Tavern proximity, tavern density and socio-economic status as predictors of assault occurrence within New Zealand: a temporal comparison

Figures & data

Figure 1. Proportion of assaults where the maximal error in location measurement is less than a specified amount.

Figure 2. New Zealand assaults in 2016 by selected day of week and hour.

Figure 3. Proportion of population, land mass, assaults, peak time assaults and off-peak assaults occurring within a given distance of taverns.

Table 1. Results of logistic regression – Part I.

Model	Variable	Std. coefficient	Odds ratio (95% CI)	Gini	Model	Variable	Std. coefficient	Odds ratio (95% CI)	Gini
Peak time assaults					Multiple peak time assaults
A1	Tavern proximity	−0.9095	0.883 (0.869, 0.899)	0.412	A13	Tavern proximity	−4.0134	0.579 (0.515, 0.650)	0.674
A2	Tavern density	0.1875	1.132 (1.121, 1.142)	0.308	A14	Tavern density	0.2112	1.150 (1.138, 1.162)	0.620
A3	T.G. proximity	−0.6391	0.928 (0.917, 0.939)	0.385	A15	T.G. proximity	−1.2225	0.867 (0.833, 0.902)	0.441
A4	T.G. density	0.2404	1.365 (1.341, 1.390)	0.308	A16	T.G. density	0.3009	1.476 (1.440, 1.513)	0.580
A5	NZDEP13 decile	0.3509	1.253 (1.230, 1.276)	0.334	A17	NZDEP13 decile	0.4152	1.305 (1.255, 1.358)	0.374
A6	AU pop density	0.1659	1.203 (1.181, 1.226)	0.205	A18	AU pop density	0.2070	1.260 (1.226, 1.294)	0.147
Off-peak assaults					Multiple off-peak assaults
A7	Tavern proximity	−0.5657	0.926 (0.920, 0.932)	0.307	A19	Tavern proximity	−1.2741	0.841 (0.825, 0.857)	0.441
A8	Tavern density	0.1858	1.131 (1.119, 1.142)	0.183	A20	Tavern density	0.1860	1.131 (1.120, 1.141)	0.315
A9	T.G. proximity	−0.5397	0.939 (0.934, 0.944)	0.343	A21	T.G. proximity	−1.4886	0.840 (0.824, 0.857)	0.488
A10	T.G. density	0.2398	1.364 (1.343, 1.385)	0.216	A22	T.G. density	0.2798	1.436 (1.412, 1.462)	0.363
A11	NZDEP13 decile	0.3676	1.266 (1.254, 1.279)	0.353	A23	NZDEP13 decile	0.4791	1.360 (1.336, 1.384)	0.431
A12	AU pop density	0.1571	1.191 (1.175, 1.208)	0.196	A24	AU pop density	0.1570	1.191 (1.170, 1.213)	0.207

Notes: Likelihood ratio test, efficient score test and Wald test for all models significant at the P < .001 level; All coefficients stated are significant at the P < .001 level.

Table 2. Results of logistic regression - Part II.

	Standardised coefficients			Odds ratio (95% CI)
Model	NZDEP13 decile	Tavern/TG proximity	Tavern/TG density	NZDEP13 decile	Tavern/TG proximity	Tavern/TG density	Gini
Peak assaults
B1: model 1	0.3165	−0.5961	0.1519	1.225 (1.202, 1.249)	0.922 (0.909, 0.935)	1.105 (1.095, 1.116)	0.481
B2: model 2	0.2981	−0.3100	0.2014	1.211 (1.188, 1.234)	0.964 (0.956, 0.973)	1.298 (1.274, 1.322)	0.477
Off-peak assaults
B3: model 1	0.3514	−0.4339	0.1336	1.253 (1.240, 1.266)	0.943 (0.937, 0.948)	1.092 (1.082, 1.102)	0.431
B4: model 2	0.3330	−0.3235	0.1846	1.238 (1.226, 1.251)	0.963 (0.959, 0.967)	1.270 (1.250, 1.290)	0.448
Multiple peak assaults
B5: model 1	0.3342	−1.6891	0.1732	1.239 (1.187, 1.293)	0.794 (0.738, 0.855)	1.121 (1.110, 1.133)	0.690
B6: model 2	0.3141	−0.3726	0.2677	1.223 (1.173, 1.276)	0.957 (0.935, 0.980)	1.414 (1.377, 1.451)	0.664
Multiple off-peak assaults
B7: model 1	0.4507	−0.8295	0.1403	1.335 (1.311, 1.360)	0.893 (0.879, 0.907)	1.097 (1.087, 1.107)	0.555
B8: model 2	0.4233	−0.6747	0.2237	1.312 (1.288, 1.337)	0.924 (0.912, 0.936)	1.336 (1.312, 1.360)	0.591

Notes: Likelihood ratio test, efficient score test and Wald test for all models significant at the P < .001 level; All coefficients stated are significant at the P < .001 level.

Figure 4. Proportion of all assaults and taverns in 2016 by deprivation decile classification.