| Recent victimization studies find that individuals who live in disadvantaged neighborhoods are more likely to be victimized than individuals in more affluent neighborhoods. The dominant view attributes this disparity in victimization to lower levels of social control in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Yet some research challenges this view by asserting that the effect of social control on victimization risk depends upon the level of neighborhood disadvantage (e.g., Skogan). Specifically, this view contends that neighborhood disadvantage thwarts the effectiveness of social control in reducing victimization risk. Using data from the Police Services Study for 9,993 respondents across neighborhoods in St. Petersburg/Tampa (FL), Rochester (NY), and St. Louis (MO), I assess this claim by examining the role of neighborhood social control--neighboring, informal social control, and public control--on household anRepeat victimization raises important questions of attribution. That is, do individuals become repeat victims as a result of their personal characteristics and activities, their environment, or both individual and contextual factors? The present research uses hierarchical modeling to examine the relative contributions of factors about the person, factors about the context, and, most importantly, the interaction of factors about the person and factors about the context in models of both repeat victimization (more than one of the same type of crime) and multiple victimization (two or more different types of crime). Using telephone survey data from a multi-stage sample of Seattle residents, we estimate separate hierarchical models for repeat property, repeat violent, and multiple victimization. Results indicate that repeat victimization of both types varies substantially by neighborhood, whereas multiple victimization seems more determined by individuallevel factors. Implications for social disorganization theory, routine activity/lifestyle exposure theory, and future work on repeat victimization are discussed.
|
Updated 05/20/2006