Variations in Victimization: The Relationship between Community Types, Violence against Women and Reporting Behaviors

Ryan Randa (), Sarah R. Bostrom, Wyatt Brown, Bradford W. Reyns and Jessica C. Fleming
Additional contact information
Ryan Randa: College of Criminal Justice, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX 77341, USA
Sarah R. Bostrom: Department of Criminology & Justice Studies, Avila University, Kansas City, MO 64145, USA
Wyatt Brown: Department of Criminology, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX 77341, USA
Bradford W. Reyns: Department of Criminal Justice, Weber State University, Ogden, UT 84408, USA
Jessica C. Fleming: College of Criminal Justice, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX 77341, USA

Social Sciences, 2023, vol. 12, issue 9, 1-17

Abstract: Existing research suggests that victimization risk is higher among urban residents. Violence against women is a notable exception in this trend. While the literature does indicate that rural women are at equal risk for violent victimization, it does not differentiate between types of non-urban spaces (exurbs, suburbs, small towns, dispersed rural). We use a five-category measure of rural-urban location articulated land use to disentangle victim–offender relationship distribution using a female victim sample from the 1996–2005 United States National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). In the most rural areas (dispersed rural locations), women are most likely to be victimized by friends or acquaintances. The proportion of women victimized by strangers in dispersed rural locations is very low. As urbanicity increases, so does the proportion of women victimized by strangers. The findings indicate that victim–offender relationships may be dictated by proximity. In dispersed rural locations, there are comparatively fewer people unknown to the victim than in central city locations. Consequently, proximity dictates that offenders in dispersed rural locations are unlikely to be strangers. The articulated land use measure ensures that the differences between types of rural and suburban locations are identified. Future research should consider the impact of proximity on rural victimization and increased specificity in rural measurements.

Keywords: rural; measurement; proximity; violence against women; victim–offender relationship (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A B N P Y80 Z00 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/12/9/471/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/12/9/471/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:12:y:2023:i:9:p:471-:d:1223369

Access Statistics for this article

Social Sciences is currently edited by Ms. Yvonne Chu

More articles in Social Sciences from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().