No abstract

Past studies that have analyzed fear of victimization using samples composed of men and women have most frequently controlled for the effect of gender. This study not only controls for the effect of gender, but also examines how the predictors of fear of victimization may vary across gender. To do so, separate regression models for men and women were estimated and the corresponding z tests were calculated for the purpose of analyzing whether the differences between genders were significant. The results showed that women scored higher on the general fear of crime victimization scale, as well as for fear of becoming victims of each of the specific crimes under study. Religiosity had an equally significant effect on men and women’s fear of victimization. Also, younger participants were more likely to fear being victims in the cases of both men and women, although this effect was even more pronounced among women. In addition, respondents’ fear of victimization differed across gender based on sexual orientation. Finally, the results showed a few variables (political orientation and sexual victimization) that were only significant in the case of women, but not of men. The findings of this study confirm that fear of victimization and its predictors vary between women and men.

Research shows that public preferences about justice system approaches to decreasing illegal behavior distinguish between adult and juvenile offending. We also know that fear of crime and perceived risk of victimization typically strengthen support for harsh punishments and reduce support for rehabilitation. What has yet to be demonstrated—and that we examine here—is whether there are youth-specific differences in the way that crime salience affects public support for punitive versus rehabilitative policies and to what extent confidence in the criminal and juvenile justice systems affects punishment orientations toward adults and juveniles. Essentially, we examine why some Americans support “child saving” yet condemn adults. This exploratory study’s findings indicate that while crime salience increases the likelihood that one will support harsh adult criminal measures, it is not associated with similar attitudes toward juvenile delinquents. Further, those for whom crime salience is lower have a greater probability of supporting rehabilitation for both juveniles and adults. Finally, results show that support for the rehabilitation of youth persists despite crime salience among those who are otherwise punitive toward adults. Justice ideology appears unaffected by confidence in the justice systems. Policy implications and recommendations for future research are offered.