Age, Marital Status, and Risk of Sexual Victimization

Abstract

By now, age and marital status are well-established correlates of criminal victimization, including adult women's sexual victimization. National crime statistics, as well as a large body of scholarly literature, have specified that younger women and unmarried women are at comparatively higher risk of sexual victimization than older women and married women. Few studies, however, have examined the relationship between age, marital status, and risk of victimization across diverse situational contexts of sexual victimization. The current study used data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to examine whether the relationship between age, marital status, and risk of sexual victimization varied across victimization experiences involving three victim-offender relationships: stranger, acquaintance, and intimate partner. Results indicate both similarities and differences in the relationship between age, marital status, and risk of victimization across these three situational contexts of victimization. As expected, age was a significant predictor of victimization in all models; however, younger women's increased risk of victimization was far more pronounced for acquaintance and intimate partner victimization experiences as compared with stranger experiences. Also, consistent with prior research, unmarried women were at higher risk of victimization in all models; however, within unmarried status categories, separated women were at highest risk of both intimate partner and acquaintance victimization experiences as compared with never married or divorced women.

Reporting Intimate Partner Violence and Sexual Assault: A Mixed Methods Study of Concerns and Considerations Among College Women of Color

“…The study used a convenience sample of university-affiliated, self-identified women of color, ages 18 to 35 years, from a large U.S. public university. The age limitation was determined based on national statistical information about the ages at which women of color are most at risk for IPV and SA, as well as on the principal investigator's prior mixed methods work with community-based women affected by IPV and/or SA (Burton et al, 2013;Burton et al, 2016;Siddique, 2016). Participants were recruited on campus via flyers and by word of mouth.…”

Sexual Violence against Women in Germany: Prevalence and Risk Markers

“…Similarly, Siddique [49] reported that independent of the victim–offender relationship (stranger, acquaintance, or intimate partner), women who had never been married as well as separated and divorced women had an increased risk of sexual victimization (as compared to married women). Furthermore, living alone was a significant risk factor for experiencing sexual violence (also see [38,45]).…”

“…Furthermore, living alone was a significant risk factor for experiencing sexual violence (also see [38,45]). Relating her findings to the lifestyle-routine activities framework, the author argues that as “unmarried women are more likely to participate in daily routines unaccompanied by other household members, they may be perceived more frequently by motivated offenders to be suitable targets without adequate guardianship.” [49]. However, as with the effects of sexual and physical abuse in childhood, the effects of relationship status and household size need to be statistically disentangled in order to specify risk markers for sexual violence victimizations.…”

“…Besides marital status and household size, other sociodemographic characteristics, such as age or educational background [49,50,51,52], have been linked to experienced sexual victimizations. However, dependencies between the diverse variables have to be taken into account when relating them to victimization risks (e.g., single women are more likely to be living on their own than married women).…”

Psychiatric Expertise in Benin Penal Justice Context: What Do They Reveal?

“…In our study, the frequency of depressive disorders seems relatively low (19.8%) compared to the results of Nanema et al [8] and those of Osasona et al [14], who reported prevalences of 33% and 78%, respectively. The variations in prevalence observed from one study to the next can be explained by choice of assessment tools for disorders but also by the socio-cultural context [15]. In the specific context of our study, the under-representation of depressive disorders can be explained by the lack of relevance of their evocation in the context of the evaluation of criminal irresponsibility during violent crimes.…”