Prevalence rates, reporting, and psychosocial correlates of stalking victimization: results from a three-sample cross-sectional study
Public health and criminal justice stalking victimization data collection efforts are plagued by subjective definitions and lack of known psychosocial correlates. The present study assesses the question of stalking victimization prevalence among three groups. Psychosocial risk and protective factors associated with stalking victimization experiences were assessed.
Archival data (n = 2159) were drawn from a three-sample (i.e., U.S. nationwide sexual diversity special interest group, college student, and general population adult) cross-sectional survey of victimization, sexuality, and health.
The range of endorsement of stalking-related victimization experiences was 13.0–47.9%. Reported perpetrators were both commonly known and unknown persons to the victim. Participants disclosed the victimization primarily to nobody or a family member/friend. Bivariate correlates of stalking victimization were female gender, Associates/Bachelor-level education, bisexual or other sexual orientation minority status, hypertension, diabetes, older age, higher weekly drug use, elevated trait aggression, higher cognitive reappraisal skills, lower rape myth acceptance, and elevated psychiatric symptoms. Logistic regression results showed the strongest factors in identifying elevated stalking victimization risk were: older age, elevated aggression, higher cognitive reappraisal skills, lesser low self-control, increased symptoms of suicidality and PTSD re-experiencing, and female and other gender minority status.
Behavioral approaches to epidemiological and criminal justice stalking victimization are recommended. Victimization under reporting to healthcare and legal professionals were observed. Further research and prevention programming is needed to capitalize on data concerning personality and coping skills, sexual diversity, and trauma-related psychiatric symptoms.
KeywordsStalking Victimization Mental health LGBTQ BDSM Personality
The authors gratefully acknowledge the SPPE editorial staff and anonymous peer-reviewers for their valuable insights.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This study was approved by two University ethics committees and has, therefore, been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. All participants gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study.
- 1.Tjaden PG, Thoennes N (1998) Stalking in America: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice and Centers for Disease Control; 1998. http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/169592.pdf. Accessed March 25 2018
- 3.Breiding MJ (2014) Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization—National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, United States. 2011. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Surv Summ 63(8):1–18Google Scholar
- 4.Nobles MR, Fox KA (2017) The extent, nature, and dynamic of stalking against women on college campuses. In: Kaukinen C, Hughes Miller M, Powers RA (eds) Addressing and preventing violence against women on college campuses. Temple University Press, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- 10.Smith SG, Chen J, Basile KC, Gilbert LK, Merrick MT, Patel N, Walling M, Jain A (2017) The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010–2012 State Report. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
- 12.Catalano S (2012) Stalking victimization in the United States—Revisited (NCJ 224527). U. S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- 18.Baum K, Catalano S, Rand M, Rose K (2009) Stalking victimization in the United States (NCJ 224527). U. S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- 23.Gemberling TM, Cramer RJ, Miller RS (2015) BDSM as sexual orientation: a comparison to lesbian, gay, and bisexual sexuality. J Positi Sex 1:37–43Google Scholar
- 33.Strauss CV, Haynes EE, Cornelius TL, Shorey RC (2016) Stalking victimization and substance use in college dating relationships: an exploratory analysis. J Interpers Violence 0886260516663899Google Scholar
- 35.Gemberling TM, Cramer RJ, Wright S, Nobles MR (2015) Psychological functioning and violence victimization and perpetration in BDSM practitioners from the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom. Technical Report. pp 1–25Google Scholar
- 45.Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
- 46.Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2003) Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences, 3rd edn. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
- 47.Harrell FE (2001) Regression modeling strategies with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 48.Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (2005) Applied logistic regression. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 57.Campbell R, Greeson MR, Bybee D, Raja S (2008) The co-occurrence of childhood sexual abuse, adult sexual assault, intimate partner violence, and sexual harassment: a mediational model of posttraumatic stress disorder and physical health outcomes. J Consult Clin Psychol 76(2):194CrossRefGoogle Scholar