5. Are Neighbourhood Incivilities Associated with Fear of (original) (raw)
Related papers
Community Dimensions of Offending, Crime and Fear of Crime
ESRC Seminar Series: Crime, Insecurity and Well-being Seminar Four: Thursday 16 December, 2004 Additional notes to the paper “Attitudes to Punishment in two high-crime communities” We were asked to make this contribution to the ESRC Seminar because, apparently, the Seminar has so far focussed very predominantly on individual dimensions of victimization and the fear of crime, and raising the issue of a potential community dimension was thought to be valuable. Our principal empirical contribution rests in the paper that has already been circulated, concerning a recent study of attitudes to punishment in two high-crime communities in Sheffield. That paper is not as irrelevant to the general themes of the ESRC Seminar as might appear at first sight, because in order to explain the difference in punitiveness between the two neighbourhoods it was necessary to explore issues relating to disorder and ‘control signals’ in the two areas. However, in order to relate the circulated paper more closely to the main concerns of the ESRC Seminar, it has been considered helpful to prepare also this brief additional note.
Neighbourhood Disorder and Worry About Criminal Victimization in the Neighbourhood
2010
This study tested a cross-level integrated model of neighbourhood level disorder and individual level vulnerability, in relation to explaining individual differences in worry about criminal victimization 1 . The aim of the present study is (1) to establish if there is unique neighbourhood level variation in worry about criminal victimization, independent of neighbourhood composition, and (2) to establish the extent to which two proposed mechanisms at the individual level, prior local victimization and perceived disorder, act as mediators of a hypothesised effect of neighbourhood level disorder. Given the hierarchical structure of the research question a series of multilevel analyses based on data from a survey of more than 4,000 residents of a Swedish urban area was performed. Findings by and large indicate that there are significant neighbourhood level differences in worry about criminal victimization and that these differences are not completely due to compositional effects. Neighbourhood disorder has effects on worry about criminal victimization, independent of the composition of neighbourhoods. The present study suggests that neighbourhood disorder has consequences for worry about criminal victimization and that prior victimization and perceived disorder are key mediators of the contextual effect of neighbourhood disorder. The implications of these findings are discussed.
2019
This article presents the quantitative findings from a mixed-method study of perceptions of crime in inner Sydney. A survey was deployed via Computer Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) on a randomly selected sample of the inner-Sydney population (n=409). We find that less than half of the participants worry about crime but that a sizable minority (13%) indicated that they have some worry about a category of crime every week of the year or more. Building on a recent conceptual advance Grey et al 2011), we differentiate between functional and dysfunctional fear of crime. We find that greater direct and indirect experience of victimization, believing one’s neighbourhood to be disorderly, and believing that collective efficacy is low all predict moving up the scale from no worry, to functional fear, to increasingly frequent dysfunctional fear. The findings suggest gender and age are largely unrelated to worry about crime, controlling for perceptions of community disorder, perceptions o...
Explaining fear of crime in Queensland
Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1995
A model to explain fear of crime in Queensland is developed and fitted to data from the 1991 Queensland Crime Victims Survey. Fear of crime is measured from the answers to the question about respondents' feelings of safety when walking alone in their area after dark. The results suggest that factors such as gender, age, poverty, educational level, labor force status, level of incivility in the area, perceived amount of crime in the area, and neighborhood cohesion all make an impact on fear of crime in a way that is consistent with the theory. The results also show that fear of crimein Queensland is explained by very concrete factors that can be subject to intervention and policy formulation by relevant bodies.
Public Health and Fear of Crime: A Prospective Cohort Study
Public insecurities about crime are widely assumed to erode individual well-being and community cohesion. Yet robust evidence on the link between worry about crime and health is surprisingly scarce. This paper draws on data from a prospective cohort study (the Whitehall II study) to show a strong statistical effect of mental health and physical functioning on worry about crime. Combining with existing evidence, we suggest a feedback model where worry about crime harms health, which in turn heightens worry about crime. We conclude with the idea that while fear of crime may express a whole set of social and political anxieties, there is a core to worry about crime that is implicated in real cycles of decreased health and perceived vulnerability to victimization. The challenge for future study is to integrate core aspects of the everyday experience of fear of crime into the more layered and expressive features of this complex social phenomenon.
Fear of Crime in Residential Communities
Criminology, 1979
0 Three variables were hypothesized to cause a fear of crime and apotential change in behavior. These were: ( I ) crimes against a person rather than crimes against property: (2) a crime commirted in an area frequented rather than a crime occurring in an area one never entered; (3) a recurring crime rather than a crime that occurred once. Two diJferent samples of female subjects (n = 249) were approached at their residences and were asked 10 read one of a number offictitious crime stories that the news media supposedly had not reported and to complete two scales measuring: ( I ) an emotional response to crime and (2) a potential behavioral response to crime. The results indicate that a physical assault produces both more fear and more potential behavioral change than a burglary. A crime that occurs eight times causes people to consider taking precautions in comparison to a crime that occurs once. There is some evidence that a crime in an area one frequents causes more fear than a crime occurring in an area one never enters. Shotland et al. / FEAR OF CRIME 45 Carlotta Young is a doctoral candidate in psychology specializing in social psychology with interests in evaluation research and thepsychology of women. Margaret L Signorella is a doctoral candidate in psychology at Pennsylvania State University and is currently an instructor at Eastern Michigan University. Her interests include the psychology of women and developmentalpsychology. Kenneth Mindingall graduated Brown University (B. A.) 1973. Washington University (M.A.) 1975. and Pennsylvania State University (M.S.) 1978. Mr. Mindingall is currently employed as partial Hospitalization Coordinator
Social capital and fear of crime in Brisbane
Social capital is upheld for its value in explaining variations in crime across place. Collective efficacy is understood to be the superlative link between less effectual components of neighbourhood social capital (such as social ties and reciprocity) and lower rates of crime. The current study examines the value of neighbourhood social capital in explaining another community attribute associated with neighbourhoods: fear of crime. We conduct a secondary analysis of survey data collected from over 2000 people clustered in 82 Statistical Local Areas in Brisbane, Australia, to examine the correlates of fear of crime. We find that when comparing elements of social capital, the agentic element of social capital – collective efficacy – has the strongest relationship to reduced fear of crime.