Differential Risk of Retaliation by Relational Distance: A More General Model of Violent Victimization

• NCJ Number: 211129
• Journal: Criminology Volume: 43 Issue: 3 Dated: August 2005 Pages: 697-730
• Author(s): Laura Dugan; Robert Apel
• Date Published: August 2005
• Length: 34 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology in Denver, CO, November 19-22, 2003.

Annotation

This research expands upon a routine activity model of violent victimization by incorporating a rational-choice perspective on potential targets' decisions designed to avoid violent encounters.

Abstract

A major implication of routine activity theory is that convergence of suitable targets in the absence of capable guardians is sufficient to bring an increase in crime rates without a corresponding increase in either offender motivation or the supply of motivated offenders. Routine activity models are most often associated with the explanation of predatory victimization by strangers in public spaces, implying that the offender's targeting strategy is largely opportunistic. The current research is interested in the characteristics of the target-offender-guardian triad that influences whether offenders will retaliate against their targets' actions to reduce the likelihood of contact. The authors developed hypotheses based on these concepts and tested them with data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (1992-2000). In a test of the differential risk of retaliation in the routine activity model, this study found an overwhelming pattern which suggests that for females, lifestyle factors that are associated with an elevated risk of violent victimization produce a higher risk of domestic violence compared to stranger violence. Thus, females who have close relational distance with their attackers are more vulnerable to domestic retaliatory violence vis-a-vis factors that increase exposure to predatory victimization. This is not true for men, however. Thus, hypotheses about the differential risk of retaliation for exposure reduction are confirmed for women but not for men. A key contribution of this research is the distinction between opportunistic and deliberate targeting by the offender when potential victims and offenders are in close proximity. This has implications for the tailoring of crime prevention measures to differences in the dynamics of these two kinds of targeting. 3 tables, 2 figures, 59 references and appended supplementary data