Incivilities in nonmetropolitan communities: The effects of structural constraints, social conditions, and crime

Reisig, Michael D.; Cancino, Jeffrey M.

doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2003.10.002

Cited by 77 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Regardless, this relationship appears consistently strong in urban areas (see Scarborough, Like-Haislip, Novak, Lucas, & Alarid, 2010). Reisig and Cancino (2004) also confirm the relationship exists in areas other than highly urbanized communities. Their research shows that even in relatively rural, nonmetropolitan areas, there is a significant negative relationship between perceived incivilities and collective efficacy.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Fear of crime, incivilities, and collective efficacy in four Miami neighborhoods

Swatt

Varano

Uchida

et al. 2013

Journal of Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Extant literature indicates that individual perceptions of collective efficacy and incivilities are important in explaining fear of crime. These studies, however, often implicitly assume that the relationships between key variables do not differ between neighborhoods. The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between perceptions of collective efficacy, perceptions of incivilities, and fear of crime and determine whether these relationships are constant between neighborhoods. Methods: Surveys were conducted using a sample of residents from four neighborhoods within Miami-Dade County. Structural equation models were used to examine the relationships between perceptions of collective efficacy, perceptions of incivilities, and fear of crime for each neighborhood separately. Tests for invariance were conducted to determine whether the coefficients from these models differed across neighborhoods. Results: Results from these analyses suggest that the relationship between perceptions of collective efficacy and fear of crime exhibit significant heterogeneity between neighborhoods, as do a number of other relationships. The relationships between perceptions of collective efficacy and perceptions of incivilities, and perceptions of incivilities and fear of crime do not exhibit heterogeneity. Conclusions: These results illustrate the importance of examining perceptions of collective efficacy within the neighborhood context. Implications for policy and future research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Fear of crime, incivilities, and collective efficacy in four Miami neighborhoods

Swatt

Varano

Uchida

et al. 2013

Journal of Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Questions about place are asked by all criminologists interested in the ecology of crime because they seek to understand why there are high and low crime areas in places of all types, including urban, suburban, and rural localities (Barnett & Mencken 2002;Bouffard & Muftić 2006;Kaylen & Pridemore 2011;Jobes et al 2004;Lee et al 2003;Wells & Weisheit 2004;Osgood & Chambers 2000;Reisig & Cancino 2004;Sampson, Raudenbush & Earls 1997).…”

Section: A Macro-level Perspective On Informal Social Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It assumes that aggregate level characteristics, such as population stability or the proportion of two-parent families, for example, are indicators of a community's cohesion and common identity. In nonometropolitian areas, criminologists and rural sociologists see a variety of ways that cohesion may be threatened, including rapid population and/or economic growth, growing urbanization, high levels of unemployment and persistent poverty, and a variety of other structural-level social and economic conditions (Arthur 1991;Carcach 2000a;Jobes 1999;Kaylen & Pridemore 2011;Krannich et al 1985;Lee, Maumee & Ousey 2003;Osgood & Chambers 2000;Reisig & Cancino 2004;Rephann 1999;Spano & Nagy 2005;Wells & Weisheit 2004;Wilkinson 1984aWilkinson , 1984bWood 1942). Many scholars of rural life also point to the diffusion of urban culture and values as a basic, long-term shift that influences individual behavior and the integration of individuals and groups in nonmetropolitian localities (Fischer 1980;Wilkinson 1984a).…”

Section: A Macro-level Perspective On Informal Social Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More recently, scholars have applied the tenets of social disorganization theory to rural areas, examining crime rate variations with the social and economic traits of locations with smaller populations (Kaylen & Pridemore 2011;Jobes et al 2004;Reisig & Cancino 2004;Spano & Nagy 2005;Wells & Weisheit 2004;Wilkinson 1984aWilkinson , 1984b.…”

Section: A Macro-level Perspective On Informal Social Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social Structure and Informal Social Control in Rural Communities

Li¹

2011

International Journal of Rural Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between social structure and crime in rural counties of the United States. Social structures are assumed to be associated with informal control of crime, and as well, it is assumed that structural changes in rural communities influence changes in the level of informal social control of crime, hence, crime itself. Social disorganization theory provides a useful macro-level study frame for this study. The county is the study unit. Data from 2,050 non-metropolitian counties were collected, using three different sources: the census, the FBI Uniform Crime Report, and the USDA Economic Research Service. US Counties data files of the US Bureau of Census provide the demographic and social economic variables for 1990 and 2000.The results show that social structural change in rural communities reduces social control in rural communities to some extent. The applications of findings are discussed in terms of future research on crime in rural communities.

show abstract

“…There has been little examination of the how the structural, financial, and social capital characteristics of a community may influence team functioning or sustainability (Herrenkohl et al 2000;Osgood and Chambers 2000;Reisig and Cancino 2004). For example, communities that have few well-functioning institutions, have a history of mistrust or failure, or have a relatively hierarchical (vs. democratic and collaborative) local political culture may have more difficulties with developing and sustaining partnerships.…”

Section: Community Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community and Team Member Factors that Influence the Operations Phase of Local Prevention Teams: The PROSPER Project

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the longitudinal predictors of quality of functioning of community prevention teams during the "operations" phase of team development. The 14 community teams were involved in a randomized-trial of a university-community partnership project, PROSPER, that implements evidence-based interventions intended to support positive youth development and reduce early substance use, as well as other problem behaviors. The study included a multi-informant approach to measurement of constructs, and included data from 137 team members, 59 human service agency directors and school administrators, 16 school principals, and 8 Prevention Coordinators (i.e. technical assistance providers). We examined how community demographics and social capital, team level characteristics, and team member attributes and attitudes are related to local team functioning across an 18-month period. Findings indicate that community demographics (poverty), social capital, team member attitudes towards prevention, and team members' views of the acceptability of teen alcohol use played a substantial role in predicting various indicators of the quality of team functioning 18 months later.

show abstract

Incivilities in nonmetropolitan communities: The effects of structural constraints, social conditions, and crime

Cited by 77 publications

References 30 publications

Fear of crime, incivilities, and collective efficacy in four Miami neighborhoods

Fear of crime, incivilities, and collective efficacy in four Miami neighborhoods

Social Structure and Informal Social Control in Rural Communities

Community and Team Member Factors that Influence the Operations Phase of Local Prevention Teams: The PROSPER Project

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About