Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Effects of Low Self-Control and Childhood Maltreatment on Stalking Victimization among Men and Women

  • Published:
American Journal of Criminal Justice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines sex differences among stalking victimization using two theoretical perspectives: self-control and the intergenerational transmission of violence. A sample of 1,490 undergraduate students at a large southeastern university were surveyed and asked to report their experiences with stalking, childhood maltreatment, and self-control. Given that men and women may experience stalking, self-control, and child maltreatment differently, logistic regression models were estimated separately to disentangle sex differences. Findings indicate that women are more likely than men to be victims of stalking. Childhood maltreatment was significantly related to stalking victimization for both men and women whereas low self-control was significantly related to stalking victimization for women only. Implications for policy and directions for future research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. By 1995 all 50 states and the federal government enacted anti-stalking laws (Leiter 2005).

  2. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998) found higher rates of stalking (12% for women and 4% for men) when using a definition that required victims to be somewhat fearful rather than very fearful (8% for women and 2% for men).

  3. These researchers use different methods to measure stalking victimization, which may account for the variation in prevalence rates. Fisher et al. (2002) and Fremouw et al. (1997) both use direct questions to assess stalking victimization; however, Fremouw et al. (1997) use the term “stalking” whereas Fisher et al. (2002) avoid using this term and, instead, ask respondents if they have experienced a variety of behaviors that seemed obsessive or made them fear for their safety (including following, watching, phone calls, e-mails, or other communication).

  4. It is important to note that most of these studies examine stalking (Bjerregaard 2000; Fisher et al. 2002; Fremouw et al. 1997; Haugaard and Seri 2001; McCreedy and Dennis 1996; Nobles et al. 2009; Tjaden and Thoennes 1998) while others measure similar phenomenon, yet label the behaviors differently. For example, Cupach and Spitzberg (2000) examine “relational intrusion.”

  5. Hirschi’s (2004 p. 543) redefined self-control theory integrates social control and self-control theories and defines self-control as “the tendency to consider the full range of potential costs of a particular act.” Hirschi also constructed a revised scale to measure redefined self-control, which includes items such as “Do you like or dislike school?” “Do you care what teachers think of you?” and “Does your mother know where you are when you are away from home?” Recent research supports Hirschi’s redefined construct (Piquero and Bouffard 2007).

  6. The survey is available upon request from the authors.

  7. College student samples are often used by criminologists for empirical theoretical tests and for the examination of crime and victimization risk factors (Payne and Chappell 2008).

  8. Listwise deletion resulted in 157 missing cases

  9. Variation among measures of stalking victimization is unknown due to the way in which the survey questioned respondents. For example, categorizing respondents into groups of high versus low victims was not possible because the survey did not measure variation in the number of times a respondent was victimized. In addition, the survey does not permit an analysis of the variation in behaviors perpetrated by a single offender. Respondents who indicated that stalking behaviors occurred more than once were not asked how many times behaviors occurred in total.

  10. The original self-control scale created by Grasmick et al. (1993) originally included twenty-four indicators. The revised scale used in the present study includes twenty-three of the original indicators and follows Grasmick et al.’s suggestion to omit the question that states, ‘I seem to have more energy and a greater need for activity than most other people my age.’

  11. These respondents indicated victimization of stalking according to the NVAWS definition of stalking wherein individuals experienced, on two or more occasions, either one or more of the nine frightening or harassing stalking behaviors listed.

  12. The coefficients from the full model are not presented here, but are available from the authors upon request.

  13. While the Grasmick et al. (1993) self-control scale has been critiqued, it has also received much empirical support and scholars have continued to use the items similar to the original scale (Schreck 1999; Schreck et al. 2006; Sellers 1999). Using Grasmick et al.’s (1993) scale allows readers to compare and contrast the results presented here with the work from prior research.

References

  • Akers, R. L. (1991). Self-control as a general theory of crime. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 7(2), 201–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akers, R. L., & Sellers, C. S. (2009). Criminological theories: Introduction, evaluation, and application (5th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arneklev, B. J., Grasmick, H. G., & Bursik, R. J. (1999). Evaluating the dimensionality and invariance of “low self-control”. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 15, 307–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avakame, E. F. (1998). Intergenerational transmission of violence, self-control, and conjugal violence: A comparative analysis of physical violence and psychological aggression. Violence and Victims, 13(3), 301–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohrnstedt, G., & Knoke, D. (1993). Statistics for social data analysis. Itasca, Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjerregaard, B. (2000). An empirical study of stalking victimization. Violence and Victims, 15, 389–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cupach, W. R., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2000). Obsessive relational intrusion: Incidence, perceived severity, and coping. Violence and Victims, 15, 357–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietz, N. A., & Martin, P. Y. (2007). Women who are stalked: questioning the fear standard. Violence Against Women, 13, 750–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, B. S., Cullen, F. T., & Turner, M. G. (2002). Being pursued: stalking victimization in a national study of college women. Criminology & Public Policy, 1, 257–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fremouw, B., Westrup, D., & Pennypacker, J. (1997). Stalking on campus: the prevalence and strategies for coping with stalking. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 42, 666–669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gover, A. R., Kaukinen, C., & Fox, K. A. (2009). The relationship between violence in the family of origin and dating violence among college students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 1667–1693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H. G., Tittle, C. R., Bursick, R. J., & Arneklev, B. J. (1993). Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haugaard, J. L., & Seri, L. G. (2001). Stalking and other forms of intrusive contact in adolescent and young-adult relationships. University of Missouri-Kansas City Law Review, 69, 227–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, G. E. (2007). Examining the original Grasmick scale: a rasch model approach. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 157–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, G. E., & Tewksbury, R. (2006). Sex and self-control theory: the measures and causal model may be different. Youth & Society, 37, 479–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschi, T. (2004). Self-control and crime. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holtfreter, K., Reisig, M. D., & Pratt, T. C. (2008). Routine activities, low self-control, and fraud victimization. Criminology, 46, 189–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaGrange, T. C., & Silverman, R. A. (1999). Low self-control and opportunity: testing the general theory of crime as an explanation for gender differences in delinquency. Criminology, 37, 41–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauritsen, J. L., & Laub, J. H. (2007). Understanding the link between victimization and offending: new reflections on an old idea. Crime Prevention Studies, 22, 55–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauritsen, J. L., Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1991). The link between offending and victimization among adolescents. Criminology, 29, 265–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauritsen, J. L., Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (1992). Conventional and delinquent activities: implications for the prevention of violent victimization among adolescents. Violence and Victims, 7, 91–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leiter, R. A. (2005). National survey of state laws, 5th ed. Thomson Gale Publishers.

  • Logan, T. K., Leukefeld, C., & Walker, B. (2000). Stalking as a variant of intimate violence: implications from a young adult sample. Violence and Victims, 15, 91–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, L. L., & Rose, P. (1988). Family of origin violence and courtship abuse. Journal of Counseling and Development, 66, 414–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCreedy, K., & Dennis, B. (1996). Sex related offenses and fear of crime on campus. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 12, 69–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustaine, E. E., & Tewksbury, R. (1999). A routine activity theory explanation for women’s stalking victimizations. Violence Against Women, 5, 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakhaie, M. R., Silverman, R. A., & LaGrange, T. C. (2000). Self-control and social control: An examination of gender, ethnicity, class and delinquency. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 25, 35–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nobles, M. R., Fox, K. A., Piquero, N. L., & Piquero, A. R. (2009, forthcoming). Career dimensions of stalking victimization and perpetration. Justice Quarterly, 26.

  • Pathè, M., & Mullen, P. E. (1997). The impact of stalkers on their victims. British Journal of Psychiatry, 170, 12–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, B. K., & Chappell, A. (2008). Using college student samples in criminological research. Journal of Criminal justice Education, 19, 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piquero, A. R., & Bouffard, J. A. (2007). Something old, something new: a preliminary investigation of Hirschi’s refined self-control. Justice Quarterly, 24, 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piquero, A. R., MacIntosh, R., & Hickman, M. (2000). Does self-control affect survey response? Applying exploratory, confirmatory, and item response theory analysis to Grasmick et al.’s self-control scale. Criminology, 38, 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peter, K., Horn, L., & Carroll, C. D. (2005). Gender differences in participation and completion of undergraduate education and how they have changed over time: Postsecondary education descriptive analysis reports. U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.

  • Pratt, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2000). Assessing macro-level predictors and theories of crime: a meta-analysis. Crime and Justice, 32, 373–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen, Denmark: The Danish Institute for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romeo, F. F. (2001). A recommendation for a campus anti-stalking policy and procedures handbook. College Student Journal, 35, 514–516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellers, C. S. (1999). Self-control and intimate violence: an examination of the scope and specification of the general theory of crime. Criminology, 37(2), 375–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sellers, C., & Bromley, M. (1996). Violent behavior in college student dating relationships: implications for campus service providers. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 12, 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreck, C. J. (1999). Criminal victimization and low self-control: an extension and test of a general theory of crime. Justice Quarterly, 16, 633–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreck, C. J., Wright, R. A., & Miller, J. M. (2002). A study of individual and situational antecedents of violent victimization. Justice Quarterly, 19, 159–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreck, C. J., Stewart, E. A., & Fisher, B. S. (2006). Self-control, victimization, and their influence on risky lifestyles: a longitudinal analysis using panel data. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22, 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan, L., Gillett, R., & Davies, G. (2002). Perceptions and prevalence of stalking in a male sample. Psychology, Crime & Law, 8, 289–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slashinski, M. J., Coker, A. L., & Davis, K. E. (2003). Physical aggression, forced sex, and stalking victimization by a dating partner: an analysis of the National Violence Against Women Survey. Violence and Victims, 18, 595–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, E. A., Elifson, K. W., & Sterk, C. E. (2004). Integrating the General Theory of Crime into an exploration of violent victimization among female offenders. Justice Quarterly, 21, 159–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (1998). Stalking in America: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey (Special Report No. NCJ 1669592). National Institute of Justice, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.

  • Turner, M. G., & Piquero, A. R. (2002). The stability of self-control. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30(6), 457–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widom, C. S. (1989). Child abuse, neglect, and violent criminal behavior. Criminology, 27, 251–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Criminal Justice, Sam Houston State University, P.O. Box 2296, Huntsville, TX, 77341-2296, USA

    Kathleen A. Fox

  2. School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado at Denver, 1380 Lawrence Street, Suite 525, Denver, CO, 80217-3364, USA

    Angela R. Gover

  3. School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, 1420 Austin Bluffs Parkway, P.O. Box 7150, Colorado Springs, CO, 80933-7150, USA

    Catherine Kaukinen

Authors
  1. Kathleen A. Fox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Angela R. Gover
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Catherine Kaukinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathleen A. Fox.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fox, K.A., Gover, A.R. & Kaukinen, C. The Effects of Low Self-Control and Childhood Maltreatment on Stalking Victimization among Men and Women. Am J Crim Just 34, 181–197 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-009-9064-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-009-9064-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation