CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION TO VICTIMOLOGY

ute
trib
WHAT IS VICTIMOLOGY? Learning
Objectives

dis
The term victimology is not new. In fact, Benjamin Mendelsohn After reading this chapter,
first used it in 1947 to describe the scientific study of crime victims. students should be able to
­Victimology is often considered a subfield of criminology, and the two
fields do share much in common. Just as criminology is the study of 1. Describe social

or
criminals—what they do, why they do it, and how the criminal jus- movements that lead to
tice system responds to them—victimology is the study of victims. the development of the
study of crime victims
Victimology, then, is the study of the etiology (or causes) of victim-
t,
ization, its consequences, how the criminal justice system accommo- 2. Differentiate the ways
os
dates and assists victims, and how other elements of society, such as in which victims are
the media, deal with crime victims. Victimology is a science; victimol- thought to contribute to
ogists use the scientific method to answer questions about victims. For victimization
,p

example, instead of simply wondering or hypothesizing why younger

3. Apply victim typologies
people are more likely to be victims than are older people, victimolo-
to understand why some
gists conduct research to attempt to identify the reasons why younger
y

people are victimized

people seem more vulnerable.
op

4. Describe the history of the

field of victimology
THE HISTORY OF VICTIMOLOGY: BEFORE
tc

THE VICTIMS’ RIGHTS MOVEMENT

no

As previously mentioned, the term victimology was coined in the mid-

1900s. Crime was, of course, occurring prior to this time; thus, people
were being victimized long before the scientific study of crime victims
Do

began. Even though they were not scientifically studied, victims were
recognized as being harmed by crime, and their role in the criminal
justice process has evolved over time.
Before and throughout the Middle Ages (about the 5th through
the 16th century), the burden of the justice system, informal as it was,
fell on the victim. When a person or property was harmed, it was up
to the victim and the victim’s family to seek justice. This was typi-
cally achieved via retaliation. The justice system operated under the

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

1
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
 principle of lex talionis, an eye for an eye. A criminal would be punished because he or
she deserved it, and the punishment would be equal to the harm caused. Punishment based
on these notions is consistent with retribution. During this time, a crime was considered
a harm against the victim, not the state. The concepts of restitution and retribution gov-
erned action against criminals. Criminals were expected to pay back the victim through
­restitution. During this time, a criminal who stole a person’s cow likely would have to
compensate the owner (the victim) by returning the stolen cow and also giving him or her
another one.
Early criminal codes incorporated these principles. The Code of Hammurabi was

ute
the basis for order and certainty in Babylon. In the code, restoration of equity between the
offender and victim was stressed. Notice that the early response to crime centered on the
victim, not the state. This focus on the victim continued until the Industrial Revolution,
when criminal law shifted to considering crimes violations against the state rather than the

trib
victim. Once the victim ceased to be seen as the entity harmed by the crime, the victim
became secondary. Although this shift most certainly benefited the state—by allowing it
to collect fines and monies from these newly defined harms—the victim did not fare as

dis
well. Instead of being the focus, the crime victim was effectively excluded from the formal
aspects of the justice system.
Since then, this state-centered system has largely remained in place, but attention—at
least from researchers and activists—returned to the crime victim during the 1940s. Begin-

or
ning in this period, concern was shown for the crime victim, but this concern was not entirely
sympathetic. Instead, scholars and others became preoccupied with how the crime victim
contributes to his or her own victimization. Scholarly work during this period focused not on
t,
the needs of crime victims but on identifying to what extent victims could be held responsible
os
for being victimized. In this way, the damage that offenders cause was ignored. Instead, the
ideas of victim precipitation, victim facilitation, and victim provocation emerged.
,p

THE ROLE OF THE VICTIM IN CRIME: VICTIM

y

PRECIPITATION, VICTIM FACILITATION, AND

op

VICTIM PROVOCATION
tc

Although the field of victimology has largely moved away from simply investigating how
much a victim contributes to his or her own victimization, the first forays into the study of
crime victims were centered on such investigations. In this way, the first studies of crime
no

victims did not portray victims as innocents who were wronged at the hands of an offender.
Rather, concepts such as victim precipitation, victim facilitation, and victim provocation
developed from these investigations. Victim precipitation is defined as the extent to which
Do

a victim is responsible for his or her own victimization. The concept of victim precipita-
tion is rooted in the notion that, although some victims are not at all responsible for their
victimization, other victims are. In this way, victim precipitation acknowledges that crime
victimization involves at least two people—an offender and a victim—and that both parties
are acting and often reacting before, during, and after the incident. Identifying victim pre-
cipitation does not necessarily lead to negative outcomes. It is problematic, however, when
it is used to blame the victim while ignoring the offender’s role.

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

2   VICTIMOLOGY: THE ESSENTIALS
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
 Similar to victim precipitation is
the concept of victim facilitation. Vic-
tim facilitation occurs when a victim
unintentionally makes it easier for an
offender to commit a crime. A victim
may, in this way, be a catalyst for victim-
ization. A woman who accidentally left
her purse in plain view in her office while
she went to the restroom and then had it

© iStockphoto.com/Toa55
ute
stolen would be a victim who facilitated
her own victimization. This woman is not
blameworthy—the offender should not
steal, regardless of whether the purse is in

trib
plain view. But the victim’s actions certainly
made her a likely target and made it easy
for the offender to steal her purse. Unlike precipitation, facilitation helps understand why }  Photo 1.1

dis
one person may be victimized over another but does not connote blame and responsibility. A person left their
keys in their car
Contrast victim facilitation with victim provocation. Victim provocation occurs
while they went
when a person does something that incites another person to commit an illegal act. Prov- shopping. By doing
ocation suggests that without the victim’s behavior, the crime would not have occurred.

or
so, this person
Provocation, then, most certainly connotes blame. In fact, the offender is not at all respon- inadvertently made
sible. An example of victim provocation would be if a person attempted to mug a man who it easier for an
was walking home from work and the man, instead of willingly giving the offender his offender to steal
t, their car, thus
wallet, pulled out a gun and shot the mugger. The offender in this scenario ultimately is
os
facilitating their
a victim, but he would not have been shot if not for attempting to mug the shooter. The
victimization, but
distinctions between victim precipitation, facilitation, and provocation, as you probably this does not mean
noticed, are not always clear cut. These terms were developed, described, studied, and used
,p

that they are to

in somewhat different ways in the mid-1900s by several scholars. blame for it.
y

Hans von Hentig

op

In his book The Criminal and His Victim: Studies in the Sociobiology of Crime, Hans von
Hentig (1948) recognized the importance of investigating what factors underpin why cer-
tc

tain people are victims, just as criminology attempts to identify those factors that produce
criminality. He determined that some of the same characteristics that produce crime also
produce victimization. We return to this link between victims and offenders in Chapter 2,
no

but for now, recognize that one of the first discussions of criminal victimization connected
it to offending.
In studying victimization, then, von Hentig looked at the criminal–victim dyad, thus
Do

recognizing the importance of considering the victim and the criminal not in isolation but
together. He attempted to identify the characteristics of a victim that may effectively serve to
increase victimization risk. He considered that victims may provoke victimization—acting
as agent provocateurs—based on their characteristics. He argued that crime victims could
be placed into one of 13 categories based on their propensity for victimization: (1) young,
(2) females, (3) old, (4) immigrants, (5) depressed, (6) mentally defective/deranged, (7) the
acquisitive, (8) dull normals, (9) minorities, (10) wanton, (11) the lonesome and heartbroken,

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

1  •  Introduction to Victimology  3
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any meansChapter
without express written permission of the publisher.
 (12) tormentor, and (13) the blocked, exempted, and fighting. All these victims are targeted
and contribute to their own victimization because of their characteristics. For example, the
young, the old, and females may be victimized because of their ignorance or risk taking, or
may be taken advantage of, such as when women are sexually assaulted. Immigrants, minori-
ties, and dull normals are likely to be victimized due to their social status and inability to
activate assistance in the community. The mentally defective or deranged may be victimized
because they do not recognize or appropriately respond to threats in the environment. Those
who are depressed, acquisitive, wanton, lonesome, or heartbroken may place themselves in
situations in which they do not recognize danger because of their mental state, their sadness

ute
over a lost relationship, their desire for companionship, or their greed. Tormentors are people
who provoke their own victimization via violence and aggression toward others. Finally, the
blocked, exempted, and fighting victims are those who are enmeshed in poor decisions and
unable to defend themselves or seek assistance if victimized. An example of such a victim is a

trib
person who is blackmailed because of his behavior, which places him in a precarious situation
if he reports the blackmail to the police (Dupont-Morales, 2009).

dis
Benjamin Mendelsohn
Known as the father of victimology, Benjamin Mendelsohn coined the term for this area
of study in the mid-1940s. As an attorney, he became interested in the relationship between

or
the victim and the criminal as he conducted interviews with victims and witnesses and
realized that victims and offenders often knew each other and had some kind of existing
t,
relationship. He then created a classification of victims based on their culpability, or the
degree of the victim’s blame. His classification entailed the following:
os
1. Completely innocent victim: a victim who bears no responsibility at all for
,p

victimization; victimized simply because of his or her nature, such as being

a child
y

2. Victim with minor guilt: a victim who is victimized due to ignorance; a victim who
inadvertently places themself in harm’s way
op

3. Victim as guilty as offender/voluntary victim: a victim who bears as much

responsibility as the offender; a person who, for example, enters into a suicide
tc

pact
4. Victim more guilty than offender: a victim who instigates or provokes their own
no

victimization
5. Most guilty victim: a victim who is victimized during the perpetration of a crime or
as a result of crime
Do

6. Simulating or imaginary victim: a victim who is not victimized at all but, instead,
fabricates a victimization event

Mendelsohn’s classification emphasized degrees of culpability, recognizing that

some victims bear no responsibility for their victimization, whereas others, based on their
behaviors or actions, do.

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

4   VICTIMOLOGY: THE ESSENTIALS
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
 Stephen Schafer
One of the earliest victimologists, Stephen Schafer (1968) wrote The Victim and His Crimi-
nal: A Study in Functional Responsibility. Much like von Hentig and Mendelsohn, Schafer also
proposed a victim typology. Using both social characteristics and behaviors, his typology
places victims in groups based on how responsible they are for their own victimization.
In this way, it includes facets of von Hentig’s typology based on personal characteristics
and Mendelsohn’s typology rooted in behavior. He argued that people have a functional
responsibility not to provoke others into victimizing or harming them and that they also
should actively attempt to prevent that from occurring. He identified seven categories and

ute
labeled their levels of responsibility as follows:

1. Unrelated victims—no responsibility

trib
2. Provocative victims—share responsibility
3. Precipitative victims—some degree of responsibility

dis
4. Biologically weak victims—no responsibility
5. Socially weak victims—no responsibility

or
6. Self-victimizing—total responsibility
7. Political victims—no responsibility
t,
Marvin Wolfgang
os
The first person to empirically investigate victim precipitation was Marvin Wolfgang
(1957) in his classic study of homicides occurring in Philadelphia from 1948 to 1952. He
,p

examined some 558 homicides to see to what extent victims precipitated their own deaths.
In those instances in which the victim was the direct, positive precipitator in the homicide,
y

Wolfgang labeled the incident as victim precipitated. For example, the victim in such an
incident would be the first to brandish or use a weapon, the first to strike a blow, and
op

the first to initiate physical violence. He found that 26% of all homicides in Philadelphia
during this period were victim precipitated.
tc

Beyond simply identifying the extent to which homicides were victim precipitated,
­Wolfgang also identified those factors that were common in such homicides. He determined
that often in this kind of homicide, the victim and the offender knew each other. He also found
no

that most victim-precipitated homicides involved male offenders and male victims and that the
victim was likely to have a history of violent offending himself. Alcohol was also likely to play a
role in victim-precipitated homicides, which makes sense, especially considering that Wolfgang
Do

determined these homicides often started as minor altercations that escalated to murder.
Since Wolfgang’s study of victim-precipitated homicide, others have expanded his
definition to include felony-related homicide and subintentional homicide. Subinten-
tional homicide occurs when the victim facilitates his or her own demise by using poor
judgment, placing himself or herself at risk, living a risky lifestyle, or using alcohol or drugs.
Perhaps not surprising, a study of subintentional homicide found that as many as three-
fourths of victims were subintentional (N. H. Allen, 1980).

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

1  •  Introduction to Victimology  5
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any meansChapter
without express written permission of the publisher.
 Menachem Amir
The crime of rape is not immune from victim-blaming today, and it certainly has not
been in the past either. Menachem Amir, a student of Wolfgang’s, conducted an empirical
investigation into rape incidents reported to the police. Like Wolfgang, he conducted his
study using data from Philadelphia, although he examined rapes that occurred from 1958
to 1960. He examined the extent to which victims precipitated their own rapes and iden-
tified common attributes of victim-precipitated rape. Amir labeled almost 1 in 5 rapes as
victim precipitated. He found that these rapes were likely to involve alcohol and that the
victim was likely to engage in what was then considered seductive behavior, such as wear

ute
revealing clothing, use risqué language, and have a bad reputation.
What Amir also determined was that it is the offender’s interpretation of actions that is
important, rather than what the victim actually does. The offender may view the victim—

trib
her actions, words, and clothing—as going against what he considers appropriate female
behavior. In this way, the victim may be viewed as being “bad” in terms of how women
should behave sexually. He may then choose to rape her because of his misguided view of

dis
how women should act, because he thinks she deserves it, or because he thinks she has it
coming to her. Amir’s study was quite controversial—it was attacked for blaming victims,
namely women, for their own victimization. As you will learn in Chapter 7, rape and sexual
assault victims today still must overcome this view that women (because such victims are

or
usually female) are largely responsible for their own victimization.
t,
os
FOCUS ON RESEARCH
,p

Even though the first study examining victim pre- explored. Berg and Mulford suggest reevaluating
cipitation and homicide was published in 1957, routine activities theory and other leading per-
this phenomenon is being examined in contem- spectives as explanations of the victim–offender
y

porary times as well. And, according to Berg and overlap, improving empirical testing of the
op

Mulford (2017), further research is still needed to victim–offender overlap, and accounting for the
fully understand this phenomenon. In a review contextual experiences of victim precipitators.
of 96 empirical studies, the researchers contend Why do you think that individual experiences are
tc

that there are gaps in the literature that must be relevant to untangling victim-precipitated crime?

Source: Adapted from Berg, M. T., & Mulford, C. F. (2017). Reappraising and redirecting research on the victim–offender
no

overlap. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 21(1), 16–30.

Do

THE HISTORY OF VICTIMOLOGY: THE VICTIMS’

RIGHTS MOVEMENT
Beyond the attention victims began to get based on how much they contributed to their
own victimization, researchers and social organizations started to pay attention to victims
and their plight during the mid-1900s. This marked a shift in how victims were viewed,

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

6   VICTIMOLOGY: THE ESSENTIALS
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
 not only by the public but also by the criminal justice system. As noted, scholars began to
examine the role of the victim in criminal events, but more sympathetic attention was also
given to crime victims, largely as an outgrowth of other social movements.
During the 1960s, concern about crime was growing. This period saw a large increase
in the amount of crime occurring in the United States. As crime rates soared, so too did
the number of people directly and indirectly harmed by crime. In 1966, in response to
the growing crime problem, the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the
Administration of Justice was formed. One of the commission’s responsibilities was to con-
duct the first-ever government-sponsored victimization survey, called the National Crime

ute
Survey (which later became the National Crime Victimization Survey). This survey is
discussed in depth in Chapter 2. Importantly, it showed that although official crime rates
were on the rise, they paled in comparison with the amount of victimization uncovered.
This discrepancy was found because official data sources of crime rates are based on those

trib
crimes reported or otherwise made known to the police, whereas the National Crime Sur-
vey relied on victims to recall their own experiences. Further, victims were asked in the
survey whether they reported their victimization to the police and, if not, why they chose

dis
not to report. For the first time, a picture of victimization emerged, and this picture was
far different than previously depicted. Victimization was more extensive than originally
thought, and the reluctance of victims to report was discovered. This initial data collection
effort did not occur in a vacuum. Instead, several social movements were under way that

or
further moved crime victims into the collective American consciousness.

The Women’s Movement

t,
os
One of the most influential movements for victims was the women’s movement. In
recognition that victimizations such as sexual assault and domestic violence were a
by-product of sexism, traditional sex roles, emphasis on traditional family values, and
,p

economic subjugation of women, the women’s movement took on as part of its mission
helping female victims of crime. Feminists were, in part, concerned with how female
y

victims were treated by the criminal justice system and pushed for victims of rape and
op

domestic violence to receive special care and services. As a result, domestic violence
shelters and rape crisis centers started appearing in the 1970s. Closely connected to the
women’s movement was the push toward giving children rights. Not before viewed as
tc

crime victims, children were also identified as being in need of services, for they could
be victims of child abuse, could become runaways, and could be victimized in much the
same ways as older people. The effects of victimization on children were, at this time,
no

of particular concern.
Three critical developments arose from the recognition of women and children as
victims and from the opening of victims’ services devoted specifically to them. First, the
Do

movement brought awareness that victimization often entails emotional and mental harm,
even in the absence of physical injury. To address this harm, counseling for victims was
advocated. Second, the criminal justice system was no longer relied on to provide victims
with assistance in rebuilding their lives, thus additional victimization by the criminal justice
system could be lessened or avoided altogether. Third, because these shelters and centers
relied largely on volunteers, services were able to run and stay open even without signifi-
cant budgetary support (M. A. Young & Stein, 2004).

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

1  •  Introduction to Victimology  7
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any meansChapter
without express written permission of the publisher.
 The Civil Rights Movement
Also integral to the development of victims’ rights was the civil rights movement.
This movement advocated against racism and discrimination, noting that all Americans
have rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. The civil rights movement, as it created
awareness of the mistreatment of minorities, served as a backdrop for the victims’ rights
­movement in that it identified how minorities were mistreated by the criminal justice
system, both as offenders and victims. The ideologies of the women’s movement and the
civil rights movement merged to create a victims’ rights movement largely supported by
females, minorities, and young persons who pushed forward a victims’ agenda that concen-

ute
trated on making procedural changes in the operation of the criminal justice system (B. L.
Smith, Sloan, & Ward, 1990).

trib
CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE VICTIMS’ RIGHTS MOVEMENT

dis
We discuss the particulars of programs and services available for crime victims today in
Chapter 5, but to understand the importance of the victims’ rights movement, its contri-
butions should be outlined.

or
Early Programs for Crime Victims
In the United States, the first crime victims’ compensation program was started in California
t,
in 1965. Victim compensation programs allow for victims to be financially compensated for
os
uncovered costs resulting from their victimization. Not long after, in 1972, the first three
victim assistance programs in the nation, two of which were rape crisis centers, were founded
by volunteers. The first prototypes for what today are victim/witness assistance programs
,p

housed in district attorneys’ offices were funded in 1974 by the Federal Law Enforcement
Assistance Administration. These programs were designed to notify victims of critical dates
in their cases and to create separate waiting areas for victims. Some programs began to make
y

social services referrals for victims, providing them with input on criminal justice decisions
op

that involved them, such as bail and plea bargains, notifying them about critical points in
their cases—not just court dates—and going to court with them. Victim/witness assistance
tc

programs continue to provide similar services today.

Development of Victim Organizations

no

With women and children victims and their needs at the forefront of the victims’ rights
movement, other crime victims found that special services were not readily available to
Do

them. One group of victims whose voices emerged during the 1970s was persons whose
loved ones had been murdered—called secondary victims. After having a loved one become
a victim of homicide, many survivors found that people around them did not know how to
act or how to help them. As one woman whose son was murdered remarked, “I soon found
that murder is a taboo subject in our society. I found, to my surprise, that nice people appar-
ently just don’t get killed” (quoted in M. A. Young & Stein, 2004, p. 5). In response to the
particular needs of homicide survivors, Families and Friends of Missing Persons was orga-
nized in 1974 and Parents of Murdered Children was formed in 1978. Mothers Against

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

8   VICTIMOLOGY: THE ESSENTIALS
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
 Drunk Driving was formed in 1980. These groups provide support for their members and
others but also advocate for laws and policy changes that reflect the groups’ missions. The
National Organization for Victim Assistance was developed in 1975 to consolidate the pur-
poses of the victims’ movement and eventually to hold national conferences and provide
training for persons working with crime victims.

Legislation and Policy

In 1980, Wisconsin became the first state to pass a Victims’ Bill of Rights. Also in 1980, the

ute
National Organization for Victim Assistance created a new policy platform that included
the initiation of a National Campaign for Victim Rights, which included a National
Victims’ Rights Week, implemented by then-president Ronald Reagan. The attorney gen-
eral at the time, William French Smith, created a Task Force on Violent Crime, which

trib
recommended that a President’s Task Force on Victims of Crime be commissioned. Pres-
ident Reagan followed the recommendation. The President’s Task Force held six hearings
across the country from which 68 recommendations on how crime victims could be better

dis
assisted were made. Major initiatives were generated from these recommendations.

1. Federal legislation to fund state victim compensation programs and local victim
assistance programs

or
2. Recommendations to criminal justice professionals and other professionals about
how to better treat crime victims
t,
3. Creation of a task force on violence within families
os
4. An amendment to the U.S. Constitution to provide crime victims’ rights (yet to
be passed)
,p

As part of the first initiative, the Victims of Crime Act (1984) was passed and created
the Office for Victims of Crime in the Department of Justice and established the Crime
y

Victims Fund, which provides money to state victim compensation and local victim assis-
op

tance programs. The Crime Victims Fund and victim compensation are discussed in detail
in Chapter 5. The Victims of Crime Act was amended in 1988 to require victim compensa-
tc

tion eligibility to include victims of domestic violence and drunk-driving accidents. It also
expanded victim compensation coverage to nonresident commuters and visitors.
Legislation and policy continued to be implemented through the 1980s and 1990s.
no

The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, passed in 1994 by Congress,
included the Violence Against Women Act. This law provides funding for research and
for the development of professional partnerships to address the issues of violence against
Do

women. Annually, the attorney general reports to Congress the status of monies awarded
under the act, including the amount of money awarded and the number of grants funded.
The act also mandates that federal agencies engage in research specifically addressing vio-
lence against women.
In 1998, a publication called New Directions From the Field: Victims’ Rights and Services for
the 21st Century was released by then-attorney general Janet Reno and the Office for Victims
of Crime. This publication reviewed the status of the recommendations and initiatives put
forth by President Reagan’s task force. It also identified some 250 new recommendations for

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

1  •  Introduction to Victimology  9
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any meansChapter
without express written permission of the publisher.
 victims’ rights, victim advocacy, and services. Also integral, during the 1990s, the federal gov-
ernment and many states implemented victims’ rights legislation that enumerated specific
rights to be guaranteed to crime victims. These rights are discussed in detail in Chapter 5,
but some basic rights typically afforded to victims include the right to be present at trial,
to be provided a waiting area separate from the offender and people associated with the
offender during stages of the criminal justice process, to be notified of key events in the
criminal justice process, to testify at parole hearings, to be informed of rights, to be informed
of compensation programs, and to be treated with dignity and respect. These rights continue
to be implemented and expanded through various pieces of legislation, such as the Crime

ute
Victims’ Rights Act, which is part of the Justice for All Act of 2004 signed into law by then-­
president George W. Bush. Despite this push among the various legislatures, a federal vic-
tims’ rights constitutional amendment has not been passed. Some states have been successful
in amending their constitutions to ensure that the rights of crime victims are protected, but

trib
the U.S. Constitution has not been similarly amended. Various rights afforded to crime vic-
tims through these amendments are outlined in Chapter 5.

dis
VICTIMOLOGY TODAY
Today, the field of victimology covers a wide range of topics, including crime victims,

or
causes of victimization, consequences of victimization, interaction of victims with the crim-
inal justice system, interaction of victims with other social service agencies and programs,
t,
and prevention of victimization. Each of these topics is discussed throughout the text.
As a prelude to the text, a brief treatment of the contents is provided in the following
os
subsections.
,p

The Crime Victim

To study victimization, one of the first things victimologists needed to know was who
y

was victimized by crime. To determine who victims were, victimologists looked at offi-
op

cial data sources—namely, the Uniform Crime Report—but found them to be imper-
fect sources for victim information because they do not include detailed information
on crime victims. As a result, victimization surveys were developed to determine the
tc

extent to which people were victimized, the typical characteristics of victims, and the
characteristics of victimization incidents. The most widely cited and used victimization
no

survey is the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which is discussed in detail
in Chapter 2.
From the NCVS and other victimization surveys, victimologists discovered that
victimization is more prevalent than originally thought. Also, the “typical” victim was
Do

identified—a young male who lives in urban areas. This is not to say that other people are
not victimized. In fact, children, women, and older people are all prone to victimization.
These groups are discussed in detail in later chapters. In addition, victimologists have
uncovered other vulnerable groups. Homeless individuals, persons with mental illness,
disabled persons, and prisoners all have been recognized as deserving of special atten-
tion given their victimization rates. Special populations vulnerable to victimization are
discussed in Chapter 12.

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

10   VICTIMOLOGY: THE ESSENTIALS
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
 The Causes of Victimization
It is difficult to know why a person is singled out and victimized by crime. Is it something
he did? Did an offender choose a particular individual because she seemed like an easy
target? Or does victimization occur because somebody is simply in the wrong place at
the wrong time? Perhaps there is an element of “bad luck” or chance involved, but vic-
timologists have developed some theories to explain victimization. Theories are sets of
propositions that explain phenomena. In relation to victimology, victimization theories
explain why some people are more likely than others to be victimized. As you will read
in Chapter 2, the most widely used theories of victimization are routine activities the-

ute
ory and lifestyles-exposure theory. In the past two decades, however, victimologists and
criminologists alike have developed additional theories and identified other correlates of
victimization both generally and to explain why particular types of victimization, such as

trib
child abuse, occur.

Costs of Victimization

dis
Victimologists are particularly interested in studying victims of crime because of the mass
costs they often incur. These costs of victimization can be tangible, such as the cost of
stolen or damaged property or the costs of receiving treatment at the emergency room,

or
but they can also be harder to quantify. Crime victims may experience mental anguish or
other more serious mental health issues such as post-traumatic stress disorder. Costs also
include monies spent by the criminal justice system preventing and responding to crime
t,
and monies spent to assist crime victims. An additional consequence of victimization is fear
os
of being a victim. This fear may be tied to the actual risk of being a victim or, as you will
read about in Chapter 3, with the other consequences of victimization.
,p

Recurring Victimization
An additional significant cost of victimization is the real risk of being victimized again that
y

many victims face. Unfortunately, some victims do not suffer only a single victimization
op

event but, rather, are victimized again and, sometimes, again and again. In this way, a cer-
tain subset of victims appears to be particularly vulnerable to revictimization. Research
has begun to describe which victims are at risk of recurring victimization. In addition,
tc

theoretical explanations of recurring victimization have been proffered. The two main the-
ories used to explain recurring victimization are state dependence and risk heterogeneity.
no

Recurring victimization is discussed in Chapter 4.

The Crime Victim and the Criminal Justice System

Do

Another experience of crime victims that is important to understand is how they inter-
act with the criminal justice system. As discussed in detail in Chapter 3, many persons
who are victimized by crime do not report their experiences to the police. The reasons
victims choose to remain silent, at least in terms of not calling the police, are varied but
often include an element of suspicion and distrust of the police. Some victims worry that
police will not take them seriously or will not think what happened to them is worth the
police’s time. Others may be worried that calling the police will effectively invoke a system

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter 1  •  Introduction to Victimology  11
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
 response that cannot be erased or stopped, even when the victim wishes not to have the
system move forward. An example of such a victim is one who does not want to call the
police after being hit by her partner because she fears the police will automatically and
mandatorily arrest him. Whatever the reason, without a report, the victim will not activate
the formal criminal justice system, which will preclude an arrest and may preclude the
victim from receiving victim services explicitly tied to reporting.
When victims do report, they then enter the world of criminal justice, a world in
which they are often seen as witnesses rather than victims, given that the U.S. criminal
justice system recognizes crimes as harms against the state. This being the case, victims do

ute
not always find they are treated with dignity and respect, even though the victims’ rights
movement stresses the importance of doing so. The police are not the only ones with
whom victims must contend. If an offender is apprehended and charged with a crime, the
victim will also interact with the prosecutor and perhaps a judge. Fortunately, many police

trib
departments and prosecutors’ offices offer victim assistance programs through which vic-
tims can receive information about available services. These programs also offer personal
assistance and support, such as attending court sessions with the victim or helping submit

dis
a victim impact statement. The experience of the crime victim after the system is put into
motion is an area of research ripe for study by victimologists. It is important to understand
how victims view their interactions with the criminal justice system so that victim satis-
faction can be maximized and any additional harm caused to the victim can be minimized.

or
The criminal justice response is discussed throughout this text, especially because different
victim types have unique experiences with the police.
t,
The Crime Victim and Social Services
os
The criminal justice system is not the only organization with which crime victims may come
into contact. After being victimized, victims may need medical attention. As a result, emer-
,p

gency medical technicians, hospital and doctor’s office staff, nurses, doctors, and clinicians
may all be persons with whom victims interact. Although some of these professionals will
y

have training or specialize in dealing with victims, others may not treat victims with the
care and sensitivity they need. To combat this, sometimes victims will have persons from
op

the police department or prosecutor’s office with them at the hospital to serve as mediators
and provide counsel. Also to aid victims, many hospitals and clinics now have sexual assault
tc

nurse examiners, who are specially trained in completing forensic and health exams for sexual
assault victims.
In addition to medical professionals, mental health clinicians also often serve victims,
no

for large numbers of victims seek mental health services after being victimized. Beyond
mental health care, victims may use the services of social workers or other social service
workers. But not all persons with whom victims interact as a consequence of being vic-
Do

timized are part of social service agencies accustomed to serving victims. Crime victims
may seek assistance from insurance agents and repair and maintenance workers. Crime
victims may need special accommodations from their employers or schools. In short, being
victimized may touch multiple aspects of a person’s life, and agencies, businesses, and orga-
nizations alike may find themselves in the position of dealing with the aftermath, one to
which they may not be particularly attuned. The more knowledge people have about crime
victimization and its impact on victims, the more likely victims will be satisfactorily treated.

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

12   VICTIMOLOGY: THE ESSENTIALS
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
 Prevention
Knowing the extent to which people are
victimized, who is likely targeted, and the
reasons why people are victimized can help
in the development of prevention efforts.
To be effective, prevention programs and
policies need to target the known causes
of victimization. Although the offender is
ultimately responsible for crime victim-

ute
ization, it is difficult to change offender
behavior. Reliance on doing so limits
complete prevention because victimiza-

trib
tion involves at least two elements—the
offender and the victim—both of which
need to be addressed to stop crime victim-

dis
ization. In addition, as noted by scholars, it
is easier to reduce the opportunity than the
motivation to offend (Clarke, 1980, 1982).
Nonetheless, offenders should be dis-

or
couraged from committing crimes, likely
through informal mechanisms of social
control. For example, colleges could pro-
vide crime awareness seminars directed at
t,

© SAGE Publishing
os
teaching leaders of student organizations
how to dissuade their members from com-
mitting acts of aggression, using drugs or
,p

alcohol, or engaging in other conduct that

could lead to victimization.
y

In addition to discouraging offenders, potential victims also play a key role in prevent- } Photo 1.2
ing victimization. Factors that place victims at risk need to be addressed to the extent that Some cities post
op

victims can change them. For example, because routine activities and lifestyles-exposure signs warning
people about
theories identify daily routines and risky lifestyles as being key risk factors for victim-
potential criminal
tc

ization, people should attempt to reduce their risk by making changes they are able to activity. What
make. Other theories and risk factors related to victimization should also be targeted (these types of crime
are discussed in Chapter 2). Because different types of victimization have different risk prevention efforts
no

­factors—and, therefore, different risk-reduction strategies—prevention is discussed in each do you see in your
chapter that deals with a specific victim type. neighborhood?
Because victimology today focuses on the victim, the causes of victimization, the conse-
Do

quences associated with victimization, and how the victim is treated within and outside the
criminal justice system, this text addresses these issues for the various types of crime victims.
In this way, each chapter that deals with specific types of victimization—such as sexual vic-
timization and intimate partner violence—includes an overview of the extent to which people
are victimized, who is victimized, why they are victimized, the outcomes of being victimized,
and the services provided to and challenges faced by victims. The specific remedies in place
for crime victims are discussed in each chapter and in a stand-alone chapter.

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter 1  •  Introduction to Victimology  13
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
SUMMARY

—— The field of victimology originated in the early as Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Families
to mid-1900s, with the first victimologists and Friends of Missing Persons, and Parents of
attempting to identify how victims contribute to Murdered Children.
their own victimization. To this end, the concepts
—— Important pieces of legislation came out
of victim precipitation, victim facilitation, and
of the victims’ rights movement, including
victim provocation were examined.
the Victims of Crime Act, the Violence

ute
—— Hans von Hentig, Benjamin Mendelsohn, Against Women Act, and the Crime Victims’
and Stephen Schafer each proposed victim Rights Act. Many states have victims’ rights
typologies used to classify victims in terms amendments and/or legislation that guarantee
of their responsibility or role in their own victim protections.

trib
victimization.
—— Victimology today is concerned with the
—— Marvin Wolfgang and Menachem Amir extent to which people are victimized, the

dis
conducted the first empirical examinations of types of victimization they experience,
victim precipitation. Wolfgang studied homicides the causes of victimization, the
in Philadelphia, and Amir focused on forcible consequences associated with victimization,
rapes. Wolfgang found that 26% of homicides the criminal justice system’s response to

or
were victim precipitated. Amir concluded that victims, and the response of other agencies
19% of forcible rapes were precipitated by the and people. Victimology is a science—
victim. victimologists use the scientific method to
t, study these areas.
—— The victims’ rights movement gained
os
momentum during the 1960s. It was spurred —— As victimologists become aware of who is
by the civil rights and women’s movements. likely to be victimized and the reasons for
,p

This period saw the recognition of children and this, risk-reduction and prevention strategies
women as victims of violence. The first victim can be developed. These should target not
services agencies were developed in the early only offender behavior but also opportunity.
y

1970s. In this way, victims can play an important

op

role in reducing their likelihood of being

—— The victims’ rights movement influenced the
victimized.
development of multiple advocacy groups, such
tc

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
no

1. Compare and contrast victim precipitation, 4. How does the victims’ rights movement
victim facilitation, and victim provocation. correspond to the treatment of offenders and
Do

rights afforded to offenders?

2. Why do you think the first explorations into
victimization in terms of explaining why people 5. Does examining victim behavior when
are victimized centered not on offender behavior attempting to identify causes of victimization
but on victim behavior? lead to victim blaming? Is it wrong to consider
the role of the victim?
3. What are the reasons behind labeling crimes as
acts against the state rather than against victims?

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

14   VICTIMOLOGY: THE ESSENTIALS
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
 KEY TERMS

Menachem Amir  6 restitution 2 victim precipitation  2

civil rights movement  8 retribution 2 victim provocation  3
Code of Hammurabi  2 Stephen Schafer  5 victims’ rights
costs of victimization  11 subintentional movement 8
lex talionis  2 homicide 5 Hans von Hentig  3
Benjamin Mendelsohn  4 victim facilitation  3 Marvin Wolfgang  5
National Crime Survey  7 victimology 1 women’s movement  7

ute
INTERNET RESOURCES

trib
American Society of Victimology: http://www Crime Prevention Tips: http://www.crimepreven
.american-society-victimology.org tiontips.org

dis
This organization advances the discipline of victimol- This website provides many tips on how to reduce
ogy by promoting evidence-based practices and provid- your chances of becoming a crime victim. There is
ing leadership in research and education. The website also a section to help you determine whether you have
contains information about victimology and victimolo- been a crime victim. Some of the prevention tips spe-

or
gists. This organization looks at advancements in victi- cifically address how to be safer when you use public
mology through research, practice, and teaching.
t, transportation and on college campuses.
Crime in the United States: https://ucr.fbi.gov/ An Oral History of the Crime Victim Assistance
os
crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015 Field Video and Audio Archive: http://vroh.uak
ron.edu/index.php
The Federal Bureau of Investigation compiles all the
,p

information for both the Uniform Crime Report and This website contains information from the Victim
National Incident-Based Reporting System. The infor- Oral History Project, intended to capture the devel-
mation is then put into several annual publications, such opment and evolution of the crime victims’ move-
y

as Crime in the United States and Hate Crime Statistics. The ment. You will find video clips of interviews with more
op

data for these statistics are provided by nearly 17,000 law than 50 persons critical to this movement, in which
enforcement agencies across the United States. This they discuss their contributions to and perspectives of
website provides the crime information for 2015. the field.
tc

MULTIMEDIA RESOURCES
no

1. Short Video—Victim Precipitation: 2. SAGE Knowledge—Leah Daigle Discusses

Definition & Theory Victimology
Do

https://study.com/academy/lesson/victim- https://sk.sagepub.com/video/leah-daigle-
precipitation-definition-theory.html discusses-victimology

Copyright ©2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter 1  •  Introduction to Victimology  15
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.