Victim proneness Victimology

1 victim proneness

1.1 environmental theory
1.2 quantification of victim-proneness
1.3 fundamental attribution error

victim proneness
environmental theory

the environmental theory posits location , context of crime bring victim of crime , perpetrator together.

studies in 2010s showed crimes negatively correlated trees in urban environments; more trees in area congruent lower victimization rates or violent crime rates. relationship established studies in 2010 in portland, oregon , in 2012 in baltimore, maryland. geoffrey donovan of united states forest service (usfs), 1 of researchers, said, trees, provide range of other benefits, improve quality of life in portland reducing crime... because believe large street trees can reduce crime signaling potential criminal neighborhood better cared and, therefore, criminal more caught. note presence of large street trees indicated reduction in crime, opposed newer, smaller trees. in 2012 baltimore study, led scientists university of vermont , united states department of agriculture (usda), conservative spatially adjusted model indicated 10% increase in tree canopy associated 12% decrease in crime.... [and] found inverse relationship continued in both contexts, magnitude 40% greater public private lands.

quantification of victim-proneness

there have been studies quantify real existence of victim-proneness. contrary popular belief more women repeat victims, , more victim-prone men, men in prime (24- 34-year-old males) more victims of repeated crimes.

in case of juvenile offenders, study results show people more victimized result of serious offense know; frequent crimes committed adolescents towards know sexual assault, common assault, , homicide. adolescents victimizing people did not know committed common assault, forcible confinement, , armed or unarmed robbery.

sex workers are, anecdotally, thought have abnormally high incidence of violent crime committed against them, , such crimes go unresolved, there few victimological studies of matter.

fundamental attribution error

in social psychology, fundamental attribution error (also known correspondence bias or attribution effect) describes tendency over-value dispositional or personality-based explanations observed behaviors of others while under-valuing situational explanations behaviors. term coined lee ross years after now-classic experiment edward e. jones , victor harris (1967).

the fundamental attribution error visible when people explain behavior of others. not explain interpretations of 1 s own behavior—where situational factors taken consideration. discrepancy called actor–observer bias. simple example, if alice saw bob trip on rock , fall, alice might consider bob clumsy or careless (dispositional). if alice later tripped on same rock herself, more blame placement of rock (situational). victim proneness or victim blaming can form of fundamental attribution error, , more specifically, just-world phenomenon.

the just-world phenomenon belief people deserve , deserve get, first theorized melvin lerner (1977). attributing failures dispositional causes rather situational causes, unchangeable , uncontrollable, satisfies our need believe world fair , have control on our life. motivated see world because reduces our perceived threats, gives sense of security, helps find meaning in difficult , unsettling circumstances, , benefits psychologically. unfortunately, just-world hypothesis results in tendency people blame , disparage victims of tragedy or accident, such victims of rape , domestic abuse reassure of insusceptibility such events. people may blame victim s faults in past lives pursue justification bad outcome.