Role Reversals in the Life-Course: A Systematic Review

• NCJ Number: 232510
• Journal: Victims and Offenders Volume: 3 Issue: 4 Dated: October 2008 Pages: 331-345
• Author(s): Laura J. Moriarty; Nicolle Parsons-Pollard
• Date Published: October 2008
• Length: 15 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: For additional articles see NCJ-232509 and NCJ-232511-14.

Annotation

This study examined role reversals between offender and victim (and vice versa) over time.

Abstract

In this manuscript, the authors systematically review the literature on role reversals in the life-course. The term "role reversals" in this context means changes between the roles of offender and victim (and vice versa) over time. The majority of the literature focuses on the complex relationship between victim and offender in violent situations. The phrases "violence begets violence" or the "transgenerational transmission of violence" center on the relationship between early childhood victimization and future adult offending. The topics of study vary in terms of subject matter, but the general assumption is that in a culture of violence, victims become offenders and offenders become victims. The role reversals literature establishes such a relationship, but as Widom (1988, 1989b, 1996) and others point out (United States General Accounting Office, 1996) there are methodological shortcomings with the researchthus the findings should be viewed as inconclusive. In this paper, the authors review the role reversals literature published since 1989, providing summary information about the research, and analyzing it from a methodological perspective. There are several variables of interest that must be present in order for a study to be deemed "sound" in its methodology. These are (1) a valid research design that employs a control group, (2) use of a data collection technique that does not rely on retrospective self-reports, (3) uniformity in the definition of the victimization/offense studied, and (4) the avoidance of cross-sectional designs. With these criteria, the study found that only two studies can be described as having methodological rigor. The other studies reviewed all have some deficienciesmaking the studies less than sound and thus calling into question the findings.(Published Abstract)