the
investigation and wiretap records. Once the case is closed, these records are publicly
available and can be used by scholars. Nested within court records, one can find
wiretap data (Reuter 1994). When available, wiretaps are an important source of
information on the structure and activities of criminal groups and do not pose any
threat to the researcher.2 Data drawn from wiretap records have the advantage of
1
The popularity of the SNA is also reflected in the increasing amount of definitions of Organized Crime
that contain the term network (Varese 2010: 78).
2
In several jurisdictions (e.g. the United States, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Holland and Sweden),
wiretaps can be introduced as evidence in trials. Since they are to be used as evidence, the conversations
are transcribed by officers and made available to the prosecutor. On the contrary, in the UK, wiretaps
cannot be used as evidence in court, thus scholars have no access to them. Still, this information is used
extensively as part of police investigations: 2,243 warrants to intercept communications had been issued in
the UK between January and March 2006. Interestingly, police forces in the UK do not transcribe the
conversations, leading to several mistakes made by investigators, as reported by a Government review
(Reuters News Agency 20/02/2007).

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

15

capturing conversations as they occur in their natural setting and may yield a fuller
picture of the group, including conversations involving lower-level and upper-level
actors. Scholars have started to utilize this source systematically (Baker and Faulkner
1993; Finckenauer and Waring 1998; Natarajan 2000 and 2006; Varese 2006;
Morselli 2009; Campana 2011). Yet, no in-depth examination of questions related to
the validity of these data exists. Below, we shall address these questions.
Prerequisites for quantitative analysis of phone intercepts
Given the peculiar nature of the data, a researcher is left with no conventional
statistical tests for assessing the validity of a set of wiretapped conversations. Yet,
minimizing the biases and the potential sources of error is crucial if we are to seek
meaningful results. Not all the sets of wiretapped conversations are suitable for a
quantitative and systematic analysis. Some of them are a great source of anecdotal
evidence, but they may be highly misleading if analyzed in a quantitative way.
Unfortunately, the perfect set of conversations does not exist. Yet, there are ways to
assess the validity of a given set of conversations: we suggest that the following
prerequisites, if met, should guarantee a satisfactory level of validity.
A) No self-censorship Actors should talk freely on the phone about all (or most of)
the activities of a group. The use of encrypted language should not be confused with
the self-censorship about the topics discussed. In the case of criminal conversations,
we might face three different scenarios: (a) actors do not talk freely (they self-censor
themselves); (b) actors talk openly (that is to say using a non encrypted language)
and freely (touching on all or most of the activities of the group); (c) actors talk
freely but not openly. The conversations in scenario (a) are not suitable for a
quantitative analysis, and should be disregarded (the results would otherwise be
highly biased). Scenario (b) is very unlikely to happen, yet not wholly impossible.
Conversely, scenario (c) is fairly common, namely criminals use some sort of
encrypted code when touching upon all or most of the activities of the group.3 As
long as the police are able to decrypt the code, as it is often the case (Morselli 2009:
43; Varese 2011: ch. 4; Campana 2011), then a set of conversations where a coded
language is used fulfils the no self-censorship requisite, and it can therefore be
confidently analyzed.
It is possible to check whether or not this requisite is fulfilled through two
different control strategies: an internal and an external control. An internal validity
control is based mainly on the content of a conversation. We can assume that, if the
criminals under surveillance are aware they are being listened to, they would not talk
about any serious crime they are intending to carry out. If the offenders talk
strategically on the phone, we would expect them to avoid mentioning information
that could incriminate them under the law and put them away for many years. If this
is not the case, and the protagonists do talk about incriminating matters on the
phone, such as the use of violence, torture and murders, we can be confident about
the validity of the conversation transcripts (Varese 2011: 9596). Furthermore, an
3

It can also be argued that when criminals do not talk openly, they might talk even more freely since they
do not expect the police to be able to decrypt their conversations.

16

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

actor might hide some information to another actor, but not to all of them. Lets
assume that there are only three actors in our network (A, B and C): it might well be
the case that A hides some information to B, but he still talks openly to C. The larger
the set of conversations and actors wiretapped, the smaller is the potential bias
associated with the data. In the same vein, the broader are the categories of coding
adopted the smaller is the impact of missing bits of information on the overall
results.4
An external control of self-censorship can be undertaken in two ways. First, one
can build on the goals of the agency which collects the data. The police themselves
have an incentive to validate the content of some conversations by conducting
surveillance on individuals and checking their physical and financial movements. If
two people talk on the phone about a meeting or money transfer, the police might
check this information and file a report on it. Moreover, if an actor tries to
manipulate the interlocutor giving them misleading information, the police have
again an incentive to validate the content, highlighting the possible manipulations or
omissions.
Second, an external validation procedure can be undertaken by the researcher.
This would involve double-checking information extracted from conversation
transcripts with data collected from other court records (e.g., sentences, if available,
and arrest warrants) or through interviews with knowledgeable people (prosecutors,
judges, police investigators, individuals involved in crime). Thus, in-depth interviews retain a key role in this kind of quantitative research.
B) Reasonably wide group coverage All key individuals should be put under
surveillance in order to gain satisfactory coverage of the actors and the activities of a
group. If the suspects targeted for wiretapping are not representative of the group as
a whole, people who might be central will not appear so in the data simply because
their phones have not been targeted (Natarajan 2000: 293; Klerks 2001: 58).5 In an
ideal world, a researcher would aim to achieve an exhaustive group coverage, where
all the members have been put under surveillance: whilst this may be the case with
some small criminal groups, it is unlikely for very large groups. Related to this is a
second issue: actors tend to be added to the list of suspects as the investigation
proceeds, so that the group comes to look significantly different over time as a
function of police decisions to widen the net of phones being tapped.
The first concern can be addressed by an external validity control, doublechecking the information extracted from the phone wiretaps with the information
contained in other records or obtained through interviews with prosecutors and
the police. It is likely that investigators themselves have already done a check on
4

Mistaken interpretations by the police may occur. The extent to which this happens depends on the
quality of training the police forces get. In this regard, there is little that a researcher can do apart from
disregarding any set of conversations where the wiretapping activity is clearly invalidated by lack of
preparation on the police side (this should emerge during the trial). Yet, based on our and other authors
experience (see for example Morselli 2009: 43), this is seldom the case with large and medium scale
police investigations, which are often conducted by special units. Furthermore, the impact of such
inaccurate interpretations on the overall results can be lessened by applying a coding scheme based on
broader topics.
5
If there is strong evidence that the police focused on individuals suspected of particular kinds of crime
leaving out all the other members, it is better not to rely on that corpus of conversations (see also note 10).

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

17

group coverage, adding or removing names and lines during the first months of
the investigation, until they identify a core group of actors which remains
constant till the end of the investigation. It is therefore advisable to consider only
data collected once the number of actors wiretapped is settled and constant. A
longitudinal analysis of conversation transcripts and a close analysis of the warrants
issued by prosecutors may help researchers to ascertain which individuals should be
excluded. Furthermore, investigators themselves typically offer to prosecutors
reasons as to why a given individual is tapped and for how long.
Finally, it should be noted that the criteria used by the police in deciding which
individuals should be eavesdropped have a direct impact on the type of statistical
analysis we are able to carry out. For instance, if some of the actors involved have
been directly put under surveillance and some others have not, then the likelihood of
appearing in the tapes is not the same for all the actors. In this case, it is advisable to
rely on binary measures rather than continuous ones when reconstructing the
network of the group (e.g. presence/absence of ties rather than the number of
contacts exchanged: see below for a broader discussion on social network analysis
techniques). Overall, the research strategy proposed cannot avoid being affected to
some extent by the goals of the law enforcement agency which collects the data, and
these goals should therefore be critically assessed by a researcher.
C) A large sample of conversations (over a reasonably long period of time) Due to
several statistical constraints, it is important to rely on a fairly large dataset of
conversations. In addition, if one plans to undertake a longitudinal analysis, it is
essential to rely on a dataset where the conversations have been wiretapped for a
reasonably long period of time. The length of such period cannot be predetermined,
since it is highly dependent on the dynamic of the group over time, the specific
research questions we are to answer, and the number of conversations per day that
have been wiretapped. In our previous works, we have relied on conversations which
have been wiretapped over a period of ten and seven months respectively (Varese
2006 and 2011; Campana 2011).
Furthermore, extensive listening may reduce the risk of selective coverage and
reveal a more accurate picture of the relationships between the actors. By large
dataset, we mean at least several hundred conversations: a large set will give the
researcher the opportunity to apply more sophisticated data analysis techniques than
simple frequency distribution.6 A set with a few dozen conversations focused on a
single activity and wiretapped for a short period of time is not worth analysing, and
could lead to unreliable and invalid results.7
The coding procedure we discuss below is indeed time consuming, and the
amount of conversations wiretapped over a long period of time may well reach a
6

It is difficult to determine a minimum threshold that has to be generally met, since this threshold is not
only a function of the data analysis techniques to be used, but also of the number of network nodes, the
duration of the intercept operation and the coding procedure.
7
It is not uncommon to find un-usable set of conversations in court archives. TM (1994) is such an
example. The investigation focused on an Italian mafia group linked with an `Ndrangheta family who run
various types of businesses in a small town near Milan. The conversations wiretapped were less than 30
and focused only on drug dealing, and only a few actors were put under phone surveillance. A quantitative
analysis of the conversations would have led to a biased picture of the group.

18

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

level that a single researcher or even a small team of researchers find it difficult to
handle. We believe that, instead of reducing the period of observation or the number
of actors considered, it is more fruitful to extract a simple (or systematic) random
sample from the whole set of conversations. If built in this way, the new subset will
retain the same characteristics of the bigger one, but it will result in being much
easier to code and analyze.
The three criteria listed above represent the main requisites of validity that wiretap
evidence must satisfy. If met, they should help the researcher minimize biases and
potential sources of error. Undertaking a quantitative analysis on conversations which
do not meet these prerequisites may lead to unreliable results. These prerequisites are yet
not sufficient. At least three more issuessampling, the boundaries of the group, and
the link between talk and actionalso need to be addressed.

Samples, boundaries and behaviour

A corpus of conversations wiretapped by the police is a sample of all the conversations
that have occurred among the members of a criminal group. It is indeed quite unusual
for a researcher to have access to the universe of conversations (criminal and noncriminal), even if they are limited to a specific medium (e.g., the phone). Even if the
universe were available, it is not obvious that it would be useful: the number of
conversations to be analyzed would massively increase; most of them would not
concern any criminal activities; the amount of time and money requested for the
analysis would increase as well. Most crucially, the purpose of the researcher is not to
estimate the ratio of ordinary conversations to criminal ones (on this, Morselli 2009).
The sample of conversations can be seen as a special kind of purposive sample,
where the purposive criterion is as follows: in order to be included in the sample (and
therefore to be transcribed in police investigation reports), a conversation must pertain
generally speaking to a criminal activity. As a general rule, this is the criterion
followed by the police during the investigation and it can be accepted by an academic
researcher without any major concern.8 It is much more likely that a trained police
officer is able to understand the criminal nature of superficially innocent remarks than
a researcher. As we said above, the police in any case would want to cast a wide net
and include more conversations than the ones that will eventually be used by a
prosecutor to build a case in court. Such a purposive criterion does not pose major
threats to validity as long as the police define criminal activity in a broad sense.
Figure 1 presents pictorially the universe of all conversations and their subsets.
The broader set is labelled A and displayed with a dashed line: it is the universe and
contains all the conversations that have occurred in everyday life using every kind of
media (phone conversations, face-to-face conversations, etc.). The universe is not
8

Investigators selectively transcribe only the conversations that are related to a criminal activity, and
therefore the only network that we are able to reconstruct is the criminal one. Yet criminals as all the
other social actors may be part of a number of different networks at the same time, and some of these
networks may also be particularly helpful in understanding the structure and evolution of the criminal one.
Whilst some extra information may be collected from other sources and still integrated into the analysis, it
is true that our purposive criterium does not allow us to reconstruct any other network but the criminal
one.

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

19

Cr

Cp

Cr int Cp

B
A

Type I Error

Type II Error

Fig. 1 Conversations as a sample

available to researchers. A smaller subset of conversations is B, which contains all

the phone conversations that have taken place. These conversations may have been
listened to by the police, but they are usually not transcribed or included in court
records, and thus are not available to any researcher (mainly for privacy reasons; US
legislation does not allow officers to listen to B). As we have discussed before, the
police focus on conversations concerning criminal behaviour. Therefore, we may
have two more subsets of criminality-related conversations: a subset containing all
conversations that occurred (labelled Cr) and a subset containing conversations
transcribed by the police and included in a court file (Cp). In an ideal world, Cp and
Cr are perfectly overlapping, but in effect we may notice a gap and face two types of
errors: Type I and Type II. A Type I error occurs when a conversation concerning a
criminal activity is not transcribed by the police and thus not included in a court file
due to a misinterpretation of the content, an oversight of the investigator or the
technical failure of a wiretapping device. A Type II error occurs when a conversation
not concerning a criminal activity is wrongly understood and added to a court file. A
reliable corpus of conversations should minimize bias arising from such errors.
During the coding process, a researcher is able to remove any Type II error, but she
can do little about Type I errors. Moreover, it is impossible to quantify Type I errors
since the boundaries of B are unknown, and a researcher can assess the soundness of
a corpus of conversations only in a circumstantial way.
Finally, and depending on the legislation of a given country, there may be a subset
D which contains only the conversations included in the sentence issued by the
court. This set is usually very small and highly biased, and does not make a sound
basis for statistical analysis.
From content to behaviour
Conversations are texts. To what extent can they be considered as a proxy for the
actors behaviour (real or potential)? Criminal conversations about a given plan are
unlikely to be just frivolous chat. If the actors become involved in a given venture,
then the conversation about it refers to actual behaviour. If, on the contrary, the

20

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

actors restrict themselves to hypothesizing about a given plan, then their talk refers
to only potential behaviour, but still behaviour. We assume that talking with business
partners about a possible project is at least a sign of potential behaviour. Such
conversations among criminals are arguably more credible as a proxy for behaviour
than if the same conversations had taken place between academics or film buffs.
Schlegel (1984: 107) maintains that conversations among criminals often
involve lies, boasts and exaggerations which may not reflect the true nature of
crime (on the same vein, see also Smith 1975: 297). To some extent, this can be
true also of data extracted through a standard questionnaire. The advantage of this
kind of data is that outright lies can be exposed by reference to other data collected
by the police, thus producing a measure of construct validity not available to most
researchers interviewing subjects through a standard questionnaire. Not only the
police validate the content of some conversations by tailing individuals and checking
their physical and financial movements; the speakers themselves would want to
double-check whether the information conveyed by fellow conspirators is accurate.
If a large enough sample of conversations is available, we would be able to see
whether some lies are eventually exposed. A criminal group in which everybody
constantly tells only lies to anybody else is simply doomed to fail from the start.
Next to outright lies, members of the groups might have an interest in omitting to
report, say, the value of a heist, to the boss. However, discussion of the robbery
would be recorded in conversations between other members of the groups.
As with any standard questionnaire, there still will be a degree of misrepresentation of facts in wiretaps as well. Luckily, not all the lies have an impact on the
results of the analysis. For instance, lets assume that a member of the group gives to
the boss some wrong information about his actual behaviour while reporting about a
given task he was entrusted with. Lies and exaggerations, in this case, do not have an
impact on the coding, since the task (e.g. planning a robbery) is nevertheless
mentioned. As a more general rule, the broader the topics coded, the smaller the
impact of lies and exaggerations on the results. And the wider the set of
conversations and actors wiretapped, the smaller the risk of ending up with
misleading interpretations.
The boundaries of the network
Another threat to the validity of the data is a general issue often raised in the study of
social networks, namely, that we cannot be sure where the boundary of the network
lies (Lauman et al. 1983; Scott 2000: 5362; Klerks 2001: 58). A pragmatic decision
is to accept that the external boundaries of the network lie where the police file
ends.9 This assumption is reasonable if (and only if) the previous requisites have
been satisfied, namely that all the key actors are wiretapped and the coverage of the
group is satisfactory.
9

It should be borne in mind that a criminal group may well be part of a bigger network of lawbreakers
related to a specific criminal industry, e.g. drug trafficking, and that members of the criminal group may be
in contact with other criminals active in the same sector. Only a substantive criterion, based for instance
on the content of wiretapped conversations or other police/court files, may help the researcher to establish
the boundaries of the criminal group under scrutiny at a specific point in time, and assess whether the
boundaries identified by the police can be accepted without major concerns.

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

21

It should be noted that the boundaries of the overall network and those of the
criminal group do not necessarily coincide; that is to say, the network of the hardcore members may well be smaller than the whole network. For instance, if we take a
network of contacts among the members of a given Mafia-group over a certain period
of time, this will include not only the bona fide Mafiosi, but also customers, potential
victims, and fixers, among other actors. The ability to generate such a comprehensive
picture is certainly a strength of the data collection strategy that we propose to adopt;
yet, the bigger network and the sub network of bona fide Mafiosi (members) are
analytically different, and should be analyzed and interpreted accordingly (e.g., if we
are to assess whether a Mafia group is hierarchical or flat based on the informal net of
contacts, it can be argued that the analysis should be restricted to the sole members
sub network). Notwithstanding its analytical relevance, this crucial aspect of criminal
networks is hardly recognized in the literature. In order to establish where the
boundaries of the group liewe might call them internal boundaries, a researcher
may turn to a substantive criterion based on a closer analysis of the content of
wiretapped conversations or other police files (see the discussion of Content analysis
below). In conclusion, we are faced with what we might call the double-problem of
external and internal boundaries: the first issue may be solved in a pragmatic way,
while the latter requires a substantive criterion to establish the boundary (for an
example related to the Camorra case, see Campana 2011).

The data analysis techniques

To exploit fully the information contained by phone conversations, we propose to
use four different techniques: content analysis, correspondence analysis, network
analysis and stochastic models for longitudinal network data. Each technique allows
us to explore a different facet of a criminal group, but it is their joint application that
offers the fullest picture of the phenomenon. Below we discuss how each technique
relates to the type of analysis we propose scholars should undertake.
Content analysis
Content analysis is a set of techniques that aims to codify who says what to whom
systematically (Krippendorff 2004; Roberts 1997; Weber 1990). According to Holsti
(1969: 14) content analysis is any technique for making inferences by objectively
and systematically identifying specified characteristics of messages. Thus, we
suggest undertaking content analysis of wiretapped conversations as the first step of
our approach. Systematic content analysis allows a researcher to move from texts,
processed in order to remove any repeated conversation, to a data matrix. This step
enables a researcher to apply standard statistical techniques to the analysis of
criminal groups (e.g. frequencies, crosstabs, correlations, and the like depending on
the specific research questions she is to answer). As it shall be clear later, processing
the data in a quantitative way allows a researcher to work out, for instance, how
many times a given actor has talked about a single topic, and compare this frequency
with those calculated for the other topics discussed by the same actor. In addition,
the same frequency can be compared with those calculated for all the other actors.

22

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

Longitudinal analysis can also be carried out, e.g. with the aim to assess how the
frequency of a topic changes over time and whether a pattern of variations among
topics emerges. Quantitative analysis can help confirming anecdotal evidence
contained in a conversation.
Several procedures have been suggested for coding textual data in a reliable way
(Roberts 1997), depending greatly on the kind of text involved (speeches, newspaper
articles, conversations, etc.) and the aims of a given research project.
In order to code the data contained in the conversations, we suggest conducting a
thematic content analysis where the basic recording unit is a thematic unit (or,
simply, theme), defined as one or more assertions about a given subject matter
(Holsti 1969). If this procedure is adopted, it follows that segments of conversation
where a given theme is discussed are coded. A segment of conversation is a
fragment of a conversation that has a meaningful beginning and end. As both
Berelson (1952) and Holsti (1969) point out, the theme can be considered as one of
the most useful units of content analysis, notwithstanding two major drawbacks: (i)
thematic content analysis can be more time-consuming than other approaches; (ii)
the boundaries of the theme are not as easily identified as those of word, paragraph
or item (Holsti 1969: 116), therefore this requires the employment of highly trained
coders (see below).
Coding thematic units can be a bottom-up or a top-down procedure. The starting
point of the bottom-up approach is each single conversation rather than a pre-conceived
grid of themes. For each conversation, the coder identifies the various themes discussed
by the actors. The top-down approach requires that every single conversation or
segment of conversation is coded by applying categories strictly derived from a predefined set of themes. The latter approach makes it easier to undertake comparisons
across crime groups. Yet, it would be wrong to see the two approaches as mutually
exclusive. Themes identified through a bottom-up procedure can be merged with those
identified with a top-down one, thereby increasing reliability.10
Since more than one theme may be discussed per conversation, the researcher can
choose to assign a main theme or general category to each conversation.11 The
consequence of such a choice is that some information is lost, buton the plus
sideit might be easier to manipulate the data. Also, one has to decide how to code
a conversation that contains more than one theme. Arguably, the best way is to
choose the theme about which the highest number of words is spoken.12

10

As Berelson (1952: 173) points out, there could be an underestimation of reliability when the latter
arises from the measurement of reliability on detailed categories which are later subsumed into more
general categories.
11
If one does choose this path, the unit of analysis becomes the single conversation, which would be akin
an item in the Berelson (1952) and Holsti (1969) classification of units. The use of different units of
analysis within the same study is recognized also by Berelson (1952), when he stressed that there is no
reason [] why a particular study must use only one of the possible units of content analysis. The choice
of the appropriate unit depends upon the problem and the content under investigation, and this may
necessitate the use of different units within the same study (1952: 143).
12
It may be the case that a theme is nested into deceptive preliminaries and digressions, making difficult
to quantify the correct number of words. Also for this reason, it is not possible to undertake an automatic
coding procedure. Thus, the manual coder must be highly trained in order to deal with such coding
problems.

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

23

Given the nature of the data and research questions, we propose to undertake a
manual (not automatic) coding process. Analysis of wiretapped conversations cannot
be automatised for at least two reasons:
(a) Themes do not have a fixed length, nor can their length be predefined in an
automatic way. Rather, themes are discussed within segments of a conversation and
they are completely different from words or predefined strings between punctuation
marks or paragraphs (which a computer can adequately identify) (Holsti 1969).
(b) Actors often use cryptic, ambiguous, or slang language, too complex to be
decoded in an automatic way. Moreover, in order to properly codify the theme
of a given conversation, the coder might need to keep in mind topics discussed
in previous conversations. Software able to perform this process in a
completely automatic way does not exist.
The attention of trained human coders is therefore essential for identifying and
quantifying the themes of each conversation. Moreover, a pilot test for inter-coder
reliability needs to be taken before the coding process can begin.13 Objectivity is
maintained through rigorous training and supervising of coders. Once the content
analysis is concluded, we can construct a data matrix that contains, on the rows, the
conversations, and on the columns their attributes: for example, the date and time of
the call, the identity of both caller and receiver, the number of words exchanged and
the countries of origin of both speakers as well as the themes discussed. Also, an
overall theme can be assigned to each conversation. The data can then be explored by
using several descriptive statistical techniques, such as frequencies, measures of
central tendency, crosstabs, and correlations. The limitation of such an analysis is that
it will be based on data derived from conversations only. In other words, attributes of
actors derived from other sources cannot be combined with data on the conversations
in order to find out who talks most about a given theme. In order to undertake such an
analysis, we turn to techniques that allow us to represent formally the two sets of data.
Correspondence analysis
Various methods for representing categorical variables in one geometrical space have
been used by scholars, including multidimensional scaling, correspondence analysis,
dual lattice analysis and other forms of dimensional representations (Torgerson 1952;
Mohr and Duquenne 1997; Mohr 1998; Harcourt 2002; Pattison and Breiger 2002).
Such methods allow us to display a synthetic representation of information contained
in the conversations with information about the actors in the same geometrical space.
Correspondence analysis is a statistical tool able to detect patterns of associations
amongst two or more variables (Greenacre 1984). Simple correspondence analysis
deals with a two-variable matrix, while multiple correspondence analysis investigates
associations between k-variables (k>2).14 As Greenacre (1984: 54) points out,
13

For an introduction to reliability coefficients see Krippendorff (2004, ch. 11).

To be more precise, correspondence analysis is a family of techniques based on the singular value
decomposition (SVD) algorithm. Simple correspondence analysis (SCA), multiple correspondence analysis
(MCA) and Homogeneity analysis (HOMALS) differ in respect to the type of input matrix: SCA uses a simple
bivariate crosstab, MCA a Burt matrix containing a set of bivariate crosstabs while HOMALS is based on an
Objects-by-Variables matrix (where the variables are dummy variables derived from K-polytomies).

14

24

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

correspondence analysis is a technique for displaying the rows and columns of a data
matrix [] as points in dual low-dimensional vector space, usually a 2-dimensional
Euclidean space. Despite a fairly long history dating back to the 1930s (Richardson
and Kuder 1933; Hirschfeld 1935; Horst 1935), correspondence analysis has been, as
Hill put it, a rather neglected multivariate method, especially in the English-speaking
world (Hill 1974). The French school rediscovered it in the early 1960s with the works
of Benzcri and his associates (see Benzcri 1973).
Data about the actors involved in the study can be extracted from police reports or
other court files. The main added value of correspondence analysis is the opportunity
to analyze data extracted from two different types of data sets, from the conversations
and from other sources containing additional information on the actors: it is thus
possible to match the content of each conversation with information about the actors
involved, obtaining a more comprehensive and detailed picture of a criminal group.
Correspondence analysis proceeds by calculating the marginal proportions for the set
of categories of each variable (profiles) and, in order to mitigate the role played by the
components with higher frequency, it weights the distance between two points by the
inverse of the respective masses. This is a typical chi-square distance, and can be seen
as an example of weighted Euclidean distance (Greenacre 1984: 31).15 Correspondence Analysis offers a key insight into the internal division of labour on the basis of
the variables that one is able to code (e.g., nationality, gender, place of residence,
place of birth, criminal record, access to violence). In other words, meaningful
clusters of points (for instance, actors and tasks performed) can be obtained. Yet, this
technique does not allow us to explore cluster of actors based on formal measures of
centrality nor to reconstruct the informal structure on the basis of the contacts among
actors, or conclude whether the group is structured hierarchically or not. In order to
undertake such analysis, one needs to turn to Social Network Analysis.
Social network analysis (SNA)
Phone conversations are by their very nature relational. SNA is a technique that
allows us to map connections, describe the strength of the relationship between
actors, and test hypotheses about who is likely to be connected to whom over time.
In order to apply such a technique, one needs to develop measures of connection
between actors. A starting point is to count how many times two actors call each
other. This measure enables the researcher to gauge the intensity of the relationship
(based, for instance, on the number of times they spoke on the phone or on the
number of words exchanged overall). If one has the date of each call, one can create
a third data set, a Longitudinal Directed Network, split at various points in time.
Longitudinal network data are typically collected as panel data where the
relationship between network actors is observed at two or more discrete points in
time. There are at least two different ways to split such a Longitudinal Network. One
solution would be to have a time-based split, e.g. every three months. A second
approach is to have an event-based split. In this case, the researcher would decide
which relevant events might warrant a split in the data. Such events might include a
15

Given the chi-square distances feature of increasing the relative contribute of the components with lower
masses, it is better to be very careful when modalities with very low mass are included into the analysis.

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

25

murder, a police intervention or any other theoretically relevant event. Finally, one
can create a non-network matrix of attributes of actors (e.g., gender, nationality, tasks,
use of force) to be matched to the actors in the network matrix.
SNA can help reconstruct the internal structure of a criminal network (hierarchical
vs. flat), on the basis of the pattern of ties actors have with each other as opposed to
their official title. Seen through the lens of SNA, a hierarchy can be thought of as a
special pattern of relations, namely a network where the vast majority of ties flow to
or from a few nodes (Podolny and Page 1998: 59; Knoke and Rogers 1979; Lauman
1991). The internal structure uncovered by SNA is the informal one. In other words,
we might know that a boss, an underboss and several team leaders exist in a group,
but we are interested in how they relate to each other informally: a charismatic team
leader might have direct access to the boss, bypassing the formal hierarchy. Such a
feature might predict future promotion, or conflict. Furthermore, SNA allows us to
identify key brokers (Burt 1992).
The SNA suggests that different patterns of connection between actors produce
different levels of centralization. The more connections go through a given node, the
more central such a node will be within the network. A highly central node
occupies a high level within the informal pattern of relationships in the group, even
if the actor in question does not sit at the top of the official organizational pyramid.
Centrality can thus be the operationalization of the concept of hierarchy.16 Several
measures of centrality have been devised by SNA (e.g. degree centrality and node
betweenness: Freeman 1979; Wasserman and Faust 1994) and are implemented in
most software, such as UCINET (Borgatti et al. 2002) and Pajek (de Nooy et al.
2005).
SNA can also help reconstruct the internal cohesion of the network through a
variety of algorithms (see, e.g., Amorim et al. 1992; Borgatti et al. 2002; Hanneman
and Riddle 2005: ch. 11). Yet, most of these measures are descriptive and refer to the
network at one point in time only.17 Scholars would want to go beyond descriptive
measures of networks and try to test hypotheses. Examples of hypotheses that could
be tested are whether, say, actors of the same nationality are more likely to form a tie
than actors of different nationality; whether women are more likely to form ties with
other women than with men. In addition to hypotheses that test the effect of specific
attributes (e.g. nationality, gender), one might want to test peculiar network
hypotheses, such as reciprocity (if you phone me, I shall phone back) and
transitivity (if both you and I phone her, we shall phone each other; on this, see
also Robins 2009). To put it in the classical terminology of statistical analysis, the
dependent variable is the likelihood of tie formation among two actors. However,
network data have a peculiar structure: actors are located both on the rows and the
16

Hierarchy could of course be defined differently, for instance as a structure embodying relations of
authority and subordination. Such a concept could be operationalized by looking for items in a
conversation that would suggest the relative status of the speakers (Natarajan 2000). Giving orders,
expressing satisfaction, and requesting information would indicate a high position in the informal
hierarchy of the group (Natarajan 2000). Provided one has such information from the conversation, a
content analysis can be undertaken.
17
The notable exception is the so-called QAP procedure that regresses one or more independent matrices
on a dependent matrix, and assesses the significance of the r-square and regression coefficients (the
procedure is implemented in UCINET software. See Borgatti et al. 2002).

26

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

columns of a data matrix, while standard representations of data in a matrix list cases
on the rows and variables on columns. Thus, when it comes to data analysis,
standard methods such as general linear model analysis cannot be used because
they assume independence of observations (Robins and Kashima 2008). The
complicated dependence structures inherent in network data call for novel and
advanced statistical techniques. Theoretical statisticians have now developed reliable
ways to calculate coefficients for network data. The most commonly used is the
stochastic actor-oriented model proposed by Snijders (2001; see also Burk et al.
2007). The stochastic actor-oriented model allows us also to test a variety of network
effects, such as whether ties are likely to be reciprocated, as well as non-network
effects. It is also able to model network evolution, provided the data allow it (i.e. if
one has data of the network collected at different points in time). In the presence of a
large enough sample of conversation, one would normally have the time of the
conversation, thereby constructing the data set as a panel. Network evolution can
then be explored, telling us whether the group becomes more cohesive or more
fragmented over time. An additional advantage of using the stochastic actor-oriented
model is that it is implemented in an easy-to-use software, SIENA (Snijders et al.
2007).18 This method is increasingly used in other subfields of criminology (see,
e.g., Dijkstra et al. 2010).
What these techniques tell us about criminal groups
Table 1 presents a summary of the insights that might be obtained from the four
different techniques we have discussed so far.
Content Analysis draws only on data contained in the conversations intercepted
by the police. Information about actors emerges as long as it is contained in the
conversations. Content Analysis is able to extract aggregate data on the whole
corpus of conversations, e.g., the most talked about themes and the countries of
origin and destination of the calls. In this way, it is therefore possible to empirically
reconstruct the activities of a criminal group, and relative relevance of such activities
(e.g. it may be argued that the greater the number of segments of conversation
devoted to a specific task, the more relevant the task is for a given group). Content
Analysis also allows us to have summary information on individual actors, for
instance about whom they talk to most, which country they call, which themes they
discuss. The key limitation is that actors are considered, as it were, separately.
Correspondence Analysis allows us to combine two sets of data, one derived from
the conversations and one derived from other sources regarding actors attributes. It
detects the presence of clusters based on patterns of relations between attributes of
both actors and conversations. For example, instances of division of labour within
the group may be detected in this way.
Social Network Analysis enables us to reconstruct the informal structure of a
criminal group based on the number of ties exchanged by the actors involved, the
internal hierarchy and cohesiveness of a group. SNA also helps detect clusters of
18

The actor-oriented models implemented in SIENA software have some limitations. For instance, these
models do not produce a measure similar to the reproduced variance and it is not possible to compare
statistics estimated by SIENA with statistics calculated via other statistical techniques (Snijders et al. 2007;
Burk et al. 2007: 403).

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

27

Table 1 Techniques, data sets used and results achieved

Technique

Data Sets Used

Results

Content Analysis

Conversations

- Features of the conversations

(e.g. most talked topics).
- Features of actors as they emerge
from conversations.
- More generally, activities both at the
individual and group level.

Correspondence Analysis

Conversations and Actorsa

Social Network Analysis

Conversations and Actors

- Clusters based on attributes of both

actors and conversations
(e.g. internal division of labour)
- Informal hierarchy
- Clusters (factions) based on patterns of ties

Longitudinal stochastic
actor-oriented model

Conversations and Actors

- Testing hypotheses on attribute(s) and

network effects on tie formation
- Assessing the network evolution over time

a
Actors refers to data not included in the conversations per se, but extracted from other sources, such as
interviews or police files

actors based on the patterns of ties they have with each other (as measured by their
phone ties). Through the stochastic actor-oriented model one can test hypotheses on
tie formation on the basis of a variety of independent variables, both network
variables and non-network variables. It is possible to estimate the evolution of a
criminal group over time, taking into account at the same time the characteristics of
the actors involved (exogenous variables) and those of the network structure
(endogenous variables).

Conclusions
In the past years SNA has been widely adopted for the study of criminal groups. A
relatively neglected source of data is phone conversations wiretapped by the police.
Such a source poses no threat to the researcher and has the potential to capture
criminal talk as it occurs in its natural setting, involving both high-ranking and lowranking members. In this paper, we have spelled out three prerequisites that should
be met for rigorous analysis of this type of data. Individuals under surveillance must
talk freely on the phone, the coverage of the group must be reasonably wide, and a
large enough sample of conversations must be available for analysis. Wiretapped
conversations are a type of purposive sample created by officers. Thus errors of Type
I (a criminal conversation is not recorded by the police) and Type II (a non-criminal
conversation is recorded) can occur. Only Type I errors pose a threat to validity,
because the researcher can always discard superfluous conversations. As long as one
does not wish to estimate the ratio of criminal to non-criminal conversations, the
purposive nature of the sample should not distort analysis. Scholars should however
be careful not to use small sub-samples of conversations contained in certain court

28

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

documents, such as sentences. Finally we addressed two further issues, namely the
relationship between talk and behaviour, and network boundaries.
We propose a set of techniques to analyze phone conversations: content analysis,
correspondence analysis; descriptive network analysis and longitudinal stochastic
actor-oriented models. Each method shines light on different aspects of the group
and utilizes the same data differently. We argued that Content Analysis should be
quantitative, thematic and undertaken manually. Such a method relies on data
extracted from the conversations only and allows us to investigate features of the
conversations as a whole, such as which themes are most discussed, which countries
are involved, who talks the most. Cross-tabulations can used in this analysis.
Furthermore, these data serve to quantify the properties of single actors, such as how
many conversations she is involved in, to whom she talks, from where she calls and
the like. Correspondence Analysis can utilize two sources of data, the conversations
themselves and data extracted from other sources, and enables the researcher to
represent on a single geometrical space features of both actors and conversations.
For example, this technique allows one to cluster actors on the basis of the themes of
the conversations, thereby delineating the internal division of labour of the group.
Social Network Analysis can also combine two data sources (conversations and
actors attributes) to identify the informal hierarchy of the group as well as clusters
of actors, based on the patterns of their ties. Finally, the stochastic actor-oriented
model is able to test hypotheses on tie formation on the basis of both network
variables (such as reciprocity and closure) and non-network variables (such as age,
gender, place of origin, and criminal record of a given actor).
A systematic analysis of phone conversations can yield valid inferences on the
nature and activities of criminal groups. If followed, the procedures discussed here
should generate transparent results and highlight the strengths and limitations of the
case-studies. These techniques also facilitate comparisons across groups and over
time, yielding insights into how an organization adapts to changes in its own
environment. Finally, the set of procedures discussed here can be applied to other
data, generated by other surveillance techniques, although this is a topic that would
deserve another paper.
Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to John Goldthorpe, Michelle Jackson, Luca Ricolfi, the
two anonymous referees and the editor for their valuable comments and suggestions. They are also
thankful to Liz David-Barrett and Morag Henderson for their help in editing the text, and their comments.
This research was supported by a grant from Leverhulme Trust (F/01 532/B).

References
Amorim D, Saul G, Barthlemy J-P, Ribeiro CC (1992) Clustering and clique partitioning: simulated
annealing and tabu search approaches. J Classif 9(1):1741
Baker WE, Faulkner RR (1993) The social organization of conspiracy: illegal networks in the heavy
electrical equipment industry. Am Sociol Rev 58(6):837860
Benzcri J-P (1973) LAnalyse des Donnes, Tome 2. Dunod, Paris
Berelson B (1952) Content analysis in communication research. Free Press, New York
Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2002) Ucinet 6 for windows. Analytic Technologies, Harvard
Bruinsma G, Bernasco W (2004) Criminal groups and transnational illegal markets. A more detailed
examination on the basis of Social Network Theory. Crime, Law Soc Chang 41(1):7494

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

29

Burk WJ, Steglich CEG, Snijders TAB (2007) Beyond dyadic interdependence: actor-oriented models for
co-evolving social networks and individual behaviours. Int J Behav Dev 31(4):397404
Burt RS (1992) Structural holes: the social structure of competition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Campana P (2011). Eavesdropping on the Mob: the functional diversification of the Mafia activities across
territories. Eur J Criminol 8(3):116
Coles N (2001) Its not what you knowIts who you know that counts. Analysing serious crime groups
as social networks. Br J Criminol 41(4):580594
de Nooy W, Mrvar A, Batagelj V (2005) Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge
Dijkstra JK, Lindenberg S, Veenstra R, Steglich C, Isaacs J, Card NA, Hodges EVE (2010) Influence and
selection processes in weapon carrying during adolescence: the roles of status, aggression, and
vulnerability. Criminology 48:187220
Finckenauer JO, Waring EJ (1998) Russian Mafia in America: immigration, culture and crime.
Northeastern University Press, Boston
Freeman LC (1979) Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification. Soc Netw 1:215239
Gifi A (1990) Nonlinear multivariate analysis. Wiley, Chichester
Greenacre MJ (1984) Theory and application of correspondence analysis. Academic, London
Hanneman RA, Riddle M (2005) Introduction to social network methods. University of California,
Riverside. At: http://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/nettext/
Harcourt BE (2002) Measured interpretation: introducing the method of correspondence analysis to legal
studies. Univ Ill Law Rev 9791017
Hill MO (1974) Correspondence analysis: a neglected method. Appl Stat 23(3):340354
Hirschfeld HO (1935) A connection between correlation and contingency. Proc Camb Philos Soc (Math
Proc) 31:520524
Holsti OR (1969) Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, Reading
Horst P (1935) Measuring complex attitudes. J Soc Psychol 6:369374
Klerks P (2001) The network paradigm applied to criminal organisations: theoretical nitpicking or a relevant
doctrine for investigators? Recent developments in the Netherlands. Connections 24(30):5365
Knoke D, Rogers DL (1979) A blockmodel analysis of interorganizational networks. Sociol Soc Res
64:2852
Krippendorff K (2004) Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology, 2nd edn. Sage, Beverly Hills
Lauman EO (1991) Comment on The future of bureaucracy and hierarchy in organizational theory: a
report from the field. In: Bourdieu P, Coleman JS (eds) Social theory for a changing society.
Westview, Boulder, pp 9093
Lauman EO, Marsden PV, Prensky D (1983) The boundary specification problem in network analysis. In:
Burt RS, Minor MJ (eds) Applied network analysis. Sage, Beverly Hills, pp 1834
McNally D, Alston J (2006) Use of Social Network Analysis (SNA) in the examination of an outlaw
motorcycle gang. J Gang Res 13(3):125
Mohr JW (1998) Measuring meaning structures. Annu Rev Sociology 24:345370
Mohr JW, Duquenne V (1997) The duality of culture and practice: poverty relief in New York City, 1888
1917. Theory Soc 26:305356
Morselli C (2005) Contacts, opportunities, and criminal enterprise. University of Toronto Press, Toronto
Morselli C (2009) Inside criminal networks. Springer, New York
Natarajan M (2000) Understanding the structure of a drug trafficking organization: a conversational
analysis. In: Natarajan M, Hough M (eds) Illegal drug markets: from research to policy. Crime
preventions studies, Vol. 11. Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, pp 273298
Natarajan M (2006) Understanding the structure of a large heroin distribution network: a quantitative
analysis of qualitative data. J Quant Criminol 22:171192
Pattison PE, Breiger RL (2002) Lattices and dimensional representations: matrix decompositions and
ordering structures. Soc Netw 24:423444
Podolny JM, Page KL (1998) Network forms of organizations. Annu Rev Sociology 24:5776
Reuter P (1994) Research on American Organized Crime. In: Kell R, Chin K, Schatzberg R (eds)
Handbook of organized crime in the United States. Greenwood, Westport, pp 91119
Richardson M, Kuder GF (1933) Making a rating scale that measures. Pers J 12:3640
Roberts CW (ed) (1997) Text analysis for the social sciences: methods for drawing statistical inferences
from texts and transcripts. Erlbaum, NJ
Robins G (2009) Understanding individual behaviours within covert networks: the interplay of individual
qualities, psychological predispositions, and network effects. Trends Organ Crime 12(2):166187

30

Trends Organ Crim (2012) 15:1330

Robins G, Kashima Y (2008) Social psychology and social networks. Asian J Soc Psychol 11(1):112
Schlegel K (1984) Life Imitating Art: Interpreting Information from Electronic Surveillances. In: Fairbank
JK (ed) Critical issues in criminal investigations. Criminal Justice Press, Cincinnati, pp 5361
Scott J (2000) Social network analysis. A handbook, 2nd edn. Sage, London
Smith DC (1975) The Mafia mystique. Basic Books, New York
Snijders TAB (2001) The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics. Sociol Methodol 31:361395
Snijders TAB, Steglich CEG, Schweinberger M, Huisman M (2007) Manual for SIENA version 3.1. University
of Groningen: ICS / Department of Sociology and University of Oxford: Department of Statistics
TM(Tribunale di Monza) (1994) Atti del procedimento contro Sansalone Antonio (Proceedings against
Sansalone Antonio), Monza Penal Court
Torgerson WS (1952) Multidimensional scaling: I. Theory and method. Psychometrika 17(4):40119
Varese F (2006) The structure of a criminal network examined: the Russian Mafia in Rome. Oxford Legal
Studies Research Paper 21. University of Oxford, Oxford
Varese F (2010) General introduction. What is organized crime? In: Varese F (ed) Organized crime.
Routledge, London and New York, pp 133
Varese F (2011) Mafias on the move. Princeton University Press, Princeton
von Lampe K (2009) Human capital and social capital in criminal networks: introduction to the special
issue on the 7th Blankensee Colloquium. Trends Organ Crime 12(2):93100
Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social network analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Weber RP (1990) Content analysis, 2nd edn. Sage, Beverly Hills