Since you "don't object" to consumer research I'm sure you must have some understanding of it.

Cut the condescension. It's you that cannot draw basic juxtapositions here. For example:

I'm curious then, how do you deliniate the questions of subjective experience used in the crime study and the consumer research.

What someone thinks is influencing them to buy a product is effectively the same as what actually is influencing them to buy that product. Sales is all about ego-boosting. The goal is to find out what they think the influence is, not what it actually is. They are not relaying factual events.

That's just the most obvious difference. The problem that'll keep coming up for you is what surveyal study of unreported crime actually attempts to determine, which is quantity of unknown information; you are not getting around that problem. Feel free to try though by answering my question once and for all: how would you confirm the nonexistence of unreported crimes perpetrated against someone telling you they've reported all crimes?