A Routine Activity Theory Explanation for Women's Stalking Victimizations

Abstract

Drawing on surveys administered to 861 university women in nine institutions, this article presents a routine activity theory model for predicting stalking victimization likelihood for women. Using routine activity theory, the model highlights lifestyle behaviors and interactions as predictors of stalking victimization. Whereas routine activity theory often highlights the role of demographics and statuses as predictors, this analysis emphasizes the role of women's social interactions and substance use in victimization risk. Significant predictors of victimization likelihood include substance use variables, activities in public settings, and residence off campus.

Stalking Victims, Victims of Sexual Violence and Criminal Justice System Responses: Is there a Difference or just ‘Business as Usual’?

“…Therefore, a number of social researchers have used definitions provided by victims to measure and understand stalking victimisation (Emerson et al, 1998;Mustaine and Tewksbury, 1999). The study on which this article is based also relied on the understandings of participants about what stalking is based on their experiences thus aiming to capture a wide range of experiences and interpretations on the nature of stalking victimisation.…”

The Safety of Women on College Campuses

“…In the National Violence Against Women study, Tjaden and Thoennes (1998) found that over half of stalking victims reported being between 18 and 29 years of age, the typical time span of college years. And indeed, prevalence rates coming out of studies on university campuses range from 6 to 41% of college students (Coleman, 1997;Jordan et al, 2007;Levitt, Silver, & Franco, 1996;Logan, Leukefeld, & Walker, 2000;McCreedy & Dennis, 1996;Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1999;Spitzberg & Rhea, 1999;Tjaden, 2003;Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998). In more recent years, technology-based coercive behavior has come with the growth of technology and social networking (Jones, Mitchell, & Finklehor, 2012;Thompson & Morrison, 2013).…”

The dangers and self protective behaviors of ride share drivers.

“…In other words, the closer the victim and the offender are in distance, the higher the probability that a crime may occur (De Coster, Estes, & Mueller, 1999;Landau & Bendalak, 2008;Lynch, 1987;Madriz, 1996;Miethe & Meier, 1990;Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1999;Wittebrood & Nieuwbeerta, 2000;Wooldredge, Cullen, & Latessa, 1992). Further, the proximity of the target to high crime areas increases to opportunity for crime to occur (Meier & Miethe, 1993).…”

“…According to Brown and others (2015), "there must be something that tempts the hedonistic calculus of the would-be offender" (Brown, Esbensen, & Geis, 2015, p. 189). According to Mustaine and Tewksbury (1999), this attractiveness can also be seen as vulnerability when the target is a woman.…”