Reactions to crime: a multilevel analysis of fear of crime and defensive and participatory behavior

Abstract

This study examines the associations between fear of crime and individual constrained behavior. Specifically, to address the inconsistent findings of previous research, we investigate how emotional fear of crime and perceived risk of victimization are associated with the use of defensive behaviors. We also extend previous research by examining the relationships between fear of crime and perceived risk and participatory behavior. The results of multilevel models based on survey data from Seattle show that fear of crime was positively associated with three individual defensive behaviors, and perceived risk was negatively associated with two participatory behaviors. The results suggest that emotional fear increases individualistic target-hardening behaviors, while perceptions of risk reduce participation in community-wide crime-prevention activities.

Keywords::

• fear of crime
• constrained behaviors
• neighborhoods
• victimization

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

^1. The AAPOR Cooperation Rate across the three samples was over 97%. The CASRO response rate was over 51%.

^2. Reliability analyses indicated that the items measuring different forms of defensive behavior did not hang together (Cronbach's α = .38), indicating that they do not measure a single concept. Therefore, we examined these items separately.

^3. As we are unable to identify census tracts and determine whether police-sponsored activities are offered equally across neighborhoods in Seattle, we assume in the analyses that the opportunity to participate is equal across census tracts.

^4. This value of alpha is lower than a traditional cutoff of .7; however, according to Hair et al. (2006), values above .6 are considered acceptable, especially when analyzing reliability of scales made up of few items.

^5. Because of the skewed nature of the victimization measures, we conducted supplemental analyses (not presented here) using the square root of victimization. The results were not changed substantially by using the square root.

^6. While a variable indicating whether respondents' friends or family members have been victimized would be a more appropriate measure of indirect victimization, such questions were not included in the survey. Therefore, based on Bursik and Grasmick (1993), we use this survey item to approximate the crime-transmission process in the neighborhood.

^7. A measure of neighborhood average income was considered but was not included due to issues with multicollinearity (tolerance = 0.321). Therefore, we use unemployment rate to measure disadvantage instead.

^8. This was calculated by subtracting the odds ratio from 1 and multiplying by 100.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Yue Yuan

Yue Yuan is a doctorate candidate in the criminal justice department at Indiana University-Bloomington. His research focuses on perceptions of crime, victimization, and juvenile delinquency. His current projects include multi-level and longitudinal analysis of perceptions of crime, social networks, victim–offender overlap, and neighborhood processes.

Susan McNeeley

Susan McNeeley is a Postdoctoral Scholar in the Justice Center for Research at Pennsylvania State University. Her main research agenda focuses on developing and testing theories of crime and victimization that incorporate elements of opportunity. Her current research projects integrate individual, contextual, and situational factors to explain risk for victimization and delinquency.