No abstract

The current study assesses the relative influence of various individual-level characteristics on the probability of intimate partner violence (IPV) for separated and nonseparated women. While previous studies have found that separated women do in fact have a higher risk for IPV than nonseparated women, these largely bivariate examinations of marital status and risk for IPV have often not considered the effect other characteristics may have on risk estimates. The current study uses the 1995-2010 National Crime Victimization Surveys to examine how separated women's risk for IPV compares with nonseparated women's risk for IPV over time, and if separated, women's risk for IPV is a function of either being separated or possessing characteristics known to be correlated with risk. A key strength of this study is its ability to account for the confounding effects of change in separation status and IPV. Results show that separated women were more likely than nonseparated women to be victims of IPV in most years from 1995 to 2010, and after controlling for the effects of individual-level characteristics, their risk did not change. Age was the only significant predictor of women's risk for IPV, net of other factors, but had no effect on separated women's risk for IPV. These results suggest that the status of being separated has the strongest effect on women's risk for IPV. The importance of understanding how the separation period makes women more likely to be victims of IPV is discussed.

This paper assesses the state of the literature on victimization and its correlates by examining a diverse set of victimization trends and by summarizing the known correlates of victimization exhibited in research conducted at varying levels of analysis. A broad assessment of victimization research is valuable because it can shed light on both the similarities and differences in a wide range of trends and correlates of criminal victimization, thus prompting useful integration of the diverse set of literatures in this field. We also highlight how some individual-level correlates of victimization vary across spatial contexts as well as in their magnitude over time. Our review suggests that further attention to the commonalities in correlates across various types of victimization, and to multilevel and macrohistorical contexts, can help improve the utility of victimization research findings for both theory and practice.

Objectives A critical unknown in any jurisdiction is the scope of crime that is not brought to the attention of police. This study provides a unique comparison of Chicago crime rates using both police and victimization survey data. Levels of crime reporting and the reasons victims provide for or against reporting crime to the police are examined. Patterns are compared to those found for other large U.S. cities. Methods Data for Chicago residents from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) are used to estimate serious violence and burglary rates, levels of reporting to the police, and residents’ justifications for reporting or not reporting. Levels and trends in NCVS and Chicago Police Department rates of serious violence and burglary are compared. Results The NCVS data show that while Chicago residents typically experience higher rates of these crimes than residents of other large cities, they report these crimes to the police at mostly similar rates. Reasons for and against reporting these crimes to the police are generally similar to victims elsewhere. Conclusions Despite a documented history of distrust in the police, Chicago residents do not appear to have notably lower rates of reporting serious violence or burglary to the police than residents of other large cities.