2016
DOI: 10.1177/0093854816636415
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differential Vulnerability

Abstract: It is well established that victimization is associated with increased risk of future victimization. According to state dependence arguments, this occurs because the victimization event changes either the individual or the social environment in ways that elevate risk. In contrast, the population heterogeneity perspective argues that the association between victimization events is spurious. Empirical research finds that state dependence and population heterogeneity jointly contribute to risk of repeat victimiza… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to state dependence arguments, the victimization event itself changes either the individual or the social environment in ways that elevate future risk. According to the risk heterogeneity argument, the association between victimization events is spurious because the same underlying factors that caused the initial victimization event are also responsible for subsequent victimization experiences (see Clay-Warner, Bunch, & Mcmahon-Howard, 2016; Ousey, Wilcox, & Brummel, 2008).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to state dependence arguments, the victimization event itself changes either the individual or the social environment in ways that elevate future risk. According to the risk heterogeneity argument, the association between victimization events is spurious because the same underlying factors that caused the initial victimization event are also responsible for subsequent victimization experiences (see Clay-Warner, Bunch, & Mcmahon-Howard, 2016; Ousey, Wilcox, & Brummel, 2008).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…contribute to revictimization risk (Clay-Warner et al, 2016). Symptoms of psychological distress, the intermediate factor considered in the present study, are more representative of state-dependence theories.…”
mentioning
confidence: 76%
“…In contrast, state-dependence theories (Zayfert, 2012) argue that the experience of initial victimization produces changes in characteristics of the individual and/or their socio-material context that, in turn, affect the individual’s risk for subsequent revictimization. Longitudinal analyses that evaluate the two perspectives together suggest that the two theories are not exclusive; population heterogeneity and state dependence both contribute to revictimization risk (Clay-Warner et al, 2016). Symptoms of psychological distress, the intermediate factor considered in the present study, are more representative of state-dependence theories.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In conclusion, most existing risk assessment instruments predict repeat victimization from the perspective of the offender and not the victim. Moreover, most existing instruments aimed to predict repeat victimization are limited to specific types of crimes, whereas victims may also be at risk of being confronted with other types of crimes and harms (Clay-Warner et al, 2016;Farrell et al, 1995;Lantz and Ruback, 2017). This study, therefore, addressed the development and validation of an actuarial instrument (ProVict) aimed to estimate the risk of repeat victimization directly from the victim's perspective and for a wider range of crimes than typically addressed.…”
Section: Previous Research On Victim Risk Assessment Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%