The foci of the present study are to estimate the extent of cyberstalking victimization, and develop, specify, and test a theoretically based model of cyberstalking victimization among college women. A pursuit- and fear-based measure of victimization was utilized, and three leading theories—self-control, opportunity, and control balance—were tested as explanations of cyberstalking victimization. Key concepts from each theoretical perspective were operationalized using primary survey data from a probability sample of college women ( N = 1,987) from two large universities. Results show that approximately 3.4% of female students were victims of cyberstalking during the academic year. Findings from a path model revealed significant direct effects for opportunity and having a control deficit on cyberstalking. The effects of self-control were indirect through these two measures, whereas having a control surplus was not related to victimization risk. Overall, findings support the application of these three theoretical approaches to predicting and explaining cyberstalking victimization.
The current study investigates the decision by victims to report the crime to the police following identity theft victimization. Potential influences on the reporting decision are framed around two criminal justice theoriesfocal concerns theory and Gottfredson and Gottfredson's theory of criminal justice decision making. The data used to examine this decision were collected from a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults as a supplement to the 2012 National Crime Victimization Survey. Results suggest that the decision to contact law enforcement is based on the seriousness of the offense, the victim's knowledge of who committed the crime and how it was perpetrated, as well as practical considerations. These findings parallel other research into victim decision making generally, while also highlighting factors that may be unique to identity theft, notably the effects of income. The results also support the use of criminal justice theory to study and understand victim decision making.
Extant research has argued that there are variations in predictors of intimate partner violence (IPV) across nations and it is necessary to examine country-specific correlates of IPV. Much remains unknown about factors that affect risk of IPV in transitional countries. Specifically, we explore risk factors for IPV among four former nations of the Soviet Union-Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Moldova-with data from the nationally representative Demographic and Health Surveys. Rates of physical abuse were similar within Tajikistan (18.96%) and Moldova (18.38%), while Kyrgyzstan (20.62%) had the highest prevalence and Azerbaijan (9.29%) had the lowest prevalence. In contrast, the prevalence of sexual abuse was very similar across the four countries and was much lower (between 1.00% and 3.50%) than cross-national estimates of physical abuse. Findings suggest that many of the same risk factors of IPV in developing and developed nations influence risk of IPV in transitional nations. Across the four former Soviet nations included in analyses, the experience of controlling behaviors, husband's alcohol use, and witnessing IPV or experiencing abuse during childhood were all significantly associated with risk of physical and sexual abuse later in life. Indeed, the intergenerational transmission of violence may be a cross-national phenomenon. In addition, equality in decision making did not have an effect on risk of physical and sexual violence, except for risk of physical abuse in Moldova. This may be due to the historical context of these nations. Taken together, findings suggest that country context may influence individual risk factors of IPV.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.