Gender and Interpersonal Violence

Candace Kruttschnitt

INTRODUCTION

Are males really more violent than females? Although disagreement on this important question admittedly remains, a number of scholarly works have concluded that gender, perhaps more than any other variable, produces a dramatic and consistent difference in the extent and nature of interpersonal violence. For almost four decades now, men have dominated official reports of violent crime and, regardless of the data source, they appear to engage disproportionately in the most injurious acts of interpersonal violence. Race differences produce some variations among different data sets; gender differences, however, appear and reappear across time and different social contexts in crimes of violence and acts of aggression. From a public policy as well as a theoretical standpoint, this robust association is quite significant. Simply asked, what is it about being female that reduces the likelihood of aggressive or violent behavior? Unfortunately it appears that we know far more about the strength of the association between gender and interpersonal violence than about why it exists. Although numerous scholars have assessed the relationship between gender and crime (e.g., see Widom, 1978; Nagel and Hagan, 1982; Rutter

Candace Kruttschnitt is at the Department of Sociology, University of Minnesota.



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 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Gender and Interpersonal Violence Candace Kruttschnitt INTRODUCTION Are males really more violent than females? Although disagreement on this important question admittedly remains, a number of scholarly works have concluded that gender, perhaps more than any other variable, produces a dramatic and consistent difference in the extent and nature of interpersonal violence. For almost four decades now, men have dominated official reports of violent crime and, regardless of the data source, they appear to engage disproportionately in the most injurious acts of interpersonal violence. Race differences produce some variations among different data sets; gender differences, however, appear and reappear across time and different social contexts in crimes of violence and acts of aggression. From a public policy as well as a theoretical standpoint, this robust association is quite significant. Simply asked, what is it about being female that reduces the likelihood of aggressive or violent behavior? Unfortunately it appears that we know far more about the strength of the association between gender and interpersonal violence than about why it exists. Although numerous scholars have assessed the relationship between gender and crime (e.g., see Widom, 1978; Nagel and Hagan, 1982; Rutter Candace Kruttschnitt is at the Department of Sociology, University of Minnesota.

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences and Giller, 1983; Wilson and Herrnstein, 1985), virtually no integrated research reviews focus specifically on acts of violence. Instead the explanations for the relationship between gender and interpersonal violence have remained in disparate intellectual fields and in various theoretical camps, including biological, social psychological, structural, and methodological. The purpose of this paper is to examine critically the research pertaining to gender and interpersonal violence with an eye toward providing a better understanding of the role of gender in producing different rates and types of interpersonal violence. Every attempt is made to present relevant data from all intellectual traditions.1 However, as can be seen, the work on violence among males far exceeds the work on violence among females. As a result, readers will find that this review provides a synthesis of the omissions in our knowledge of the relationship between gender and interpersonal violence. We begin by defining the concepts that provide the framework for this analysis. DEFINITIONS AND CONCEPTS The Panel on the Understanding and Control of Violent Behavior limits its consideration of violent human behavior to interpersonal violence, which is defined as behavior that "threatens, attempts, or actually inflicts physical harm." This definition of violence is composed of the following three elements: (1) behavior, by one or more persons, that threatens, attempts, or inflicts physical harm (i.e., the harmful act need not be completed to be included in this study); (2) intentional infliction of physical harm (i.e., the definition excludes negligence and recklessness); and (3) one or more persons who are objects of the harmful behavior (i.e., the victims). The term sex is used to refer to genetic sex or the chromosomal makeup of the individual. It is "sex" and not "gender" to which we refer when making the distinction between people who are biologically male or biologically female (Schur, 1984:10). By contrast, the term gender refers to the sociological, psychological, and cultural patterns that are used to evaluate and to shape male or female behavior. The evidence suggesting that gender is socially constructed is now well documented (e.g., see Macaulay, 1985; Bender, 1988:15, note 38; Epstein, 1988). However, because gender is imposed on sex by acculturation and socialization, it is not surprising to find that these two concepts are still used interchangeably (cf. Widom, 1984:5). The failure to distinguish sex

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences from gender can have serious implications for research examining behavioral differences between men and women. For example, criminologists frequently refer to sex as one of the most important demographic variables in their research because of the strong association observed between this variable and aggregate arrest rates. Yet a reference to sex differences in arrest statistics implies a biological basis for the disparate rates. Explanations for these differences, however, include socialization and opportunity, as well as biological factors. Similarly, models predicting sex differences in interpersonal violence can be misspecified when they fail to include biological variables; conversely, a gender-based explanation of violence should model exogenous social and cultural variables. Further confusion arises with the related variables of gender role and gender identity. Gender roles are commonly perceived as a set of behavioral expectations based on an individual's sex in a particular social context, whereas gender identity usually refers to an individual's self-conception of being male or female. Each variable can have important and different etiological influences on crime. For example, female gender role socialization might constrain aggression or societal responses to it, whereas a masculine gender identity might encourage it (e.g., see Widom, 1984). However, in the relevant literature we find that (1) "gender/sex roles" often are employed as a generic concept for both social roles and personality traits (Norland and Shover, 1978), and (2) there are both considerable measurement variability (cf. Thornton and James, 1979; Norland et al., 1981; Horwitz and White, 1987) and questionable validity in the underlying constructs of masculinity and femininity (Spence and Sawin, 1985; Gill et al., 1987). Not surprisingly, then, our ability to draw from and build upon previous research pertaining to gender and interpersonal violence is hampered by this lack of conceptual and methodological clarity. Despite these limitations, this paper attempts to evaluate existing research and to suggest the most promising avenues for future work. The following section presents data on gender and interpersonal violence to address questions such as (1) Are men more violent than women regardless of offense, age, or residence? (2) Do victimization data present a comparable picture? (3) Do we have any evidence to indicate whether the gender gap in violent crime or violent victimizations is converging? (4) How do the violent criminal careers of men and women differ? Then we examine explanations for gender differences in aggression and violence,

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences with particular emphasis on gender role theory and the data relevant to this theory. Attention is also directed to correlates of female violence, and a preliminary set of explanatory hypotheses is offered for the most prominent patterns observed in gender and violent crime. Policy issues concerning the adjudication and sanctioning of violent offenders and sexual assault victims are discussed next. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of the research priorities that may lead to a better understanding of the relationship between gender and interpersonal violence. DATA PREVALENCE AND INCIDENCE Statistical data on gender and interpersonal violence are generally drawn from indicators of violent crime: arrest reports, victimization and self-report surveys, and public health agencies. In this section, we see that certain observations-most notably that females are underrepresented in the most serious/injurious types of violence-are remarkably consistent among all sources of data. Uniform Crime Reports Perhaps the best-known data for assessing gender differences in interpersonal violence in the United States are the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR). These reports are collected annually from local law enforcement agencies throughout the country (although there is a higher rate of reporting among urban than rural agencies) by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. UCR data contain information both on offenses known to the police and on arrests. Only the arrest data, however, are broken down by the gender of the offender; these data have a number of well-known limitations: (1) they are limited to offenses that result in arrest; (2) the data vary considerably in the accuracy with which they reflect illegal behavior due to, for example, the misclassification of similar crime events or the nonrecording of a crime (Cressey, 1970; Erickson, 1975; Steffensmeier et al., 1979; Blumstein et al., 1986); (3) as summary statistics, they fail to distinguish multiple offenders from multiple events and include attempted offenses with completed offenses (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1988); and (4) broad offense categories, such as assault, may contain a set of heterogeneous criminal acts (more generally, see Reiss, 1981; Weis, 1986). Despite these problems, scholars argue that for certain purposes (e.g,, when serious

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences offenses are considered), UCR arrest data provide valid indications of the demographic distribution of criminal behavior (Hindelang et al., 1979; Gove et al., 1985). The following analyses are based on five indices of violent crime for the year 1988: murder/nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, aggravated assaults, and other assaults. The overall measure of violent crime includes only the four indices used in the violent crime index by the UCR (i.e., it excludes other assaults). To calculate arrest rates, two types of computations were performed on UCR data. These computations were derived from Steffensmeier's extensive work on UCR data and gender differences in arrest rates (see Steffensmeier et al., 1979, 1989; Steffensmeier, 1980, 1982; Steffensmeier and Allan, 1988; Steffensmeier and Streifel, 1989). First, 1988 arrest data from UCR were combined with census data to compute offense arrest rates that take into account sex distributions in the population.2 Because few people under the age of 10 commit crimes, the rates are calculated for persons age 10 years and older (or for the population at risk). The formula used to compute the arrest rates is where M = the arrest volume given in the appropriate UCR table, P = the estimated population volume figure from the same UCR table, N = the estimated number of persons who would be in the UCR table if coverage were complete (e.g., total U.S. population, total rural population; this figure is taken from the U.S. census); and T = the estimated number of persons in the target category for whom the arrest figures are given (e.g., females age 10 and over; this figure is from U.S. census data). Second, to estimate the gender disparity in violent crimes, we calculate the female percentage of arrests (FP/A), controlling for the sex distribution in the target population. The FP/A is calculated as follows where fn = female arrest rate/100,000 for offense (i) and year (j ) and mn = male arrest rate/100,000 for offense (i) and year (j). The FP/A also facilitates comparing these arrest data with Steffensmeier's earlier longitudinal analyses, ultimately suggesting whether the

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences TABLE 1 Violent Crime Arrest Rates per 100,000 for Males and Females, and Female Percentage of Arrests to Total Arrest Rates for Violent Crimes, 1988 Type of Crime Males (101,025,300)a Females (108,223,741)a FP/A All index violent crimesb 1,081.50 161.47 12.99 Murder 15.70 2.04 11.50 Rape 630.73 0.35 1.13 Robbery 111.43 9.67 7.98 Aggravated assault 288.05 41.88 12.69 Other assaults 635.60 107.54 14.47 a Numbers in parentheses refer to estimated number of people in the target category (i.e., males and females 10 years of age and older (Bureau of the Census, 1989). b Includes the offenses of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault (U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 1989). relative gap in male and female violence has narrowed or widened. Table 1 presents violent crime arrest rates for males and females for 1988. First, it appears that the male rate of arrest for index violent crimes is about seven times higher than the female rate. Second, although there is some variation in the rates at which men and women are arrested for various types of violent crime, in no case does the female rate exceed, or even approach, one-quarter of the male rate. Not surprisingly, the largest variation appears for the crime of rape and the smallest for other assaults. Table 2 further disaggregates these data by age. When comparing the same ages and offense categories, the arrest rates of males are substantially higher than those of females. However, if we assume that these data indicate actual rates of offending among males and females, the peak ages of violent activity vary little by gender. For example, in the case of robbery or aggravated and other assaults, the arrest rates for both males and females are highest from the midteens to the late twenties. The only exception to this pattern is murder. Here we find that female involvement seems to continue at a relatively equal, albeit low, rate into the thirties, whereas the male rate drops off in the thirties. The greater tendency for women to engage in intrafamilial homicides

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences TABLE 2 Violent Crime Arrest Rates per 100,000 for Males and Females (and female percentage of arrests) by Age and Type of Violent Crime, 1988a Sex and Age Murder (FP/A) Rape (FP/A) Robbery (FP/A) Aggravated Assault (FP/A) Other Assaults (FP/A) Maleb 10-14 (8,514,000) 2.34   16.12   73.55   112.11   315.43   15-19 (9,278,800) 37.59   60.09   353.86   521.75   1076.24   20-24 (9,609,100) 39.02   67.32   289.06   620.11   1420.98   25-29 (10,956,800) 26.24   56.43   194.32   529.06   1240.66   30-39 (20,378,900) 16.31   37.17   96.57   362.26   796.38   40+ (42,287,700) 5.27   9.21   11.26   98.90   191.51   Femaleb 10-14 (8,092,000) 0.19 (7.51) 0.52 (3.12) 8.22 (10.05) 26.60 (19.18) (120.98) (27.72) 15-19 (8,922,000) 2.90 (7.16) 0.90 (1.47) 25.38 (6.69) 80.70 (13.39) 263.40 (19.66) 20-24 (9,585,400) 4.91 (11.18) 0.68 (1.00) 25.78 (8.19) 94.17 (13.18) 247.65 (14.84) 25-29 (10,917,800) 4.03 (13.31) 0.59 (1.03) 21.98 (10.17) 87.05 (14.13) 201.15 (13.95) 30-39 (20,535,500) 3.15 (16.19) 0.47 (1.25) 10.61 (9.90) 56.19 (13.43) 121.52 (13.24) 40+ (50,171,200) 0.67 (11.28) 0.05 (0.54) 0.83 (6.86) 10.07 (9.24) 21.81 (10.22) a U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (1989). b Numbers in parentheses refer to estimated number of people in the target category (Bureau of the Census, 1989).

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences (Wolfgang, 1975; Mann, 1988) probably explains why murder rates have a slightly flatter age-related curve for women than men. A relatively high proportion of the assaults (EP/As for aggravated and other assaults) also occur among the youngest group of females (10-14 years). Possible explanations for this finding encompass age, period, and cohort phenomena.3 First, because Steffensmeier and Allan's (1988:63) comparable analysis of UCR data for the years 1979-1981 reveals similarly high FP/As for assaults among the youngest age group (13-17 in their analysis), a cohort effect seems unlikely. Second, as to a period effect, one could argue that a gender convergence in crime is occurring due to changes in socialization: women who became parents during the 10-year period following the early stages of the women's movement (in the late 1960s and early 1970s) may have been especially sensitive to the issue of gender equality in the raising and socialization of their children. However, we have little confidence in a period explanation because other studies using various methodologies (Adler, 1975; Smith and Visher, 1980), and spanning a wide range of years, also find a more pronounced narrowing of the gender gap for adolescents than adults. An age effect, combined with social expectations, may be the most plausible explanation (more generally, see Farrington, 1986). These relatively high FP/As for assaults involving young adolescents in both 1979 (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1988) and 1988 may be due to (1) the natural tendency for females at this age to begin spending more time away from home and in the company of peers; (2) the visibility of this offense (Black, 1980:152); and (3) the greater willingness of parents and others to invoke legal authority when the crime involves a female (Hagan et al., 1985). The final UCR data we present for 1988 involve an analysis of arrest rates for violent crimes by residence (urban and rural) and gender.4 Here we find that, regardless of gender, arrest rates are higher in urban than in rural areas and that, regardless of residence, the arrest rates of males again far exceed those of females (see Table 3). Notably, however, across most offenses the size of rural/urban differences in FP/A is small or negligible (see also Steffensmeier and Allan, 1988). The observation that residence adds little to our ability to predict proportional female involvement in violent crime may be explained by (1) the basing of arrest statistics on place of arrest rather than place of offender's residence, and (2) the apparent direction of a significant amount of female aggression and violence toward relatives and family members.

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences TABLE 3 Violent Crime Arrest Rates per 100,000 by Type of Crime and Residence for Males and Females (and female percentage of arrests), 1988a   Malesb Femalesb Type of Crime Urban (84,493,000) Rural (32,152,000) Urban (91,595,000) (FP/A) Rural (32,646,000) (FP/A) Murder 17.88 10.93 2.18 (10.87) 1.76 (13.87) Rape 34.90 21.89 0.39 (1.10) 0.28 (1.26) Robbery 146.45 37.08 12.56 (7.90) 3.22 (7.99) Aggravated assault 333.23 191.87 43.30 (12.89) 25.61 (11.77) Other assaults 750.84 394.17 125.54 (14.32) 68.90 (14.88) a U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigations (1989). b Numbers in parentheses refer to estimated number of people in the target category (Bureau of the Census, jointly with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1989).

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences National Crime Surveys Since 1973, the Census Bureau has collected annual data for the National Crime Survey (NCS), using a sample of 60,000 households. The NCS collects data only from victims, age 12 and over, of six crimes, three of which are violent: rape, robbery, and assault (aggravated and simple). Initially, victimization surveys were designed to assess the extent of unreported crime; subsequently, a substantial difference was found in the number of crime victimizations and the number of offenses known to the police (President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, 1967:21). Methodological differences between the UCR and the NCS in recording crimes may account for some of this discrepancy. For example, when a single robbery incident results in the victimization of more than one person, NCS records information on each victimization, regardless of the number of criminal incidents involved.5 The UCR, however, records information on offenses (and only the most serious offense if more than one occurs within a given crime event) and arrests, regardless of how many victims are involved. It is also important to remember that victimization surveys rely on the victim's judgment and memory about whether a crime has occurred, and analyses suggest that memory fade may vary with the relational distance between the victim and the offender (Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, 1972:Table 5). Nevertheless, NCS data provide a rich source of complementary crime data. They reveal not only the degree to which violent crime offending and victimization covary within the same gender and age groups, but in examining the perceived characteristics of offenders, they can also help to validate the patterns observed in UCR data. We begin by presenting victimization rates, for 1987, for the three crimes of violence by gender.6 Table 4 reveals that, with the exception of rape, males are more likely to be the victims of criminal violence than females. In the case of completed simple assaults with injury, however, the male and female rates are very comparable. Although the proportion of these victimizations that involve domestic violence remains unknown, it seems likely that spouse abuse is an explanatory factor. More generally, gender appears to have little effect on the differences between rates of attempted and completed victimizations: for both men and women, assaults are less likely to be completed than robberies. Finally, it is interesting to note that the rates of attempted and completed rape are virtually the same. It is possible, however, that if knowledge of the victim-offender relationship were available, the data

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences TABLE 4 Violent Crime Victimization Rates per 1,000 for Males and Females, 1987 Type of Crime Males (99,959,780) Females (102,809,700) All crimes of violence 36.3 21.6 Completed 12.5 8.8 Attempted 23.8 12.8 Rape 0.1a 1.3 Completed 0.1a 0.6 Attempted (z)a,b 0.7 Robbery 6.6 3.9 Completed 4.0 2.9 Attempted 2.7 0.9 Aggravated assault 11.4 4.4 Completed with injury 3.7 1.3 Attempted with weapon 7.8 3.1 Simple assault 18.1 12.0 Completed with injury 4.8 4.0 Attempted with weapon 13.3 8.0 NOTE: Detail may not add to total shown because of rounding. Numbers in parentheses refer to population in the group. a Estimate is based on about 10 or fewer sample cases. b z = less than 0.05 per 1,000. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (1989:Table 3). would indicate a higher completion rate for rapes involving known offenders (see Russell, 1984:59). Table 5, which examines gender-age patterns of victimization, reveals that the peak age at which men and women are violent crime victims varies only slightly. Attempted and completed violent crime victimizations peak in the mid-to late teens for men (ages 16-19) and in the early twenties for women. Moreover, rates of completed victimizations are virtually identical for males and females age 25 to 49, and age 65 and over. Thus, regardless of gender, the peak ages for both offending and victimization appear to be from the midteens to the midtwenties (see also Russell, 1984, for comparable self-report data on rape victims and offenders).

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Hetherington, E.M. 1981 Children and divorce. Pp. 33-58 in R. Henderson, ed., Parent-Child Interaction: Theory, Research and Prospect. New York: Academic Press. Hindelang, M.J. 1979 Sex differences in criminal activity. Social Problems 27(2):143-156. Hindelang, M., and M. Gottfredson 1976 The victim's decision not to invoke the criminal process. Pp. 57-78 in W. McDonald, ed., The Victim and the Criminal Justice System . Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Hindelang, M.J., T. Hirschi, and J.G. Weis 1979 Correlates of delinquency: The illusion of discrepancy between self-report and official measures. American Sociological Review 44:995-1014. 1981 Measuring Delinquency. Beverly Hills., Calif.: Sage Publications. Holmstrom, L.L., and A.W. Burgess 1978 The Victim of Rape: Institutional Reactions. New York: Wiley-Interscience. Horwitz, A.V., and H.R. White 1987 Gender role orientations and styles of pathology among adolescents. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 28(2):158-170. Hotaling, G.T., M.A. Straus, and A.J. Lincoln 1989 Intrafamily violence, and crime and violence outside the family. Pp. 315-375 in L. Ohlin and M. Tonry, eds., Family Violence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Inciardi, J.A. 1979 Heroin use and street crime. Crime and Delinquency 25:335-346. Irwin, J. 1980 Prisons in Turmoil. Boston: Little Brown & Co. James, J., and W. Thornton 1980 Women's liberation and the female delinquent. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 17(2):230-244. Jensen, G.F., and K. Thompson 1990 What's class got to do with it? A further examination of power-control theory. American Journal of Sociology 95(4):1009-1023. Klein, D. 1973 The etiology of female crime: A review of the literature. Crime and Social Justice: Issues in Criminology (Fall):3-30. 1982 Violence against women: Some considerations regarding its cause and eliminations. Pp. 203-222 in B.R. Price and N.J. Sokologg, eds., The Criminal Justice System and Women. New York: Clark Boardman Co. Klein, M.W., and C.L. Maxson 1989 Street gang violence. Pp. 198-234 in N.A. Weiner and M.E.

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Wolfgang, eds., Violent Crime, Violent Criminals. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. Kratcoski, P.C. 1987 Families who kill. Marriage and Family Review 12(1-2):47-70. Kritzer, H.M., and T.M. Uhlman 1977 Sisterhood in the courtroom: Sex of judge and defendant in criminal case disposition. Social Science Journal 14(2):77-78. Krohn, M.D., J.P. Curry, and S. Nelson-Kilger 1983 Is chivalry dead: An analysis of changes in police dispositions of males and females. Criminology 21:417-437. Kruttschnitt, C. 1984 Sex and criminal court dispositions: The unresolved controversy. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 21(3):213-232. 1985a ''Female crimes" or legal labels? The effect of deviance processing agents on our understanding of female criminality. Pp. 76-94 in I.L. Moyer, ed., The Changing Roles of Women in the Criminal Justice System . Prospect Heights, Ill.: Waveland. 1985b Legal outcomes and legal agents. Adding another dimension to the sex-sentencing controversy. Law and Human Behavior 9(3):287-303. Kruttschnitt, C., and D. Green 1984 The sex-sanctioning issue: Is it history? American Sociology Review 21:213-232. Kruttschnitt, C., and C. Johnson 1984 Sentencing recommendations and women offenders: The biopsychological model and the treatment of female offenders. Law and Inequality 2(1):97-120. Kruttschnitt, C., and S. Krmpotich 1990 Aggressive behavior among female inmates: An exploratory study. Justice Quarterly 7(2):371-389. Kruttschnitt, C., L. Heath, and D. Ward 1986 Family violence, television viewing habits, and other adolescent experiences related to violent criminal behavior. Criminology 24:235-267. Kruttschnitt, C., D. Ward, and M. Sheble 1987 Abuse-resistant youth: Some factors that may inhibit violent criminal behavior. Social Forces 66(2):501-519. Kurz, D. 1989 Social science perspectives on wife abuse: Current debates and future directions. Gender and Society 3(4):489-505. LaFree, G.D. 1989 Rape and Criminal Justice. The Social Construction of Sexual Assault. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth. Laub, J.H., and M.J. McDermott 1985 An analysis of serious crime by young black women. Criminology 23(1):81-99.

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Law Enforcement Assistance Administration 1972 San Jose Methods Test of Known Crime Victims. Statistics Technical Report No. 1, National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, Statistics Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. Leonard, E.G. 1982 Women, Crime and Society. New York: Longmans. Letcher, M. 1979 Black women and homicide. In H.M. Rose, ed., Lethal Aspects of Urban Violence. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath. Lewis, D.K. 1981 Black women offenders and criminal justice: Some theoretical considerations. Pp. 89-105 in M.Q. Warren, ed., Comparing Female and Male Offenders. Research Progress Series in Criminology, Vol. 21. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Lewis, D.O., S.S. Shanok, R.J. Cohen, M. Kligfeld, and G. Frisone 1981 Race bias in the diagnosis and disposition of violent adolescents. Annual Progress in Child Psychiatry and Child Development 14:508-520. Lewis, D.O., S.S. Shanok, M. Grant, and E. Rita 1983 Homicidally aggressive young children: Neuropsychiatric and experiential correlates. American Journal of Psychiatry 140(2):148-153. Lizotte, A.J. 1985 The uniqueness of rape: Reporting assaultive violence to the police. Crime and Delinquency 31(2):169-190. Loeber, R., and M. Stouthamer-Loeber 1986 Family factors as correlates and predictors of juvenile conduct problems and delinquency. Pp. 219-339 in M. Tonry and N. Morris, eds., Crime and Justice, Vol. 7. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Loh, W.D. 1980 The impact of common law reform and rape statutes on prosecution: An empirical study. Washington Law Review 55:543-652. Macaulay, J. 1985 Adding gender to aggression research: Incremental or revolutionary change? Pp. 191-224 in V.E. O'Leary, R.K. Unger and B.S. Wallston, eds., Women, Gender and Social Psychology. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Maccoby, E.E., and C.N. Jacklin 1974 The Psychology of Sex Differences. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press. 1980 Sex differences in aggression: A rejoinder and reprise. Child Development 51:964-980. Magnusson, D., H. Stottin, and A. Duner 1983 Aggression and criminality in a longitudinal perspective. Pp.

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences 277-301 in K.T. Van Dusen and S.A. Mednick, eds., Antecedents of Aggression and Antisocial Behavior. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff. Makepeace, J.M. 1983 Life events stress and courtship violence. Family Relations: Journal of Applied Family and Child Studies 32(1):101-109. 1986 Gender differences in courtship violence victimization. Family Relations: Journal of Applied Family and Child Studies 35(3):383-388. Mandaraka-Sheppard, A. 1986 The Dynamics of Aggression in Women's Prisons in England. Brookfield, Vt.: Gower. Mann, C.R. 1984 Female Crime and Delinquency. Huntsville: University of Alabama Press. 1987 Black women who kill. Pp. 157-186 in R.L. Hampton, ed., Violence in the Black Family. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books. 1988 Getting even? Women who kill in domestic encounters. Justice Quarterly 5(1):33-51. Marsh, P., and R. Paton 1986 Gender, social class and conceptual schemes of aggression. Pp. 59-86 in A. Campbell and J. Gibbs, eds., Violent Transactions. The Limits of Personality. New York: Basil Blackwell. Matsueda, R.L., and K. Heimer 1987 Race, family structure and delinquency: A test of differential association and social control theories. American Sociological Review 52:826-846. Menard, S. 1987 Short-term trends in crime and delinquency: A comparison of UCR, NCS and self-report data. Justice Quarterly 4(3):455-474. Miethe, T.D. 1987 Stereotypical conceptions and criminal processing: The case of the victim-offender relationship. Justice Quarterly 4(4):571-593. Miller, W.B. 1973 The Molls. Society 11:32-35. 1975 Violence by Youth Gangs and Youth Groups as a Crime Problem in Major American Cities. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Moseley, W.H., and M.H. Gerould 1975 Sex and parole: A comparison of male and female parolees. Journal of Criminal Justice 3:47-57. Mowbray, E.J. 1982 Parole Prediction and Gender. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Toronto, Canada. Myers, M.A., and G.D. LaFree 1982 The uniqueness of sexual assault: A comparison with other

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences crimes. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 73:1282-1305. Naffine, N. 1987 Female Crime: The Construction of Women in Criminology. Sydney, Australia: Allen and Unwin. Nagel, I.H., and J. Hagan 1982 Gender and crime: Offense patterns and criminal court sanctions. Pp. 91-144 in N. Morris and M. Tonry, eds., Crime and Justice, Vol. 4. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Norland, S., and P.J. Mann 1984 Being troublesome-Women on probation. Criminal Justice and Behavior 11(1):115-135. Norland, S., and N. Shover 1978 Gender roles and female criminality. Criminology 15:87-104. Norland, S., R.C. Wessel, and N. Shover 1981 Masculinity and delinquency. Criminology 19(3):421-433. Pagelow, M.D. 1984 Family Violence. New York: Praeger. Parisi, N. 1982 Exploring female crime patterns. Pp. 111-129 in N.H. Rafter and E.A. Stanko, eds., Judge, Lawyer, Victim, Thief. Boston, Mass.: Northeastern University Press. Parke, R.D., and C.W. Collmer 1975 Child abuse: An interdisciplinary analysis. Pp. 1-102 in M. Hetherington, ed., Review of Child Development Research, Vol. 5. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Polk, K. 1985 Rape reform and criminal justice processing. Crime and Delinquency 31(2):191-205 President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice 1967 The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Quicker, J.C. 1974 The Chicana Gang: A Preliminary Description. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Pacific Sociological Association, San Jose, Calif. Randall, S.C., and V.M. Rose 1981 Barriers to becoming a "successful" rape victim. Pp. 336-354 in L.H. Bowker, ed., Women and Crime in America. New York: Macmillan. Rans, L. 1978 Women's crime: Much ado about . ...? Federal Probation 42:45-49. Reid, J.B., and G.R. Patterson 1989 The development of antisocial behavior patterns in childhood and adolescence. European Journal of Personality 3:107-119.

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Reiss, A.J. 1981 Problems in developing statistical indicators of crime. Presentation for the XXXI Cours International de Criminologie, Connaître la Criminalité: Le Dernier État de la Question, Aix-en-Provence, December 7-11. Reskin, B.F., and C.A. Visher 1986 The impact of evidence and extralegal factors in jurors' decisions. Law & Society Review 20:423-438. Riedel, M. 1988a Black Women and Homicide: Rates, Patterns, and Perspectives. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology. 1988b Murder, Race and Gender: A Test of Hagan's Hypotheses. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Chicago, Ill. Rivera, B., and C.S. Widom 1989 Childhood Victimization and Violent Offending. Unpublished paper. Departments of Criminal Justice and Psychology, Indiana University. Robins, L.N. 1966 Deviant Children Grow Up: A Sociological and Psychiatric Study of Sociopathic Personality. Baltimore, Md.: Williams and Wilkins. Russell, D.E.H. 1984 Sexual Exploitation. Rape, Child Sexual Abuse and Workplace Harassment. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Rutter, M. 1982 Epidemiological-longitudinal approaches to the study of development. Pp. 105-144 in W.A. Collins, ed., The Concept of Development: Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, Vol. 15. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Rutter, M., and H. Giller 1983 Juvenile Delinquency. Trends and Perspectives New York: The Guilford Press. Schur, E.M. 1984 Labeling Women Deviant: Gender, Stigma and Social Control. New York: Random. Shannon, L.W. 1988 Criminal Career Continuity. Its Social Context. New York: Human Sciences Press. Shanok, S.S., and D.O. Lewis 1981 Medical histories of female delinquents. Archives of General Psychiatry 38:211-213. Shelden, R.G. 1981 Sex discrimination in the juvenile justice system: Memphis, Tennessee, 1900-1917. Pp. 55-72 in M.Q. Warren, ed., Comparing

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Female and Male Offenders. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Short, J.F., Jr. 1968 Gang Delinquency and Delinquent Subcultures. New York: Harper & Row. Siann, G. 1985 Accounting of Aggression: Perspectives on Aggression and Violence . Winchester, Mass.: Allen and Unwin. Sigelman, C.K., C.J. Berry, and K.A. Wiles 1984 Violence in college students' dating relationships. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 14(6):530-548. Simon, R.J. 1975 Women and Crime. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Health. 1979 The parole system: How women fare. Pp. 380-385 in F. Adler and R.J. Simon, eds., The Criminology of Deviant Women. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Simon, R.J., and S. Baxter 1989 Gender and violent crime. Pp. 171-197 in N.A. Weiner and M.E. Wolfgang, eds., Violent Crime, Violent Criminals. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. Simpson, S.S. 1989 Feminist theory, crime and justice. Criminology 27(4):605-632. Smart, C. 1976 Women, Crime and Criminology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Smith, D.A. 1987a Police response to interpersonal violence: Defining the parameters of legal control. Social Forces 65(3):767-782. Smith, D.A., and C.A. Visher 1980 Sex and involvement in deviance/crime: A quantitative review of the empirical literature. American Sociological Review 45(4):691-701. 1981 Street-level justice: Situational determinants of police arrest decisions. Social Problems 29(2):167-177. Smith, D.M. 1987b Changes in the victimization of women: Is there a "new female victim"? Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 24(4):291-301. Spence, J.T., and L.L. Sawin 1985 Images of masculinity and femininity: A reconceptualization. Pp. 35-66 in V.E. O'Leary, R.K. Unger and B.S. Wallston, eds., Women, Gender and Social Psychology. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Spencer, C., and J.E. Berocochea 1972 Recidivism Among Women Parolees: A Long Term Survey. Report No. 47, California Research Division, Department of Corrections.

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Spohn, C., and S. Welch 1987 The effect of prior record in sentencing research: An examination of the assumption that any measure is adequate. Justice Quarterly 4(2):287-302. Staples, W.G. 1984 Toward a structural perspective on gender bias in the juvenile court. Sociological Perspectives 27(3):349-367. Stark, E., A. Flitcraft, and W. Frazier 1979 Medicine and patriarchal violence: The social construction of a "private" event. International Journal of Health Services 98:461-491. Steele, B.F., and C.A. Pollock 1974 A psychiatric study of parents who abuse infants and small children. Pp. 89-134 in R.E. Helfer and C.H. Kempe, eds., The Battered Child , 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Steffensmeier, D.J. 1980 Sex differences in patterns of adult crimes, 1965-77: A review and assessment. Social Forces 58(4):1080-1108. 1982 Trends in female crime. It's still a man's world. Pp. 117-129 in R.R. Price and N.J. Solkoloff, eds., The Criminal Justice System and Women. New York: Clark Boardman Co. Steffensmeier, D.J., and E.A. Allan 1988 Sex disparities in arrests by residence, race and age: An assessment of the gender convergence/crime hypothesis. Justice Quarterly 5(1):53-80. Steffensmeier, D.J., and C. Jordan 1978 Changing patterns of female crime in rural America, 1962-1975. Rural Sociology 43(1):87-102. Steffensmeier, D.J., and R.H. Steffensmeier 1980 Trends in female delinquency. Criminology 18(1):62-85. Steffensmeier, D.J., and C. Streifel 1989 Women's Status and the Female Share of Offending, 1960-1985: A Time Series Analyses of Sex Differences in Person and Property Crime Involvement. Unpublished paper, Department of Sociology, Pennsylvania State University. Steffensmeier, D.J., R.H. Steffensmeier, and A. Rosenthal 1979 Trends in female violence, 1960-1977. Sociological Focus 12(3):217-227. Steffensmeier, D.J., E.A. Allan, and C. Streifel 1989 Development and female crime: A cross-national test of alternative explanations. Social Forces 68(1):262-283. Stets, J.E., and M.A. Pirog-Good 1987 Violence in dating relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly 50(3):237-246. Stewart, J.K. 1985 Prosecution of child sexual abuse: Innovations in practice. National

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Institute of Justice. Research in Brief. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. Straus, M.A., R.J. Gelles, and S.K. Steinmetz 1980 Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family. New York: Doubleday/Anchor. Stryker, R., I.H. Nagel, and J. Hagan 1983 Methodological issues in criminal court research: Pretrial release decisions for federal defendants. Sociological Methods and Research 11(4):469-500. Sylvester, S., J. Reed, and D. Nelson 1977 Prison Homicide. New York: Spectrum. Thornton, W.E., and J. James 1979 Masculinity and delinquency revisited. British Journal of Criminology 19(3):225-241. Thrasher, F.M. 1963 The Gang. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Tieger, T. 1980 On the biological basis of sex differences in aggression. Child Development 51:943-963. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 1981 National Study of the Incidence and Severity of Child Abuse and Neglect. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics 1989 Criminal Victimization in the United States, 1987. A National Crime Survey Report, NCJ-115524. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation 1989 Uniform Crime Reports for the United States, 1988. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. VanVoorhis, P., F.T. Cullen, R.A. 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(2):235-261. Vigil, J.D. 1988 Barrio Gangs. Austin: University of Texas Press. Visher, C.A. 1983 Gender, police arrest decisions and notions of chivalry. Criminology 21(1):5-28. Visher, C.A., and J.A. Roth 1986 Participation in criminal careers. Appendix A. Pp. 211-291 in A. Blumstein, J. Cohen, J.A. Roth, and C.A. Visher, eds., Criminal Careers and "Career Criminals", Vol. 1. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Walker, L.E., and A. Browne 1985 Gender and victimization by intimates. Special issue: Conceptualizing

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences gender in personality theory and research. Journal of Personality 53(2):179-195. Ward, D.A., M. Jackson, and R.E. Ward 1969 Crimes of violence by women. Pp. 843-909 in D.J. Mulvihill and M.M. Tumin, eds., Crimes of Violence, Vol. 13. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Weinberg, L., and W.L. Eubank 1987 Italian women terrorists. Terrorism 9(3):241-262. Weiner, N.A. 1989 Violent criminal careers and "violent career criminals." Pp. 35-138 in N.A. Weiner and M.E. Wolfgang, eds., Violent Crime, Violent Criminals. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. Weis, J.G. 1986 Issues in the measurement of criminal careers. Pp. 1-51 in A. Blumstein, J. Cohen, J.A. Roth and C.A. Visher, eds., Criminal Careers and "Career Criminals", Vol. 2. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. White, J.W. 1983 Sex and gender issues in aggression research. Pp. 1-26 in R.G. Geen and E.I. Donnerstein, eds., Aggression: Theoretical and Empirical Reviews. Vol. 2. Issues in Research. New York: Academic Press. Widom, C.S. 1978 Toward an understanding of female criminality. Pp. 245-308 in A. Mafier, ed., Progress in Experimental Personality Research, Vol. 8. New York: Academic Press. 1984 Sex roles, criminality and psychopathology. Pp. 183-217 in C.S. Widom, ed., Sex Roles and Psychopathology. New York: Plenum. 1987 Family Violence and Infanticide. Paper presented at the Pennsylvania State University Conference on Perspectives on Postpartum Depression and Criminal Responsibility . 1989a Child abuse, neglect and violent criminal behavior. Criminology 27:251-271. 1989b The intergenerational transmission of violence. Pp. 137-201 in N.A. Weiner and M.E. Wolfgang, eds., Pathways to Criminal Violence . Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. Widom, C.S., and A. Ames 1988 Biology and female crime. Pp. 308-331 in T.E. Moffitt and S.A. Medinick, eds., Biological Contributions to Crime Causation. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. Widom, C.S., and A.J. Stewart 1986 Female criminality and the status of women. International Annals of Criminology 24:137-162. Wilbanks, W. 1982 Murdered women and women who murder: A critique of the literature. Pp. 151-180 in N.H. Rafter and E.A. Sanko, eds.,

OCR for page 293
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Judge, Lawyer, Victim, Thief: Women, Gender Roles and Criminal Justice . Boston: Northeastern University Press. 1986 Are female felons treated more leniently by the criminal justice system. Justice Quarterly 3(4):517-529. Williams, K.M. 1976 The effects of victim characteristics on the disposition of violent crimes. Pp. 177-213 in W.F. McDonald, ed., Criminal Justice and the Victim. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Williams, L.S. 1984 The classic rape: When do victims report? Social Problems 31(4):459-467. Wilson, J.Q., and R.J. Herrnstein 1985 Crime and Human Nature. New York: Simon and Schuster. Wish, E.D., and B.A. Gropper 1990 Drug testing by the criminal justice system: Methods, research and applications. Pp. 321-391 in M. Tonry and J.Q. Wilson, eds., Drugs and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wolfgang, M.E. 1975 Patterns in Criminal Homicide. Montclair, N.J.: Patterson Smith. Young, V.D. 1979 Victims of female offenders. Pp. 72-87 in W.H. Parsonage, ed., Perspectives on Victimology. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. 1986 Gender expectations and their impact on black female offender and victims. Justice Quarterly 3(2):305-327. Zatz, M.J., and J. Hagan 1985 Crime, time and punishment: An exploration of selection bias in sentencing research . Journal of Quantitative Criminology 1(1):103-126. Zingraff, M.T., and R.J. Thomson 1985 Differential sentencing of women and men in the U.S.A. International Journal of the Sociology of Law 12:401-413.