Stalking: Developing an Empirical Typology to Classify Stalkers

Abstract

Stalking has received a great deal of attention from the media and its harmful effects on victims have been well documented. Stalking is also more common than previously thought, leading researchers to classify stalkers into groups in an attempt to predict future behavior. Previous research has grouped stalkers based on theoretical models rather than trying to empirically examine stalking behaviors along with other factors such as motivation, type of relationship, and attachment style in determining a typology of stalkers. Female college students (N_108) who had experienced stalking behaviors responded to questions regarding their perceptions of those behaviors. First, these victim perceptions were factor analyzed. Then, cluster analysis grouped those factors to produce a four-cluster typology of stalkers. Cluster 1 (Harmless) appeared to reflect a more casual, less jealous pattern of behavior. Cluster 2 (Low Threat) appeared the least likely to become physically violent or threatening, or to engage in illegal behaviors. Cluster 3 (Violent Criminal) appeared to be the most likely to engage in physically threatening and illegal behaviors. Cluster 4 (High Threat) was characterized by a more serious type of relationship and may attempt to be more restrictive of their partner when first meeting them.

Look who's stalking: Obsessive pursuit and attachment theory

“…Although typologies may be useful when assessing general characteristics of offenders, there is no consensus on how to operationalize shared concepts like prior relationships to victim and motive, nor do the typologies attend to the actual behaviors perpetrated by the stalker. Since different types of stalkers may exhibit drastically different behaviors, it is important to account for these differences (as well as shared conceptual underpinnings) in order to establish better means of prevention and treatment (Del Ben & Fremouw, 2002).…”

“…According to several studies, most stalkers do not display symptoms of severe psychological disorder, like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or major depression (Kienlen et al, 1997;McGuire & Wraith, 2000;Mullen et al, 1999). Instead, stalkers are more likely to show signs of comparatively minor psychopathology, in the form of personality disorders (Kamphuis & Emmelkamp, 2000;Kienlen et al, 1997;McCann, 1998;Meloy, 1996), anger-related problems (Davis et al, 2000;Del Ben & Fremouw, 2002;Meloy, 1996), and mild to moderate depression (Kienlen et al, 1997). Though it is generally accepted that stalkers may suffer from various minor psychiatric conditions, and less frequently from more profound disturbances, the studies that had focused specifically on the possibility of a relationship between stalking perpetration and personality disorder did not necessarily present a consensus on what types of personality disorder may be most prevalent among stalkers.…”

Differentiating between Physically Violent and Nonviolent Stalkers: An Examination of Canadian Cases

“…The nine predictor variables included were defined as follows: (1) Degree of indications of likely obsession ⁄ fixation (Obsess)ranging from (1) low ⁄ none obvious to (5) high relating to the relative number of contacts with the victim as well as the degree to which the perpetrator either went out of his way to contact the victim or acted in an unusual or peculiar manner; (2) Degree of perceived negative affect ⁄ emotion in actions (Negaff)-ranging from (1) low to (5) high relating to the degree of perceived anger ⁄ hatred towards the victim based on known emotional hostility directed towards the victim; (3) Explicit verbal threat ⁄ no threat status towards victim (Threat)nominally scaled item (1 = yes; 0 = no); (4) Strength of emotional attachment (attach)-based on the type and degree of emotional attachment ranging from (1) weak (casual acquaintance, dated and ⁄ or known less than 6 months) to (5) strong (married, commonlaw, may have kids with victim and ⁄ or lived together and ⁄ or relationship extended more than 3 years); (5) Known substance abuse ⁄ dependency (i.e., legal or illegal drugs ⁄ alcohol) (Drugalc)-nominally scaled item (1 = yes; 0 = no); (6) Presence of a personality disorder (Axis II diagnosis Scorer reliability was estimated by having the subjective questions from a small sample of cases (n = 25) independently rated by another expert rater. The scores for each subjective question were then correlated.…”

“…An expanding number of typologies exist to describe the various types of stalkers (5)(6)(7)(8). Relational typologies-which describe stalkers based on their relationship to their victim have been seen as more theoretically practical in some research (9).…”

Drohungen als Vorboten schwerer Gewalttaten

“…Andere Motive sind das Verlangen nach Aufmerksamkeit, das Streben nach Einfluss oder Macht über das Opfer[3], Rache, Geld, Einschüchterung oder Bestrafung des Opfers und vieles mehr, wobei einer Drohung auch mehrere Motive gleichzeitig zugrun− de liegen können[7,24].Drohungen sind weder eine hinreichende noch eine notwendige Bedingung für schwere Gewaltdelikte. Del Ben und Fremouw[19] entwickelten aufgrund von Stalking−Erfahrungen weiblicher Collegestudentinnen eine 4−stufige Typologie. Im ersten ¹Harm− los−Cluster" werden diejenigen Stalker aufgeführt, die durch ei− nen eher tiefen Eifersuchtsgrad auffällig werden.…”