Violent Victimization and Offending: Individual-, Situational-, and Community-Level Risk Factors

Robert J. Sampson and Janet L. Lauritsen

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this paper is to (1) summarize current knowledge on individual-, situational-, and community-level sources of criminal violence; (2) identify key problems of causal interpretation in existing research; and (3) suggest new directions for future research and policy. Although violence has not been an understudied phenomenon in American criminology, a synthesis of the causes and consequences of criminal violence across multiple levels of analysis has not been undertaken. Indeed, most of the more than 2,000 studies of violence published since 1945 (Bridges and Weis, 1989:14) have been descriptive and focused either on individual-level correlates of violent offending or, to a much lesser extent, on community-level correlates of violence rates. As a consequence, extant reviews tend to emphasize individual-level factors (especially age, race, and sex) or particular classifications such as family violence (e.g., Ohlin and Tonry, 1989) and criminal career violence (e.g., Weiner, 1989). By contrast, our goal in this review is to show how a multilevel perspective on both victimization and offending may substantially increase the understanding

Robert J. Sampson is at the Department of Sociology, University of Chicago. Janet L. Lauritsen is at the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Missouri, St. Louis.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Violent Victimization and Offending: Individual-, Situational-, and Community-Level Risk Factors Robert J. Sampson and Janet L. Lauritsen INTRODUCTION The purpose of this paper is to (1) summarize current knowledge on individual-, situational-, and community-level sources of criminal violence; (2) identify key problems of causal interpretation in existing research; and (3) suggest new directions for future research and policy. Although violence has not been an understudied phenomenon in American criminology, a synthesis of the causes and consequences of criminal violence across multiple levels of analysis has not been undertaken. Indeed, most of the more than 2,000 studies of violence published since 1945 (Bridges and Weis, 1989:14) have been descriptive and focused either on individual-level correlates of violent offending or, to a much lesser extent, on community-level correlates of violence rates. As a consequence, extant reviews tend to emphasize individual-level factors (especially age, race, and sex) or particular classifications such as family violence (e.g., Ohlin and Tonry, 1989) and criminal career violence (e.g., Weiner, 1989). By contrast, our goal in this review is to show how a multilevel perspective on both victimization and offending may substantially increase the understanding Robert J. Sampson is at the Department of Sociology, University of Chicago. Janet L. Lauritsen is at the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Missouri, St. Louis.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences and control of violence. Because there appears to be little consensus in the social science literature on how multilevel factors should be defined, we describe in more detail our conceptualization of these terms. Our use of the terms ''individual," "situational," and "community" corresponds closely to Short's (1985) definition of the "individual," "micro-," and "macro-" levels of analysis (see also Short, 1990:11). The individual level of explanation typically inquires as to characteristics of individuals that explain behavior. In our discussion of individual-level risk factors for violence, we specifically focus on the ascribed and achieved characteristics of individuals that are statistically associated with violent victimization and offending. For example, we examine how the risks of violent victimization and offending are distributed across characteristics such as age, sex, race, marital status, lifestyle, and socioeconomic status. Our intention, though, is not only to provide a descriptive summary of statistical findings, but to suggest how, and in what ways, individual characteristics are causally related to the risk of violent victimization and offending. By situational-level risk factors, we are referring to those factors, broadly defined, that influence the initiation or outcome of a violent event. This conceptualization corresponds to Short's (1990:11) definition of the microlevel, where attention is focused on the unfolding of events and the interaction of parties involved in events. Situational-level analyses usually treat the violent incident, or event, as the unit of analysis. Included in our review is a discussion of such factors as the presence and type of weapon, the presence of drugs or alcohol, the role of bystanders or third parties during violent events, and victim resistance and retaliation. However, we expand the traditional conceptualization of situational-level analyses to include a discussion of the victim-offender overlap and how victim-offender relationships are related to violence. These factors are included because we believe that the simultaneous consideration of victims, offenders, and their past and present interactions provides a more complete context for studying the initiation and outcomes of violent events. The macrosocial or community level of explanation asks what it is about community structures and cultures that produces differential rates of crime (Byrne and Sampson, 1986; Bursik, 1988; Short, 1990:11). For example, what characteristics of communities are associated with high rates of violence? Are communities safe or unsafe because of the persons who reside in them or because of community properties themselves? Can changes in community

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences structure affect violent crime rates? As implied by these questions, the goal of macrolevel research is not to explain individual involvement in criminal behavior but to isolate characteristics of communities, cities, or societies that lead to high rates of criminality. Examples of macrolevel risk factors include residential mobility, population density, heterogeneity, and income inequality. These and other factors are assessed for both intraurban (e.g., local community, neighborhood) and interurban (e.g., city, metropolitan area) units of analysis, although for substantive reasons discussed below we place more weight on between-community variations in rates of criminal violence. CRITERIA Conclusions about the correlates of violence are naturally linked to the universe of studies under consideration. Because our review is highly focused we applied systematic criteria for inclusion of research. Although exceptions arise, the studies analyzed in this paper were selected based on the following criteria: Studies in which serious interpersonal violence (e.g., assault, homicide, robbery, and rape) is measured directly are our primary focus. Issues surrounding the measurement of violence are discussed as needed; however, we should note that our intention herein is to avoid studies that present overall measures (e.g., total scales, index crimes) in which violence is confounded with property or other crime types (e.g., drug use, status offenses). Also, many delinquency studies focus on such events as schoolyard theft ("robbery") and minor fighting. Except where important for historical or theoretical reasons, these studies are generally not considered. Analyses of objective social characteristics of individuals, situations, and community context are emphasized, as opposed to those studies focusing on internal psychological states, perceptions, or biological/constitutional conditions.1 Because individual-level social characteristics have received disproportionate attention in the past, we tend to highlight the theoretical and policy implications of community-level factors. As we make clear, however, the study of community-level processes is not possible without a thorough understanding of individual-and situational-level correlates. We emphasize studies that present empirical data, especially those that have representative (e.g., national-level) or large

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences enough samples to draw reasonable conclusions. However, this does not rule out the selective use of important ethnographic work that bears directly on issues of concern. We focus on American studies or those written in the English language, particularly those published in refereed journals. Moreover, we emphasize urban-based research from the past 20 years that has formed the bulk of multivariate studies of violence. In general, we attempt to assess the substantive and (where appropriate) causal importance of key factors. Consequently, we focus on the magnitude of effects as opposed to mere statistical significance. Although not strict criteria for inclusion, we also make a special effort to highlight (a) micro-macro linkages (i.e., the simultaneous consideration of both individual-and community-level risk factors in violence) and (b) the connection between violent victimization and violent offending. We believe that much previous research on violence is problematic because of the causal confounding and alternative causal interpretations that can arise in designs relying on a single level of analysis. Furthermore, we contend that the victim-offender overlap can provide fundamental insights into the etiology of violence; hence we pay close attention to studies that allow assessment of the causal role that offending may play in increasing victimization risk, and vice versa. Too often in the past these issues have been treated separately as if they were unrelated (see Reiss, 1986a; Sampson and Wooldredge, 1987; Sampson and Lauritsen, 1990). In contrast, by highlighting micro-(individual/ situational) and macro-(community) linkages in the study of violence, in addition to victim-offender relationships, we believe that our understanding of the social structural and contextual sources of violence is improved. To our knowledge the literature on violence has not been critically assessed from this perspective before, especially in a framework that points to future research designs needed to address remaining etiological questions. Before turning to a road map outlining our review, two issues deserve further clarification. Given the vast literature and multiple measures of both violence and community factors, we do not present in tabular form the magnitudes of effect for all studies and factors-preliminary efforts found this to be unworkable. As noted above, the Bridges and Weis (1989) review located more than 2,000 studies of violence-a universe larger than that relevant

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences to other comprehensive reviews (e.g., see Visher and Roth, 1986). Perhaps more of a problem, we discovered an almost unlimited supply of incomparable measures and incomparable techniques, especially in community-level studies. For example, a concept as seemingly straightforward as "poverty" has been measured in at least 20 different ways, ranging from dichotomous groupings of communities through census-based percentage measures to factor-analytic scores. Complicating matters further, researchers have employed many different analytical techniques and styles of data presentation. This issue is discussed more below, but we emphasize at the outset that the nature of past research makes it difficult to present summary figures representing magnitudes of effect that are comparable across studies. Second, there is a plethora of theories of violence that have been advanced in the criminological literature. Some of these, such as the subculture of violence theory (Wolfgang and Ferracuti, 1967), are well known and have been explicated quite well in other sources. A seemingly reasonable strategy, then, especially in a review devoted to empirical risk factors in violence, is simply to ignore theory and concentrate on the findings. However, findings alone do not speak for themselves and are generally devoid of meaning when stripped of substantive content. More to the point, empirical research designs are valid only to the extent that the substantive model under consideration is valid and properly specified. Our compromise is therefore to couch, no matter how briefly, the correlates of violence in substantive perspective. We refer readers to appropriate sources on theoretical issues for more detail, particularly individual-level theories that are more widely known. Thus, theories per se are not reviewed, but key substantive themes are emphasized in an effort to shed light on the importance of empirical findings, especially multivariate, community-level, or contextual studies. This review is divided into seven major sections. First, the literature on factors underlying an individual's risk of violent victimization is assessed. This section includes a review not only of demographic correlates (e.g., age, race, and sex) emphasized in previous research, but of lifestyle and routine activity factors as well. In a similar fashion, the second section reviews the individual-level correlates of violent offending. In the third section, an overview is presented of situational-level risk factors in violence, along with analyses that consider victim-offender relationships and the concept of a victim-offender overlap. The fourth and fifth sections assess community-level determinants of violent

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences crime and metropolitan (i.e., city-level) sources of violence, respectively. In the sixth section, some key problems and pitfalls in attributing causal interpretations to findings from past research are examined. Finally, the last section identifies promising directions for future research designs and public policy initiatives. INDIVIDUAL-LEVEL RISK FACTORS IN VIOLENT VICTIMIZATION Our focus in this section is on factors related to the risk of violent victimization among individuals. Here, we address the following questions: What are the overall risks of violent victimization to individuals? How are these risks distributed across individual characteristics such as age, sex, race, marital status, and socioeconomic status? Are these differences stable over recent time periods? How are individual-level differences in risk explained by theories of victimization? Finally, how might some of the limitations of extant victimization research be minimized? We begin with a brief overview of the general aspects of violent victimization. Victimization research over the past 20 years has produced several consistent findings. One of the primary findings is that the annual risk of becoming a victim of a crime of personal violence (i.e., homicide, rape, robbery, or assault) is relatively low (Gottfredson, 1986; U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). For example, the combined risk of suffering a violent victimization by either rape, robbery, or assault in 1987 was estimated at approximately 1 in 33.2 The risk of suffering a victimization from a personal crime of violence is considerably less than that of suffering a theft victimization-in 1987, the rate of reported theft victimization (approximately 1 in 14) was more than twice the rate of reported violent victimization (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Although this risk may seem low on an annual basis, the lifetime risk of violence for any particular crime is much higher. For example, the annual risk of becoming a victim of homicide is about 1 in 10,000, but the lifetime risk of being murdered is approximately 1 in 369 for white females, 1 in 131 for white males, 1 in 104 for black females, and as high as 1 in 21 for black males (U.S. Department of Justice, 1985; see also Fingerhut and Kleinman, 1990). As suggested by the differences in lifetime homicide risks, the second major finding in individual-level analyses is that the distribution of violent victimization is not random. Rather, the risk

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences of experiencing personal violence varies considerably across demographic and social groups (Hindelang, 1976; Hindelang et al., 1978; Cohen et al., 1981a,b; Gottfredson and Hindelang, 1981; Skogan, 1981; Sparks, 1982; Gottfredson, 1986; Miethe et al., 1987; U.S. Department of Justice, 1988a). The pattern of systematic differences found across different demographic and socioeconomic subgroups has been fairly consistent across analyses utilizing either the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) data or the National Crime Survey (NCS) data in the United States (e.g., see Gottfredson, 1986). Patterns of association similar to those found in the United States have also been found in analyses using data from other countries such as England (Hough and Mayhew, 1983), the Netherlands (van Dijk and Steinmetz, 1983), and Australia (Braithwaite and Biles, 1984). To describe these patterns of violent victimization, we present, as briefly as possible, bivariate and then multivariate findings of research examining individual-level risk factors associated with victimization by homicide, assault, robbery, and rape. Particular attention is paid to the magnitude and consistency of findings in multivariate research, as well as their theoretical importance. Limitations of these analyses and their consequences for our understanding of violent victimization are discussed. BIVARIATE FINDINGS It should be mentioned at the outset that the vast majority of knowledge about the risk of violent victimization has been obtained through analyses of National Crime Survey data. The NCS is an ongoing survey conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, designed to measure the extent of personal and household victimization in the United States. Interviews are conducted at six-month intervals with all persons 12 years of age or older living in a household. By using NCS data, it is possible to estimate the extent of victimizations that are not reported in official police data (due to nonreporting of incidents, arrest bias, etc.) and to calculate prevalence measures of violent victimization for specific individual subgroups (see Reiss, 1981; Langan and Innes, 1990). Therefore, the NCS constitutes the best available data source on the risk of victimization for persons living in the United States.3 Age Age is one of the most important predictors of an individual's risk of violent victimization (Hindelang et al., 1978). The NCS

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences data for 1987 indicate that the risk of personal violent victimization is highest for persons under 25 years of age (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). After age 25, the risk of such victimization gradually declines such that by age 65, the risk of suffering a violent victimization is approximately one-tenth that of persons under 25 years of age. This bivariate age-victimization relationship-a relatively high level of victimization in youth and young adulthood followed by a gradual decline in risk-is observed for the crimes of homicide, rape, and assault (and, therefore, violent victimization in general). Differences in the risk of robbery victimization across age groups are not as great as those found for other violent crimes (Hindelang et al., 1978; Cohen et al., 1981b). In addition to contributing to the overall risk of violent victimization, age appears to be related to the nature of crime-specific victimizations. In an analysis of NCS victimization narratives for juvenile victims (age 12-17) of personal crime, Garofalo et al. (1987) found that assaults reported by juveniles were overwhelmingly minor in nature-that is, they were often the result of an inability to resolve common disputes and rarely led to serious injury on the part of the victim. For robbery as well, the relative nature of the event was reported to be less serious among juvenile victims than among adults. Although a large proportion of all victimization reported in the NCS is relatively minor in nature (Skogan, 1981; Sparks, 1982), juvenile victimization appears to be least serious overall in terms of both injury levels and monetary loss. Therefore, although juveniles appear to be at high risk for violent personal victimization, the victimizations they do suffer are more likely to have minor consequences compared to those of adults.4 Sex5 For all crimes of personal violence--with the obvious exception of rape--males are at greater risk for victimization than females (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). The annual rate of homicide victimizations for males is nearly three times greater than the annual rate for females (U.S. Department of Justice, 1986). The lifetime risk of becoming a victim of homicide is estimated to be between three and four times greater for males (1 in 84) than females (1 in 282) (U.S. Department of Justice, 1985). For the crimes of robbery and assault, males are approximately 1.5-2 times more likely to become victims. On the other hand, women are overwhelmingly the victims of rape. NCS data estimate the risk

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences of attempted or completed rape for females to be approximately 1 in 770 annually (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Furthermore, these relationships between sex and the risk of violent victimization have remained fairly constant over the last decade. Smith (1987), for example, reports that the proportion of female victims of robberies and assaults has remained stable, whereas the proportion of female homicide victims has increased slightly over the past 10 years. As was true for the relationship between age and overall risk of violence, the nature of victimization for males and females differs. First, for assault and robbery victimizations, men are more likely than women to report injury (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989).6 Second, according to victim reports, offenders attacking males are more likely to be armed: between 1973 and 1982, approximately 41 percent of male and 29 percent of female victims of violent crime were attacked by offenders with weapons (U.S. Department of Justice, 1988a). Rape is an obvious exception to this pattern. Excluding homicide, rape is the crime with the highest level of injury (Hindelang et al., 1978) and is perpetuated largely against females. Race Both NCS and UCR data confirm that blacks are disproportionately the victims of homicide, rape, and robbery (U.S. Department of Justice, 1988a). Blacks are approximately five times more likely than whites to become victims of homicide (U.S. Department of Justice, 1986) and approximately three to four times more likely to report victimization by rape and robbery (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Higher rates of black victimization by homicide (compared to whites) have been found throughout the last century (Wolfgang, 1958; Block, 1975), and recent trends indicate a continuation of this differential (Shin et al., 1977; Farley, 1980; Hawkins, 1985). As noted earlier, the lifetime risk of homicide victimization is approximately three times greater for black women than for white women, and approximately four times greater for black men than for white men (U.S. Department of Justice, 1985). Assault victimization rates for blacks and whites do not differ significantly in magnitude, although the majority of assault victimizations reported by blacks are incidents of aggravated assault, whereas among whites, simple assaults comprise the majority (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). The lack of race differences in

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences assaults overall may be the result of differences in reporting. For example, it has been suggested that blacks underreport less serious forms of assault and/or that whites overreport minor assaults (Skogan, 1981; Gottfredson, 1986). Two-and three-way associations for age, sex, and race suggest that the relationships among these factors are, generally speaking, additive. Thus, for certain subgroups the relative risk of violent victimization is quite high. In particular, young, black males are approximately 22 times more likely than older, white females to become the victims of violent crime (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Within these three-way associations, age continues to have the largest independent effect followed by sex and race. Marital Status Although somewhat less studied than age, race, and sex, marital status has also been found to be substantially related to the risk of violent victimization (Hindelang et al., 1978; Cohen et al., 1981b; Miethe et al., 1987; U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Overall, NCS estimates suggest that unmarried persons are nearly four times more likely to become the victims of robbery, rape, or assault than are those currently married (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). The exception to this pattern is for widowed persons who have the lowest risk of violent victimization. Never-married persons have the highest risk of victimization, followed closely by divorced and separated persons (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). At the extreme ends of the scale, those never married are approximately 11 times more likely than widowed persons,7 and more than 3 times more likely than currently married persons, to become the victims of assault. On the other hand, the differences by marital status for robbery and rape are not as pronounced (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Finally, when sex and marital status are considered simultaneously, marital status is more strongly related to victimization risk among females than among males (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Socioeconomic Status Not surprisingly, family income is inversely related to the risk of personal victimization (Hindelang, 1976; Hindelang et al., 1978; Cohen et al., 1981a,b; Miethe et al. 1987; U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). However, the overall magnitude of the effect of family income is not as large as the magnitudes for the individual-level

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences characteristics previously discussed (namely, age, race, sex, and marital status). For violence in general, the risk of victimization is approximately twice as great for persons whose family income is reported to be less than $7,500 compared to those whose family income is higher than $50,000 (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Specific crimes of violence also have varying relationships to family income. For example, there is little relationship between rape and family income, although women whose families earn less than $7,500 are again most likely to become victims. The risk of rape among women in the remaining income categories is approximately equal. Income is somewhat more strongly related to the risk of assault, with those at the lowest end of the income distribution reporting twice the risk of victimization as those at the highest end. Of all violent crimes, income is most strongly related to the risk of robbery-poorer persons report a robbery rate about three times higher than persons at the upper ends of the income distribution (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). The relationship between education and violent victimization is less consistent than the relationship between family income and personal victimization (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). In fact, persons with the least amount of education report the lowest level of violent victimization. Excluding this category of education, and with slight fluctuations, the general relationship between education and victimization is negative but small in magnitude. It has been suggested that the ability to accurately recall victimizations may be affected by one's level of education. For example, highly educated respondents in the NCS appear to be more "productive" when recalling victimization events (Skogan, 1981). The relationship between socioeconomic status (either income or education) and rape victimization is also small in magnitude and is more uniformly distributed across women in different income and education groups (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Finally, of the common indicators of an individual's socioeconomic status, unemployment is most strongly related to the risk of violent victimization (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). Those who are unemployed are at the greatest risk of robbery, assault, and rape, followed by persons in school, the employed, those unable to work, those keeping house, and the retired.8 Overall, the unemployed are more than twice as likely as the employed to suffer a violent victimization (U.S. Department of Justice, 1989). It is thus clear that the risk of suffering a violent victimization is differentially distributed across social and demographic groups. Extant data suggest that age has the largest bivariate

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Liska, A., and M. Reed 1985 Ties to conventional institutions and delinquency: Estimating reciprocal effects. American Sociological Review 50:547-560. Loeber, R., and M. Stouthamer-Loeber 1986 Family factors as correlates and predictors of juvenile conduct problems and delinquency. Pp. 29-150 in M. Tonry and N. Morris, eds., Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Vol. 7. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Loftin, C., and R. Hill 1974 Regional subculture and homicide: A examination of the Gastil-Hackney thesis. American Sociological Review 39:714-724. Loftin, C., and E. MacKenzie 1990 Building national estimates of violent victimization. Commissioned paper for the National Academy of Sciences Symposium on ''The Understanding and Control of Violent Behavior," Destin, Fl., April. Loftin, C., and D. McDowall 1988 The analysis of case-control studies in criminology. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 4:85-98. Loftin, C., and R. Parker 1985 An errors-in-variable model of the effect of poverty on urban homicide rates. Criminology 23:269-287. Loftin, C., K. Kindley, S. Norris, and B. Wiersema 1987 An attribute approach to relationships between offenders and victims in homicide. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 78:259-271. Logan, J., and H. Molotch 1987 Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. Berkeley: University of California Press. Luckenbill, D., and D. Doyle 1989 Structural position and violence: Developing a cultural explanation. Criminology 27:419-436. Lynch, J. 1987 Routine activities and victimization at work. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 2:283-300. Maccoby, E., J. Johnson, and R. Church 1958 Community integration and the social control of juvenile delinquency. Journal of Social Issues 14:38-51. Massey, D. 1990 American apartheid: Segregation and the making of the underclass. American Journal of Sociology 96:329-357. Massey, D., and M. Eggers 1990 The ecology of inequality: Minorities and the concentration of poverty, 1970-1980. American Journal of Sociology 95:1153-1188.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Massey, D., and S. Kanaiaupuni 1990 Public Housing and the Concentration of Poverty. Working paper, Population Research Center, University of Chicago. Maxfield, M. 1987 Lifestyle and routine activity theories of crime: Empirical studies of victimization, delinquency, and offender decision-making. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 3:275-282. Mayer, S., and C. Jencks 1989 Growing up in poor neighborhoods: How much does it matter? Science 243(March):1441-1445. McCord, J. 1982 A longitudinal view of the relationship between paternal absence and crime. Pp. 113-128 in J. Gunn and D. Farrington, eds., Abnormal Offenders, Delinquency and the Criminal Justice System. London: Wiley. McCord, W., J. McCord, and A. Howard 1961 Familial correlates of aggression in non-delinquent male children. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology 62:79-93. McDonald, S. 1986 Does gentrification affect crime rates? Pp. 163-202 in A.J. Reiss, Jr., and M. Tonry, eds., Communities and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Messner, S. 1982 Poverty, inequality, and the urban homicide rate. Criminology 20:103-114. 1983a Regional and racial effects on the urban homicide rate: The subculture of violence revisited. American Journal of Sociology 88:997-1007. 1983b Regional differences in the economic correlates of the urban homicide rate: Some evidence on the importance of cultural context. Criminology 21:477-488. Messner, S., and J. Blau 1987 Routine leisure activities and rates of crime: A macro-level analysis. Social Forces 65:1035-1052. Messner, S., and R. J. Sampson 1991 The sex ratio, family disruption, and rates of violent crime: The paradox of demographic structure. Social Forces 69:693-714. Messner, S., and S. South 1986 Economic deprivation, opportunity structure, and robbery victimization: Intra-and interracial patterns. Social Forces 64:975-991. Messner, S., and K. Tardiff 1986 Economic inequality and levels of homicide: An analysis of urban neighborhoods. Criminology 24:297-318.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Miethe, T., and R. Meier 1990 Opportunity, choice, and criminal victimization. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 27:243-266. Miethe, T., M. Stafford, and J. Long 1987 Social differentiation in criminal victimization: A test of routine activities/lifestyle theories. American Sociological Review 52:184-194. Mladenka, K., and K. Hill 1976 A reexamination of the etiology of urban crime. Criminology 13:491-506. Monahan, J., and D. Klassen 1982 Situational approaches to understanding and predicting individual violent behaviors. Pp. 292-319 in M. Wolfgang and N. Weiner, eds., Criminal Violence. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Morris, T. 1958 The Criminal Area. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1970 Book review of Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas, 2nd ed. British Journal of Criminology 10:194-196. O'Brien, R. 1985 Crime and Victimization Data. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. 1987 The interracial nature of violent crimes: A re-examination. American Journal of Sociology 92:817-835. 1988 Exploring the intersexual nature of violent crimes. Criminology 26:151-170. Ohlin, L., and M. Tonry, eds. 1989 Family Violence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Park, R.E., E. Burgess, and R. McKenzie 1925 The City. Chicago: University of Chicago Pess. Parker, R.N., and M.D. Smith 1979 Deterrence, poverty, and type of homicide. American Journal of Sociology 85:614-624. Peterson, R., and C. Bailey 1988 Forcible rape, poverty, and economic inequality in U.S. metropolitan communities. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 4:99-120. Pierce, G., and W. Bowers 1981 The Bartley-Fox gun law's short-term impact on crime in Boston. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 455:120-137. Piper, E. 1985 Violent recidivism and chronicity in the 1958 Philadelphia cohort. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 1:319-344. Pittman, D., and W. Handy 1964 Patterns in criminal aggravated assault. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science 55:462-470.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Pokorny, A. 1965 Human violence: A comparison of homicide, aggravated assault, suicide and attempted suicide. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science 56:488-497. Pyle, G., E. Hanten, P. Williams, A. Pearson, J. Doyle, and K. Kwofie 1974 The Spatial Dynamics of Crime. Chicago: Department of Geographic Research, University of Chicago. Rainwater, L. 1970 Behind Ghetto Walls: Black Families in a Federal Slum. Chicago: Aldine. Rankin, J. 1983 The family context of delinquency. Social Problems 30:466-479. Raudenbush, S., and A. Bryck 1986 A hierarchical model for studying school effects. Sociology of Education 59:1-17. Recktenwald, W., and L. Myers 1991 849 killings put 1990 in a sad record book. Chicago Tribune 1,7. Reiss, A.J., Jr. 1981 Towards a revitalization of theory and research on victimization by crime. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 72:704-713. 1986a Why are communities important in understanding crime? Pp. 1-33 in A.J. Reiss, Jr., and M. Tonry, eds., Communities and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1986b Co-offender influences on criminal careers. Pp. 121-160 in A. Blumstein, J. Cohen, J. Roth, and C. Visher, eds., Criminal Careers and "Career Criminals." Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Reiss, A.J., Jr., ed. 1989 Proceedings of the Workshop on Communities and Crime Control. Committee on Research on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, National Research Council. Washington, D.C.: National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Riedel, M. 1987 Stranger violence: Perspectives, issues, and problems. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 78:223-258. Rieder, J. 1985 Canarsie: The Jews and Italians of Brooklyn Against Liberalism . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Robins, L. 1966 Deviant Children Grown Up. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins. Roncek, D. 1981 Dangerous places: Crime and residential environment. Social Forces 60:74-96.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Roncek, D., and D. Faggiani 1986 High schools and crime: A replication. Sociological Quarterly 26:491-505. Roncek, D., R. Bell, and J. Francik 1981 Housing projects and crime: Testing a proximity hypothesis. Social Problems 29:151-166. Rose, H., and P. McClain 1990 Race, Place and Risk: Black Homicide in Urban America. Albany: State University of New York Press. Rosenfeld, R. 1986 Urban crime rates: Effects of inequality, welfare, dependency, region, and race. In J. Byrne and R. Sampson, eds., The Social Ecology of Crime. New York: Springer-Verlag. Sampson, R.J. 1983 Structural density and criminal victimization. Criminology 21:276-293. 1984 Group size, heterogeneity, and intergroup conflict. Social Forces 62:618-639. 1985a Neighborhood and crime: The structural determinants of personal victimization. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 22:7-40. 1985b Race and criminal violence: A demographically disaggregated analysis of urban homicide. Crime and Delinquency 31:47-82. 1986a Neighborhood family structure and the risk of criminal victimization. Pp. 25-46 in J. Byrne and R. Sampson, eds., The Social Ecology of Crime. New York: Springer-Verlag. 1986b Crime in cities: The effects of formal and informal social control. Pp. 271-311 in A.J. Reiss, Jr., and M. Tonry, eds., Communities and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1986c Effects of socioeconomic context on official reaction to juvenile delinquency. American Sociological Review 51:876-885. 1987a Urban black violence: The effect of male joblessness and family disruption. American Journal of Sociology 93:348-382. 1987b Personal violence by strangers: An extension and test of the opportunity model of predatory victimization. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 78:327-356. 1988 Community attachment in mass society: A multilevel systemic model. American Sociological Review 53:766-769. 1990 The impact of housing policies on community social disorganization and crime. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 66:526-533. Sampson, R.J., and W.B. Groves 1989 Community structure and crime: Testing social-disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology 94:774-802. Sampson, R.J., and J.H. Laub 1990 Crime and deviance over the life course: The salience of adult social bonds. American Sociological Review 55:609-627.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Sampson, R.J., and J. Lauritsen 1990 Deviant lifestyles, proximity to crime, and the offender-victim link in personal violence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 27:110-139. Sampson, R.J., and J. Wooldredge 1986 Evidence that high crime rates encourage migration away from central cities. Sociology and Social Research 70:310-314. 1987 Linking the micro-and macro-level dimensions of lifestyle-routine activity and opportunity models of predatory victimization. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 3:371-393. Schlesselmann, J. 1982 Case-Control Studies. New York: Oxford University Press. Schmid, C. 1960 Urban crime areas, part I. American Sociological Review 25:527-542. Schuerman, L., and S. Kobrin 1986 Community careers in crime. Pp. 67-100 in A.J. Reiss, Jr., and M. Tonry, eds., Communities and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Shaw, C., and H. McKay 1931 Social factors in juvenile delinquency. Vol. 2 of Report of the Causes of Crime. National Commission of Law Observance and Enforcement. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. 1942 Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1969 Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas (rev. ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Shaw, C., F. Zorbaugh, H. McKay, and L. Cottrell 1929 Delinquency Areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sherman, L., P. Gartin, and M. Buerger 1989 Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology 27:27-56. Shin, Y., D. Jedlicka, and E. Lee 1977 Homicide among blacks. Phylon 38:398-407. Short, J.F., Jr. 1963 Introduction to the abridged edition. Pp. xv-liii in F. Thrasher, The Gang: A Study of 1,313 Gangs in Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1969 Introduction to the revised edition. Pp. xxv-liv in C. Shaw and H. McKay, eds., Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1985 The level of explanation problem in criminology. Pp. 51-74 in R. F. Meier, ed., Theoretical Methods in Criminology. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences 1990 Delinquency and Society. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Short, J.F., and F. Strodtbeck 1965 Group Process and Gang Delinquency. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Silverman, R., and L. Kennedy 1987 Relational distance and homicide: The role of the stranger. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 78:272-308. Simcha-Fagan, O., and J. Schwartz 1986 Neighborhood and delinquency: An assessment of contextual effects. Criminology 24:667-704. Simon, R. 1975 Women and Crime. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath. Simon, R., and S. Baxter 1989 Gender and violent crime. Pp. 171-197 in N. Weiner and M. Wolfgang, eds., Violent Crime, Violent Criminals. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Simpson, M. 1985 Violent crime, income inequality, and regional culture: Another look. Sociological Focus 18:199-208. Singer, S. 1981 Homogeneous victim-offender populations: A review and some research implications. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 72:779-788. Skogan, W. 1981 Assessing the behavioral context of victimization. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 72:727-742. 1986 Fear of crime and neighborhood change. Pp. 203-229 in A.J. Reiss, Jr., and M. Tonry, eds., Communities and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Smith, D.R. 1986 The neighborhood context of police behavior. Pp. 313-341 in A.J. Reiss, Jr., and M. Tonry, eds., Communities and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Smith, D.R., and G.R. Jarjoura 1988 Social structure and criminal victimization. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 25:27-52. Smith, D.R., and C. Visher 1980 Sex and involvement in deviance/crime: A quantitative review of the empirical literature. American Sociological Review 45:691-701. Smith, M. 1987 Changes in the victimization of women: Is there a new female victim? Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 24:291-301.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Smith, M.D., and R.N. Parker 1980 Type of homicide and variation in regional rates. Social Forces 59:137-147. Smith, S. 1982 Victimization in the inner city: A British case study. British Journal of Criminology 22:386-402. South, S., and R. Felson 1990 The racial patterning of rape. Social Forces 69:71-94. Sparks, R. 1982 Research on Victims of Crime. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Sparks, R., H. Glenn, and D. Dodd 1977 Surveying Victims. London: Wiley. Spergel, I. 1964 Racketville, Slumtown, Haulburg. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Stahura, J., and J. Sloan, III 1988 Urban stratification of places, routine activities and suburban crime rates. Social Forces 66:1102-1118. Stark, R. 1987 Deviant places: A theory of the ecology of crime. Criminology 25:893-909. Steffensmeier, D., E.A. Allan, M. Harer, and C. Streifel 1989 Age and the distribution of crime. American Journal of Sociology 94:803-831. Straus, M., and R. Gelles 1986 Societal change and change n family violence from 1975 to 1985 as revealed by two national surveys. Journal of Marriage and the Family 48:465-479. Street, L. 1989 Why focus on communities? Pp. 27-34 in A.J. Reiss, Jr., ed., Proceedings of the Workshop on Communities and Crime Control. Committee on Research on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, National Research Council. Washington, D.C.: National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Sullivan, M. 1989 Getting Paid: Economy, Culture, and Youth Crime in the Inner City. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press. Suttles, G. 1968 The Social Order of the Slum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Taub, R., D.G. Taylor, and J. Dunham 1984 Paths of Neighborhood Change: Race and Crime in Urban America . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Taylor, R., and J. Covington 1988 Neighborhood changes in ecology and violence. Criminology 26:553-590.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Taylor, R., and S. Gottfredson 1986 Environmental design, crime, and prevention: An examination of community dynamics. Pp. 387-416 in A.J. Reiss, Jr., and M. Tonry, eds., Communities and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Taylor, R., S. Gottfredson, and S. Brower 1984 Block crime and fear: Defensible space, local social ties, and territorial functioning. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 21:303-331. Thornberry, T., and M. Farnworth 1982 Social correlates of criminal involvement: Further evidence on the relationship between social status and criminal behavior. American Sociological Review 47:505-517. Thrasher, F. 1963 The Gang: A Study of 1,313 Gangs in Chicago (rev. ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Tienda, M. 1989 Poor People and Poor Places: Deciphering Neighborhood Effects on Behavioral Outcomes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, San Francisco, August 9-13. Tittle, C., W. Villemez, and D. Smith 1978 The myth of social class and criminality: An empirical assessment of the empirical evidence. American Sociological Review 43:643-656. Tonry, M., and J.Q. Wilson, eds. 1990 Drugs and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. U.S. Department of Justice 1985 The Risk of Violent Crime. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1986 Crime in the United States, 1985. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1988a Report to the Nation on Crime and Justice, 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1988b Crime in the United States, 1987. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1989 Criminal Victimization in the United States, 1987. A National Crime Survey Report, June. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. van Dijk, J., and C. Steinmetz 1983 Victimization surveys: Beyond measuring the volume of crime. Victimology 8:291-301. Van Voorhis, P., F. Cullen, R. Mathers, and C.C. Garner 1988 The impact of family structure and quality on delinquency: A comparative assessment of structural and functional factors. Criminology 26:235-261.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Visher, C., and J. Roth 1986 Participation in criminal careers. Pp. 211-191 in A. Blumstein, J. Cohen, J. Roth, and C. Visher, eds., Criminal Careers and "Career Criminals." Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Wallace, R., and D. Wallace 1990 Origins of public health collapse in New York City: The dynamics of planned shrinkage, contagious urban decay and social disintegration. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 66:391-434. Weiner, N. 1989 Violent criminal careers and "violent career criminals." Pp. 35-138 in N. Weiner and M. Wolfgang, eds., Violent Crime, Violent Criminals. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Wells, L., and J. Rankin 1988 Direct parental controls and delinquency. Criminology 26:263-285. West, D., and D. Farrington 1977 The Delinquent Way of Life. London: Heinemann. Widom, C.S. 1989a The intergenerational transmission of violence. Pp. 137-201 in N. Weiner and M. Wolfgang, eds., Pathways to Criminal Violence. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. 1989b Child abuse, neglect, and violent criminal behavior. Criminology 27:251-272. Wilbanks, W. 1985 Is violent crime intraracial? Crime and Delinquency 31:117-128. Wilkinson, K. 1980 The broken home and delinquent behavior. Pp. 21-42 in T. Hirschi and M. Gottfredson, eds., Understanding Crime. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Williams, K. 1984 Economic sources of homicide: Reestimating the effects of poverty and inequality. American Sociological Review 49:283-289. Williams, K., and R. Flewelling 1988 The social production of criminal homicide: A comparative study of disaggregated rates in American cities. American Sociological Review 53:421-431. Wilson, W.J. 1987 The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wolfgang, M. 1958 Patterns in Criminal Homicide. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Wolfgang, M., and F. Ferracuti 1967 The Subculture of Violence. London: Tavistock.

OCR for page 1
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Wolfgang, M., T. Thornberry, and R. Figlio 1987 From Boy to Man, From Delinquency to Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zahn, M., and P. Sagi 1987 Stranger homicides in nine American cities. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 78:377-396. Zimring, F. 1981 Kids, groups, and crime: Some implications of a well known secret. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 72:867-885