The utility of country structure: A cross-national multilevel analysis of property and violent victimization

International Criminal Justice Review

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 35-55

  Stein, Rachel E ^a  

^a WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cross national; Routine activities theory; Victimization

Indexed keywords

EID: 77649268091     PISSN: 10575677     EISSN: 15563855     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1057567710361718     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Anderson, T.L., & Bennett, R.R. (1996). Development, gender, and crime: The scope of the routine activities approach. Justice Quarterly, 13, 31-56.
2. Arnold, R., Keane, C., & Baron, S. (2005). Assessing risk of victimization through epidemiological concepts: An alternative analytic strategy applied to routine activities theory. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 42, 345-364.
3. Bennett, R.R. (1991). Routine activities: A cross-national assessment of a criminological perspective. Social Forces, 70, 147-163.
4. Birkbeck, C., & LaFree, G. (1993). The situational analysis of crime and deviance. Annual Review of Sociology, 19, 113-137.
5. Bjerregaard, B., & Cochran, J.K. (2008). Want amid plenty: Developing and testing a cross-national measure of anomie. International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 2, 182-193.
6. Block, R. (1993). A cross-national comparison of victims of crime: Victim surveys of twelve countries. International Review of Victimology, 2, 183-207.
7. Bouten, E., Goudriaan, H., & Nieuwbeerta, P. (2002). Criminal victimization in seventeen industrialized countries. In P. Nieuwbeerta (Ed.), Crime victimization in comparative perspective (pp. 13-28). Dan Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.
8. Cantor, D., & Land, K.C. (1985). Unemployment and crime rates in the post-World War II United States: A theoretical and empirical analysis. American Sociological Review, 50, 317-332.
9. Cao, L., & Maume, D.J. Jr. (1993). Urbanization, inequality, lifestyles and robbery: A comprehensive model. Sociological Focus, 36, 11-26.
10. Cohen, L.E., Cantor, D., & Klugel, J.R. (1981a). Robbery victimization in the U.S.: An analysis of a nonrandom event. Social Science Quarterly, 62, 644-657.
11. Cohen, L.E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588-608.
12. Cohen, L.E., Klugel, J.R., & Land, K.C. (1981b). Social inequality and predatory criminal victimization: An exposition and test of a formal theory. American Sociological Review, 46, 505-524.
13. Cruszczynska, B. (2002). Cross-national perspective of violent victimization risk. In P. Nieuwbeerta (Ed.), Crime victimization in comparative perspective (pp. 213-226). Dan Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.
14. Felson, M. (1998). Crime and everyday life (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
15. Felson, M., & Cohen, L. (1980). Human ecology and crime: A routine activities approach. Human Ecology, 8, 389-406.
16. Felson, R.B. (1996). Big people hit little people: Sex differences in physical power and interpersonal violence. Criminology, 34, 433-452.
17. Gottfredson, M.R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18. Hawley, A. (1950). Human ecology. A theory of community structure. New York: Ronald Press.
19. Hindelang, M.J., Gottfredson, M.R., & Garofalo, J. (1978). Victims of personal crime: An empirical foundation for a theory of personal victimization. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
20. Hsieh, C., & Pugh, M.D. (1993). Poverty, income inequality, and violent crime: A meta-analysis. Criminal Justice Review, 18, 182-202.
21. Kennedy, L.W., & Forde, D.R. (1990). Routine activities and crime: An analysis of victimization in Canada. Criminology, 28, 137-152.
22. Kick, E.L., & LaFree, G.D. (1985). Development and the social context of murder and theft. Comparative Social Research, 8, 37-58.
23. Kim, S., & Pridemore, W.A. (2005). Poverty, socioeconomic change, institutional anomie, and homicide. Social Science Quarterly, 86, 1377-1398.
24. LaFree, G.D., & Kick, E.L. (1986). Cross-national effects of developmental, distributional, and demographic variables on crime: A review and analysis. International Annals of Criminology, 24, 213-235.
25. Lee, M.R. (2000). Community cohesion and violent predatory victimization: A theoretical extension and cross-national test of opportunity theory. Social Forces, 79, 683-688.
26. Lynch, J.P. (1987). Routine activity and victimization at work. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3, 283-300.
27. Messner, S.F., & Blau, J.R. (1987). Routine leisure activities and rates of crime: A macro-level analysis. Social Forces, 65, 1035-1052.
28. Messner, S.F., & Rosenfeld, R. (1997). Political restraint of the market of levels of criminal homicide: A cross-national application of institutional-anomie theory. Social Forces, 75, 1393-1416.
29. Messner, S.F., & Sampson, R.J. (1991). The sex ratio, family disruption, and rates of violent crime: The paradox of demographic structure. Social Forces, 69, 693-713.
30. Miethe, T.D., & Drass, K.A. (1999). Exploring the social contest of instrumental and expressive homicides: An application of qualitative comparative analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 15, 1-21.
31. Miethe, T.D., & Meier, R.F. (1990). Opportunity, choice, and criminal victimization: A test of a theoretical model. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 27, 243-266.
32. Miethe, T.D., Stafford, M.C., & Long, J.S. (1987). Social differentiation in criminal victimization: A test of routine activities/lifestyle theories. American Sociological Review, 52, 184-194.
33. Mustaine, E.E., & Tewksbury, R. (1999). A routine activity theory explanation for women's stalking victimizations. Violence Against Women, 5, 43-62.
34. Outlaw, M.C. (2001). A routine activity approach to the study of intimate partner violence. Retrieved on April, 2007, from http://www.etda.libraries.psu.edu/theses/approved/WorldWideFiles/ETD78/outlawd.pdf.
35. Pratt, T.C., & Godsey, T.W. (2002). Social support and homicide: A cross-national test of an emerging criminological theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 589-601.
36. Pratt, T.C., & Godsey, T.W. (2003). Social support, inequality, and homicide: A cross-national test of an integrated theoretical model. Criminology, 41, 611-644.
37. Pridemore, W.A. (2008). A methodological addition to the cross-national empirical literature on social structure and homicide: A first test of the poverty-homicide thesis. Criminology, 46, 133-154.
38. Pridemore, W.A., & Kim, S. (2007). Democratization and political change as threats to collective sentiments: Testing Durkheim in Russia. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 82-103.
39. Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
40. Sacco, V.F., Johnson, H., & Arnold, R. (1993). Urban-rural residence and criminal victimization. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 18, 431-451.
41. Sampson, R.J. (1987). Personal violence by strangers: An extension and test of the opportunity model of predatory victimization. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 78, 327-356.
42. Sampson, R.J., & Wooldredge, J.D. (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.
43. Savolainen, J. (2000). Inequality, welfare state, and homicide: Further support for the institutional anomie theory. Criminology, 38, 1021-1042.
44. Schreck, C.J., & Fisher, B.S. (2004). Specifying the influence of family and peers on violent victimization: Extending routine activities and lifestyles theories. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1021-1041.
45. Tseloni, A., & Farrell, G. (2002). Burglary victimization across Europe: The roles of prior victimization, micro-and macro-level routine activities. In P. Nieuwbeerta (Ed.), Crime victimization in comparative perspective (pp. 141-162). Dan Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.
46. Tseloni, A., Wittebrood, K., Farrell, G., & Pease, K. (2004). Burglary victimization in England and Wales, the United States and the Netherlands. British Journal of Criminology, 44, 66-91.
47. van Kesteren, J., Mayhew, P. & Nieuwbeerta, P. (2000). Criminal Victimisation in Seventeen Industrialized Countries. Justitie: Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum.
48. van Kesteren, J.N. (2007). Integrated database from the international crime victims survey (ICVS) 1989-2005, codebook and data. Tilburg: INTERVICT.
49. van Wilsem, J. (2004). Criminal victimization in cross-national perspective. European Journal of Criminology, 1, 89-109.
50. van Wilsem, J., de Graaf, N.D., & Wittebrood, K. (2002). Variations in cross-national victimization: The impact of composition and context. In P. Nieuwbeerta (Ed.), Crime victimization in comparative perspective (pp. 119-140). Dan Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.
51. van Wilsem, J., de Graff, N.D., & Wittebrood, K. (2003). Cross-national differences in victimization: Disentangling the impact of composition and context. European Sociological Review, 19, 125-142.
52. Vieraitis, L.M. (2000). Income inequality, poverty, and violent crime: A review of the empirical evidence. Social Pathology: A Journal of Reviews, 6, 24-45.
53. Vold, G.B., Bernard, T.J., & Snipes, J.B. (1998). Theoretical criminology (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
54. Wilcox, P., Land, K.C., & Hunt, S.A. (2003). Criminal circumstance: A dynamic multicontextual criminal opportunity theory. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.