Neighborhood Disadvantage, Alcohol Use, and Violent Victimization

Abstract

This study examines the impact of neighborhood and individual level factors as predictors of violent victimization in a sample of high-school students in Toronto, Canada. Individual factors include school and family effects, alcohol use, and a variety of demographic measures. The neighborhood elements in this study include neighborhood disadvantage (Wilson, 1996) and collective efficacy (Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997) concepts in the forefront of research on crime. The research not only examines the direct effect of these variables but also the interaction of the macro-and micro-level variables as correlates of victimization. The results indicate that the neighborhood disadvantage is critical in the explanation of violent victimization. Moreover, the relationship between alcohol use and victimization varies by neighborhood disadvantage.

Exposure to violence, substance use, and neighborhood context

“…We are aware of only one study that has investigated this issue, and it focused solely on economic disadvantage. Browning and Erickson (2009) found that among high school students in Toronto, community disadvantage moderated the relationship between alcohol use and direct victimization, such that drinkers were more likely than non-drinkers to be victims of assaults or threats in poor neighborhoods versus more affluent areas. Because this study relied on cross-sectional data, another interpretation of the results is that victimization was more likely to lead to drinking in disadvantaged areas.…”

“…In addition, we investigate the degree to which two neighborhood characteristics – economic disadvantage and community norms regarding adolescent substance use – moderate the impact of victimization on substance use. To date, there has been minimal attention paid to the potential for neighborhood context to affect the relationship between exposure to violence in the community and substance use by adolescents (with the exception of Browning and Erickson, 2009), despite research indicating that economically and socially disadvantaged neighborhoods have higher rates of violence (Anderson, 1999; De Coster et al, 2006; Shaw and McKay, 1942) and victimization (Browning and Erickson, 2009; Gibson et al, 2009; Sampson and Lauritsen, 1994) compared to more advantaged areas. The current study will explore whether or not residence in such areas affects alcohol use, binge drinking, and marijuana use among adolescents, and the degree to which neighborhood factors ameliorate or exacerbate the likelihood that victims will engage in substance use.…”

Violence towards people with mental illness: Assessment, risk factors, and management

“…Criminological theory proposes that victimization is explained by variations in lifestyle and routine activities that shape contexts for delinquent and criminal behaviour . Explanations of differences in assault risk between sub‐populations has also emphasized differences in neighborhood conditions, for example ecological characteristics, including social disorganization/disorder . Theoretical emphasis on contextual factors has been revised recently, in favor of increased focus on victim characteristics, such as behavioral self‐control in violent situations, and lifestyle patterns that increase the opportunity for assault to take place .…”

Victimization Experiences and Adolescent Substance Use

“…Although the majority of studies guided by GST have examined the effects of victimization on outcomes other than substance use, there is evidence of a significant association between exposure to violence in the community and increased alcohol and/or other drug use by teenagers (Browning & Erickson, 2009; Kilpatrick et al, 2003; Kliewer & Murrelle, 2007; Kliewer et al, 2006; Taylor & Kliewer, 2006; Zinzow et al, 2009). Much of this research has been based on cross-sectional data, however, which is problematic given evidence of bi-directional relationships between the two constructs (Mrug & Windle, 2009; Ousey, Wilcox, & Fisher, 2011).…”