Journal of Quantitative Criminology

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 125–149

Reciprocal Effects of Victimization and Routine Activities

Original Paper


Although there is much research on the relationship between routine activities and victimization, we have little knowledge about the reciprocal effects of victimization and routine activities. The current paper is framed within the Once Bitten Twice Shy perspective proposed by Hindelang et al. (Victims of personal crime: an empirical foundation for a theory of personal victimization. Ballinger, Cambridge, 1978) which argues that victimization decreases risky routine activities and that this in turn decreases the risk of victimization. The current paper tests these propositions by using longitudinal data from the National Crime Victimization Survey, which allows us to tease out victimization and routine activities over time. Both violent and household victimization are examined. Variables pertaining to how often respondents go out for shopping, how often they go away at night and whether they have household devices are used as indicators for routine activities. Results indicate that the reciprocal effects of victimization and routine activities are limited. Consequences for routine activities theory are discussed.


Victimization Routine activities Longitudinal data 


  1. Anderson TW, Hsiao C (1982) Formulation and estimation of dynamic models using panel data. J Econ 18:47–82Google Scholar
  2. Arellano Manuel, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud 58:277–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Belsky J (2001) Emmanuel Miller lecture. Developmental risks (still) associated with early child care. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 42(7):845–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bond S (2002) Dynamic panel data models: a guide to micro data methods and practice. Working paper CWP09/02: CEMMAPGoogle Scholar
  5. Bushway S, Brame R, Paternoster R (1999) Assessing stability and change in criminal offending: a comparison of random effects, semiparametric, and fixed effects modeling strategies. J Quant Criminol 15:23–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cantor D (1989) Substantive implications of longitudinal design features: the national crime survey as a case study. In: Kasprzyk D, Duncan GJ, Kalton G, Singh MP (eds) Panel surveys. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Chenery S, Holt J, Pease K (1997) Biting back II: reducing repeat victimisation in Huddersfield. Home Office Police Research Group, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen LE, Cantor D (1980) Residential burglary in the United States: life-style and demographic factors associated with the probability of victimization. J Res Crime Delinq 17:140–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen LE, Felson M (1979) Social change and crime rate trends: a routine activity approach. Am Sociol Rev 44:588–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cook PJ (1986) The demand and supply of criminal opportunities. Crime and justice. Annu Rev Res 7:1–27Google Scholar
  11. Ditton J, Chadee D (2006) People’s perceptions of their likely future risk of criminal victimization. Br J Criminol 46:505–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DuBow F, McCabe E, Kaplan G (1979) Reactions to crime. A critical review of the literature. US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  13. Dugan L (1999) The effect of criminal victimization on a household’s moving decision. Criminology 37:903–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duncan GJ, Wilkerson B, England P (2006) Cleaning up their act: the effects of marriage and cohabitation on licit and illicit drug use. Demography 43:691–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ellingworth D, Pease K (1998) Movers and breakers: household property crime against those moving home. Int J Risk Secur Crime Prev 3:35–42Google Scholar
  16. Estrada F, Nilsson A (2008) Segregation and victimization: neighbourhood resources, individual risk factors and exposure to property crime. Eur J Criminol 5:193–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Farrell G, Pease K (2006) Preventing repeat residential burglary victimization. In: Welsh BC, Farrington DP (eds) Preventing crime: what works for children, offenders, victims and places. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Fattah EA (1997) Criminology: past, present and future. A critical overview. MacMillan Press, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  19. Felson M (1994) Crime and everyday life. Insights and implications for society. Pine Forge Press, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  20. Ferraro KF (1995) Fear of crime. Interpreting victimization risk. State University of New York, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Finkelhor D, Ormrod RK, Turner HA (2007) Polyvictimization and trauma in a national longitudinal cohort. Dev Psychopathol 19:149–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gale J-A, Coupe T (2005) The behavioural, emotional and psychological effects of street robbery on victims. Int Rev Victimol 12:1–22Google Scholar
  23. Garofalo J (1979) Victimization and the fear of crime. J Res Crime Delinq 16:80–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gershuny J, Bittman M, Brice J (2005) Exit, voice, and suffering: do couples adapt to changing employment patterns. J Marriage Fam 67:656–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gottfredson MR (1984) Victims of crime: the dimensions of risk. HM Stationary Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Gottfredson MR, Hirschi T (1990) A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Halaby CN (2004) Panel models in sociological research: theory into practice. Annu Rev Sociol 30:507–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heiskanen M, Lättilä R, Seppänen S (1991) Interim results of a Finnish national survey. Victims and criminal justice. In: Kaiser G, Kury H, Albrecht H-J (eds) Victimological research: stocktaking and prospects. Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Penal Law, FreiburgGoogle Scholar
  29. Hindelang MJ, Gottfredson MR, Garofalo J (1978) Victims of personal crime: an empirical foundation for a theory of personal victimization. Ballinger, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. Home Office (2006) British crime survey 2006/2007. Final questionnaireGoogle Scholar
  31. Home Office (2007) British crime survey 2007/2008. Final questionnaireGoogle Scholar
  32. Hsiao C (2003) Analysis of panel data. University of Cambridge Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kennedy LW, Forde DR (1990) Routine activities and crime: an analysis of victimization in Canada. Criminology 28:137–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lauritsen JL (1998) The age-crime debate: assessing the limits of longitudinal self-report data. Soc Forces 77:127–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lauritsen JL (2001) The social ecology of violent victimization: individual and contextual effects in the NCVS. J Quant Criminol 17:3–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lauritsen JL, Davis Quinet KF (1995) Repeat victimization among adolescents and young adults. J Quant Criminol 11:143–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lauritsen JL, Laub JH, Sampson RJ (1992) Conventional and delinquent activities: implications for the prevention of violent victimization among adolescents. Violence Vict 7:91–108Google Scholar
  39. Lavrakas PJ (1981) On households. In: Lewis DA (ed) Reactions to crime. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  40. Lejeune R, Alex N (1973) On being mugged. The event and its aftermath. Urban Life Cult 2:259–287Google Scholar
  41. Lloyd S, Farrell G, Pease K (1994) Preventing repeated domestic violence: a demonstration project on merseyside. Home Office Police Research Group, LondonGoogle Scholar
  42. Lohr S, Sun S (1998) Probability of victimization over time: results from the US national crime victimization survey. In: Proceedings of statistics canada symposium 98. Longitudinal analysis for complex surveys, pp 161–166Google Scholar
  43. Lurigio AJ (1987) Are all victims alike? The adverse, generalized, and differential impact of crime. Crime Delinq 33:452–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lynch JP (1991) Victim behavior and the risk of victimization: implications of activity-specific victimization rates. In: Kaiser G, Kury H, Albrecht H-J (eds) Victims and criminal justice. Victimological research: stocktaking and prospects. Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Penal Law, FreiburgGoogle Scholar
  45. Maddala GS (1987) Limited dependent variable models using panel data. J Hum Res 22:307–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Maguire M (1980) The impact of burglary upon victims. Br J Criminol 20:261–275Google Scholar
  47. Mawby RI (2001) Burglary. Willan, CullomptonGoogle Scholar
  48. Maxfield MG (1987) Lifestyle and routine activity theories of crime: empirical studies of victimization, delinquency, and offender decision-making. J Quant Criminol 3:275–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mayhew P (1993) Measuring the effects of crime in victimization surveys. In: Bilsky W, Pfeiffer C, Wetzels P (eds) Fear of crime and criminal victimization. Ferdinand Enke, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  50. McCartney K, Rosenthal R (2000) Effect size, practical importance, and social policy for children. Child Dev 71(1):173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Miethe TD (1991) Citizen-based crime control activity and victimization risks: an examination of displacement and free-rider effects. Criminology 29:419–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Miethe TD, Stafford MC, Sloane D (1990) Lifestyle changes and risks of criminal victimization. J Quant Criminol 6:357–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nomaguchi KM, Bianci SM (2004) Exercise time: gender differences in the effects of marriage, parenthood, and employment. J Marriage Fam 66:413–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Norris FH, Kaniasty K, Thompson MP (1997) The psychological consequences of crime. In: Davis RC, Lurigio AJ, Skogan WG (eds) Victims of crime. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  55. Ousey GC, Wilcox P, Brummel S (2008) Déjà vu all over again: investigating temporal continuity of adolescent victimization. J Quant Criminol 24:307–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Paap WR (1981) Being burglarized: an account of victimization. Victimology 6:297–305Google Scholar
  57. Pease K (1998) Repeat victimisation: taking stock. Home Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  58. Phillips C, Sampson A (1998) Preventing repeated racial victimization. An action research project. Br J Criminol 38:124–144Google Scholar
  59. Quann N, Hung K (2002) Victimization experiences and the fear of crime. In: Nieuwbeerta P (ed) Crime victimization in comparative perspective. Results from the international crime victims survey, 1989–2000. Boom Juridische uitgevers, Den Haag, pp 301–316Google Scholar
  60. Rand MR, Rennison CM (2005) Bigger is not necessarily better: an analysis of violence against women estimates from the national crime victimization survey and the national violence against women survey. J Quant Criminol 21:267–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Roodman D (2006) How to do xtabond2: an introduction to “difference” and “system” GMM in Stata. Working paper number 103. Center for Global Development, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  62. Rountree PW, Land KC (1996) Burglary victimization, perceptions of crime risk, and routine activities: a multilevel analysis across Seattle neighborhoods and census tracts. J Res Crime Delinq 33:147–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rountree PW, Land KC, Miethe TD (1994) Macro-micro integration in the study of victimization: a hierarchical logistic model analysis across Seattle neighborhoods. Criminology 32:387–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sampson RJ, Wooldredge JD (1987) Linking the micro- and macro-level dimensions of lifestyle-routine activity and opportunity models of predatory victimization. J Quant Criminol 3:371–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Schreck CJ (1999) Criminal victimization and low self-control: an extension and test of a general theory of crime. Justice Q 16:633–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Schreck CJ, Stewart EA, Fisher BS (2006) Self-control, victimization, and their influence on risky lifestyles: a longitudinal analysis using panel data. J Quant Criminol 22:319–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Shapland J, Hall M (2007) What do we know about the effects of crime on victims? Int Rev Victimol 14:175–217Google Scholar
  68. Skogan WG (1981) On attitudes and behaviors. In: Lewis DA (ed) Reactions to crime. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  69. Skogan WG (1987) The impact of victimization on fear. Crime Delinq 33:135–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Skogan W, Maxfield MG (1981) Coping with Crime. Individual and neighborhood reactions. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  71. Smith DA, Jarjoura GR (1989) Household characteristics, neighborhood composition and victimization risk. Soc Forces 68:621–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Trickett A, Osborn DR, Ellingworth D (1995) Property crime victimisation: the roles of individual and area influences. Int Rev Victimol 3:273–295Google Scholar
  73. Tseloni A (2000) Personal criminal victimization in the United States: fixed and random effects on individual and household characteristics. J Quant Criminol 16:415–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tseloni A, Pease K (2003) Repeat personal victimization: ‘boosts’ or ‘flags’? Br J Criminol 43:196–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Tseloni A, Pease K (2004) Repeat personal victimization. Random effects, event dependence and unexplained heterogeneity. Br J Criminol 44:931–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tseloni A, Zarafonitou C (2008) Fear of crime and victimization: a multivariate multilevel analysis of competing measurements. Eur J Criminol 5:387–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tseloni A, Osborn DR, Trickett A, Pease K (2002) Modelling property crime using the British crime survey. Br J Criminol 42:109–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tyler TR (1980) Impact of directly and indirectly experienced events: the origin of crime-related judgments and behaviors. J Pers Soc Psychol 39:13–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. US Department of Commerce (2010) National income and product accounts table. Table 1.1.5. Gross domestic product. Retrieved 29 July 2010, from
  80. US Department of Justice (2006) National crime victimization survey, 1992–2004. Codebook. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Sciences, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  81. Van Wilsem J, Wittebrood K, De Graaf ND (2006) Socioeconomic dynamics of neighborhoods and the risk of crime victimization: a multilevel study of improving, declining, and stable areas in the Netherlands. Soc Probl 53:226–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Windmeijer F (2005) A finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step GMM estimators. J Econ 126:25–51Google Scholar
  83. Wittebrood K, Nieuwbeerta P (2000) Criminal victimization during one’s life course: the effects of previous victimization and patterns of routine activities. J Res Crime Delinq 37:91–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Xie M, McDowall D (2008a) Escaping crime: the effects of direct and indirect victimization on moving. Criminology 46:809–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Xie M, McDowall D (2008b) The effects of residential turnover on household victimization. Criminology 46:539–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Zedner L (2002) Victims. In: Maguire M, Morgan R, Reiner R (eds) The Oxford handbook of criminology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 419–456Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Zurich, Institute of Education, Büro F 15aZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations