Why Definitions Matter

Abstract

Although there is a growing understanding of stalking victimization, it remains difficult to define, and characterizations of the phenomenon vary within the literature. As such, research is needed to understand how variations in the definition of stalking may change who is defined as a victim and thereby limit the generalizability of findings across previous studies. The focus of this study is the inclusion or exclusion of subjective and reasonable measures of fear for 1,430 victims identified by the 2006 Supplemental Victimization Survey. Results suggest that the definition of stalking is important, and prior research has potentially excluded stalking victims due to restrictive operationalizations. Victims who report different types of fear appear to be similar to each other in some respects but differ in others, particularly with regard for gender representation, suggesting some definitions of stalking may be gendered and under-represent male stalking victims. Finally, using complex stratified survey weights, the impact of these varying operationalizations is examined. Using the same data but different definitions resulted in estimates of just over 1 to 5.3 million persons who are stalked in the United States each year.

Behavioral and Mental Health Correlates of Youth Stalking Victimization

“…This class was identified as the minimal exposure class because stalking by definition requires a pattern of repeated behaviors. 2,4,14 …”

“…A third class, making up about 35% of the sample, evinced a profile indicating, at most, minimal exposure to stalking behaviors. As stalking represents a pattern of repeated behaviors 2,4,8,14,16–22 and these students experienced behaviors, on average, one time or less, we did not consider these youth stalking victims. The most common behaviors experienced by this class with mean values slightly more than 1 were related to “hyperintimacy,” that is, expressions of affection or tactics to increase the intimate nature of the relationship.…”

“…1–4 Yet, there is a paucity of research on juvenile stalking that has been confined to case studies, small forensic samples, and anecdotal evidence. 5–13 Thus, little is actually known about the rates and potential consequences of stalking victimization in developing adolescent populations.…”

“…Currently, no universally accepted stalking definition exists 4,14,15 ; however, there is general agreement that stalking comprises a pattern of repeated behaviors under several broad domains, including invasion of personal space, property, or privacy; attempts to initiate contact; excessive or inappropriate expressions of affection; surveillance/monitoring; coercion/harassment; intimidation/threats; and aggression. 2,4,8,14,16–22 Identifying how these different stalking tactics manifest in different combinations is critical because different stalking profiles likely confer varying degrees and forms of risk.…”

“…2,4,8,14,16–22 Identifying how these different stalking tactics manifest in different combinations is critical because different stalking profiles likely confer varying degrees and forms of risk. For instance, a victim primarily experiencing surveillance/monitoring by a stalker may suffer far fewer physical, social, and psychological consequences than a victim of a stalker showing more diversity in stalking behavior (e.g., surveillance/monitoring, coercion/harassment, and invasion of privacy).…”